[Senate Hearing 112-514]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-514
ADDRESSING THE HOUSING CRISIS IN INDIAN COUNTRY: LEVERAGING RESOURCES
AND
COORDINATING EFFORTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
BANKING,HOUSING,AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
EXAMINING THE LACK OF SAFE, AFFORDABLE, HIGH-QUALITY HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES IN INDIAN COUNTRY AND EXPLORING INDIAN HOUSING,
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO ENSURE HIGH-QUALITY
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES ARE EASILY ACCESSIBLE TO TRIBES AND THEIR HOUSING
ORGANIZATIONS
__________
MARCH 8, 2012
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs
Available at: http: //www.fdsys.gov /
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
75-712 WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota, Chairman
JACK REED, Rhode Island RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey BOB CORKER, Tennessee
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
JON TESTER, Montana MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia MARK KIRK, Illinois
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon JERRY MORAN, Kansas
MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
KAY HAGAN, North Carolina
Dwight Fettig, Staff Director
William D. Duhnke, Republican Staff Director
Charles Yi, Chief Counsel
Laura Swanson, Policy Director
Adam Healy, Professional Staff Member
Beth Cooper, Professional Staff Member
Dana Wade, Republican Professional Staff Member
Dawn Ratliff, Chief Clerk
Riker Vermilye, Hearing Clerk
Shelvin Simmons, IT Director
Jim Crowell, Editor
(ii)
?
C O N T E N T S
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 2012
Page
Opening statement of Chairman Johnson............................ 1
Prepared statement........................................... 19
Opening statements, comments, or prepared statements of:
Senator Akaka................................................ 2
WITNESSES
Sandra B. Henriquez, Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development........... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 19
Response to written question of:
Chairman Johnson......................................... 35
Doug O'Brien, Deputy Under Secretary for Rural Development,
Department of Agriculture...................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Robert G. McSwain, Deputy Director for Management Operations,
Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services. 7
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Jodi Gillette, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs for
Policy and Economic Development, Department of the Interior.... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 31
(iii)
ADDRESSING THE HOUSING CRISIS IN INDIAN COUNTRY: LEVERAGING RESOURCES
AND COORDINATING EFFORTS
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 2012
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met at 10:04 a.m. in room SD-538, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Tim Johnson, Chairman of the
Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN TIM JOHNSON
Chairman Johnson. Good morning. I call this hearing to
order.
Today, the Committee will continue examining an issue of
great importance to me and so many in my home State of South
Dakota: the lack of safe, affordable, high-quality housing
opportunities in Indian Country. During my time in Congress, I
have worked to improve the housing options available to
American Indians, including being an original cosponsor of the
Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act
of 1996, NAHASDA. Unfortunately, as those living in Native
communities know all too well, the critical housing needs far
outpace the resources devoted to the problem.
The Census Bureau reported in 2008 that Native Americans
are almost twice as likely to live in poverty as the rest of
the population. For the same year, the GAO reported that nearly
46 percent of Native households were overcrowded, a rate that
was almost three times as high as the rest of the country.
According to the 2009 Annual Homeless Assessment Report,
American Indians make up less than 1 percent of the general
population, but 8 percent of the country's homeless population.
Together, we must work to reverse this trend.
In 2010, I chaired a joint Banking and Indian Affairs
Committee field hearing in Rapid City, South Dakota, to examine
creative solutions to the Indian housing crisis. Prior to the
hearing, I brought HUD Secretary Donovan to the Rosebud Sioux
Reservation so that he could see firsthand the immediate
challenges facing Native communities. We heard from several
witnesses who all echoed the need for housing funds. I support
their calls for sufficient funding and will continue fighting
for such funding as a member of the Appropriations Committee.
But it is also important that we collaborate and leverage
existing resources to provide housing in these tough economic
times. These resourceful ideas are not meant to free the
Federal Government of its treaty and trust responsibility;
rather, these ideas should serve as another avenue for us to
work together to address the housing crisis facing Indian
Country.
As Chairman of this Committee, I am committed to ensuring
that programs across many Federal agencies that address Indian
housing, infrastructure, and community development are easily
accessible to tribes and their housing organizations. It is
also critically important that Federal agencies engage in a
government-to-government relationship and participate in
meaningful consultation with tribes on housing issues and other
important matters. That is why I have invited all of you to
testify today. Each of your agencies plays an important role in
Indian housing or housing-related infrastructure and community
development. I look forward to hearing from you about how your
agencies collaborate to make sure your work provides the most
efficient and effective housing assistance possible in Indian
Country.
Longer term, the Committee is beginning to lay the
foundation for the reauthorization of NAHASDA next year. It
will be important for all of us concerned about Indian housing
to work closely on this reauthorization, including tribes and
their housing agencies.
With that, are there any Members who wish to make a brief
opening statement?
Senator Akaka. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Johnson. Yes, Senator Akaka.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR DANIEL K. AKAKA
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership
in holding this important hearing.
Chairman Johnson, you and I, along with Senators Tester,
Crapo, and Johanns, also serve together on the Indian Affairs
Committee where we have been examining the various obstacles
that hold tribal nations back from achieving the goals of self-
sufficiency and economic development.
One of the many core problems that plague Indian Country is
the state of Indian housing, and you all know that very well.
It is estimated that 90,000 Native families are homeless or
underhoused and that 200,000 new housing units are currently
needed. Due to this shortage, many Indian homes are severely
overcrowded, and many lack the basic features that most
Americans take for granted, such as access to electricity, a
kitchen, or even connection to a sewer system.
This lack of housing also has significant impacts on other
areas of tribal life. Insufficient housing makes it harder for
tribes to attract teachers to educate their children and law
enforcement officers to protect their citizens and the local
community. Also, it creates barriers to economic development,
standing in the way of business opportunities that would
benefit both tribes and local communities by creating jobs.
Addressing these issues is not easy. However, it is vital
that we do, and for the well-being of the tribal economies to
help tribes provide for the basic needs of their members.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to be here with
you today as we continue the good work of the Banking Committee
as we examine how to address the housing needs of Native
communities. Thank you.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Akaka.
I want to remind my colleagues that the record will be open
for the next 7 days for opening statements and other materials
you would like to submit. Now I would like to briefly introduce
the witnesses that are here with us today.
Sandra Henriquez was confirmed by the Senate unanimously in
2009 as HUD's Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, where she oversees the Office of Native American
Programs.
Doug O'Brien has served as USDA's Deputy Under Secretary
for Rural Development since 2011, where he works with the Rural
Housing Service and other agencies that are important to Indian
housing.
Robert McSwain is Deputy Director for Management Operations
at the Indian Health Service. He is a member of the North Fork
Rancheria of Mono Indians in California. Mr. McSwain was
confirmed by the Senate in 2008 and served as the IHS Director
until May 2009.
Jodi Gillette is the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian
Affairs for Policy and Economic Development at the Department
of the Interior. She is an enrolled member of the Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe located in North and South Dakota.
We welcome all of you here today and look forward to your
testimony about this important issue.
Ms. Henriquez, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF SANDRA B. HENRIQUEZ, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Henriquez. Thank you and good morning, Chairman Johnson
and Senator Akaka. It is a pleasure to appear before you, and I
would like to express my appreciation for your continuing
efforts to improve the housing conditions of American Indian,
Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian peoples.
The Office of Public and Indian Housing is responsible for
the management, operation, and oversight of HUD's Native
American and Native Hawaiian housing and community development
programs. These programs are available to all 566 federally
recognized tribes and the State of Hawaii's Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands. Since President Obama took office, we have
worked to create a new chapter in our nation-to-nation
relationship, one built not on Federal mandates but on
expanding interagency collaborations, strengthening tribal
partnerships, and developing programs that better meet the
needs of the Native communities, and today I would like to
discuss how HUD is making progress in all of these areas.
At a time when we are all being asked to do more with less,
it is more critical than ever to identify inefficiencies,
streamline programs, and find ways to work together and pool
Federal resources to benefit the families and communities we
work to serve. For years, HUD has worked closely with several
Federal agencies that serve Indian country, including the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian Health Services, the
Departments of Agriculture and Energy, the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and the Environmental Protection Agency. We
know that increased interagency collaboration helps stretch
Federal resources and assures that Native communities are
actually receiving the support they need from the Federal
Government, and the results of that collaboration are clear.
Whether it is our work with BIA to reduce the title status
report delays, to increase access to capital for Native
Americans and Alaska Natives living on trust land, or our
partnership with FEMA to provide homes to retain Native
teachers who were previously unable to find adequate housing on
reservation land, or our work with USDA, EPA, HHS, and BIA to
improve the quality and long-term viability of water and
wastewater infrastructure projects, or our Greener Homes Summit
where multiple agencies collaborated on a strategy to provide
tribes with a one-stop approach to training and technical
assistance in energy efficiency and sustainability, HUD is
doing everything we can to eliminate duplicative efforts,
conserve precious resources, and improve service delivery in
Indian Country.
But our commitment to collaboration goes even deeper than
our work with other Federal agencies. Indeed, history has shown
that failure to include the views of tribal leaders in policies
that affect tribes has often led to undesirable and at times
devastating results. By contrast, we have seen that meaningful
dialogue between Federal officials and tribal leadership has
vastly improved the U.S. Federal policy and government-to-
government relations, and I would like to speak briefly about a
few efforts that reflect that new understanding.
In October 2008, the President signed into law NAHASDA, and
as part of NAHASDA, a negotiated rulemaking process was
established that allows HUD and tribal leadership to work
together to develop regulations that support implementation of
the act. Tribally elected communities and HUD held six
negotiated rulemaking sessions in 2010 which produced a draft
proposed rule, which we hope to have finalized by the end of
this year.
In addition, this May, we will publish a Federal Register
notice announcing the creation of a separate negotiated
rulemaking Committee to propose changes to the Indian Housing
Block Grant formula, and HUD anticipates holding the first
meeting of this new rulemaking committee in the fall of 2012.
In our consultations with tribes, we were told time and
again just how critical it was that we reform the Indian
Housing Plan and Annual Performance Report, to streamline the
planning and reporting process, and move from a grant-based
program year to a fiscal year program, as well as to get money
out the door faster and into the hands of the communities that
needed it. I am proud to say that we have responded, and over
the next year, we should see the benefits of how the new IHP/
APR, which include ability to more accurately track activities
and expenditures, spend down the oldest IHBG funds first, and
speed up the obligation by tribes of funding from September to
June.
And, finally, in 2010, we launched a study of the unique
housing needs in Indian Country. HUD's last comprehensive study
of housing needs in Native countries was 15 years ago, and in
order for HUD to fully respond to the current needs in Indian
Country, we first need a clearer picture of what those needs
are.
So this study, we can begin to develop a long-term and long
overdue economic and community development reinvestment
strategy. And to ensure that tribal concerns and ideas are
incorporated into the study, HUD will hold six additional
consultations this year and begin field work in 2013.
Chairman, I believe that a housing needs study as well as
the revised IHP/APR and the negotiated rulemaking are but a few
examples of how HUD is not just investing in Native families,
as important as that is, but writing a new chapter in Native
American policy that emphasizes inclusion, growth, and creative
responses to the needs of tribal communities. We are becoming a
better partner to the tribes, a partner that is working to
build a stronger, better America, where every Native family and
community has a fair shot.
So thank you again, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee, for the opportunity to appear before you today. I
would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Henriquez.
Mr. O'Brien, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF DOUG O'BRIEN, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR RURAL
DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. O'Brien. Chairman Johnson, Senator Akaka, thank you for
inviting USDA to testify on the issue of housing in Indian
Country. The Obama administration is acutely aware of and
committed to overcoming the longstanding barriers to
homeownership on tribal lands, borrowers' credit issues,
challenges with security on trust land, and a complicated
leasing process, all of which hinder capital investment on
Indian lands. USDA is particularly committed to improving our
service to Indian Country.
The Office of Tribal Relations, located within the Office
of the Secretary, was created to ensure that all relevant
programs and policies are efficient, accessible, and developed
in consultation with the governments they impact. And in order
to address civil rights complaints and to pave the way for
stronger relationships with Native American farmers and
ranchers, USDA's Keepseagle settlement will make $760 million
available to successful claimants, provide education and
technical assistance to Native American farmers and ranchers,
and require that regulations and policies be reformed to better
assist them.
At the direction of President Obama and Secretary Vilsack,
USDA has also taken a number of actions that will significantly
reduce existing challenges to affordable housing in Indian
Country, and we are designing these approaches through a
government-to-government consultation process because
meaningful dialogue between Federal officials and tribal
officials greatly improves Federal policy designed to be
delivered to the tribal communities.
Since President Obama's 2009 Memorandum on Tribal
Consultation and Collaboration, a team from across USDA has
been reviewing how tribal consultation informs program
implementation. Rural Development is part of this effort, and
our staff continues to dialogue with tribal leadership at the
local, regional, and national level.
Because of consultation and our experience on tribal lands,
we know that lack of infrastructure is a major issue. Along
with my fellow panel members, USDA serves on the Tribal
Infrastructure Task Force that focuses on Federal agency
collaboration to address the need for safe drinking water and
basic sanitation. In February 2011, this group produced a
report containing 10 recommendations for increasing access to
programs in Indian Country. Rural Development is committed to
working with this group to implement these recommendations.
Beyond addressing critical infrastructure issues, USDA is
working with the Bureau of Indian Affairs to discuss land and
lending issues that create challenges to extending credit on
trust land. As a result of these meetings, USDA and the BIA are
drafting a memorandum of understanding that will allow both
agencies to better understand each other's programs and the
technical requirements for their delivery in Indian Country.
When we at Rural Development talk about housing, we think
about it in the context of the entire rural community. It is
infrastructure and facilities, it is businesses and jobs that
support families as well as individual homeowners. Rural
Development staff delivers programs through a network of local
offices. These programs support essential public facilities and
services such as water and sewer systems, health clinics,
emergency facilities, electric, telephone, and broadband
services. Rural Development promotes economic development in
rural areas by providing loans, grants, and other assistance.
From 2001 to 2011, Rural Development assistance benefiting
tribes totaled more than $3 billion. Because we have State and
area offices in and near tribal communities, we are able to
cultivate relationships with tribal leaders, lenders, realtors,
community-based organizations, and others.
To maximize these relationships, we not only have a
national Native American tribal coordinator, we also have
tribal coordinators located at each Rural Development State
Office. In housing in particular, we have invested $1.3 billion
in Indian Country over the past 10 years. We have seen the
impact of such investment firsthand.
Just last month, Rural Development's Under Secretary Dallas
Tonsager took part in a ribbon cutting held by the Maliseet
Tribe in Maine to celebrate their first multi-family apartment
complex. When the tribe broke ground in November 2010, the
Tribal Housing Authority had 40 families on a waiting list for
housing. The completion of this housing complex moves this
tribe in the right direction.
For a community to access housing programs, it must have
access to insurance products, a historic challenge on trust
lands. We have been working to develop solutions. For example,
the AMERIND Risk Management Corporation is a risk management
agency administering a tribally owned risk management pool that
covers homes and other structures on Indian lands. A Rural
Development Administrative Notice was published last November,
advising staff that the AMERIND could save borrowers money and
increase capital in tribal communities.
All of us on this panel have been working to improve
coordination across agencies, and we are proud of the progress
that this Administration has made. These collaborative efforts
provide us the best opportunity yet to significantly reduce the
barriers that have made it difficult for Indian Country to
access Government programs. We look forward to continuing to
work closely with tribes to create more homeownership
opportunities.
Again, I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak
before you today, and I am ready to answer any questions.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. O'Brien.
Mr. McSwain, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT G. McSWAIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR MANAGEMENT
OPERATIONS, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Mr. McSwain. Thank you, Chairman Johnson and Senator Akaka.
I am really pleased to be here today to talk about and
certainly discuss this important issue of Native American
housing as well as the infrastructure development, and the
infrastructure development certainly in an area that we play
heavily in. I, too, want to thank everyone for your leadership
on bringing this topic to the forefront.
The IHS is keenly aware of the need for adequate housing
throughout Indian Country and role to address the requirements
for adequate infrastructure to support new and existing
housing.
The IHS has the primary responsibility for providing water
supply, along with solid and liquid waste disposal facilities
for American Indian and Alaskan Native homes and communities as
part of delivering our total program. As you know, our total
program consists of clinical care, preventative care, and
public health, and the Sanitation Facilities Construction
program is a critical part of our effort to deliver the care we
do.
IHS works cooperatively with tribes in providing these
essential facilities. Enhancing tribal capabilities and
building partnerships based on mutual respect are key factors
in the success of this IHS program. The IHS also coordinates
and advocates on behalf of and in cooperation with tribes to
seek resources from other Federal agencies as my colleagues at
the table.
The Sanitation Facilities Construction program, as I
mentioned, is an integral component of the IHS disease
prevention activities. The IHS has carried out this program
since 1959 using funds appropriated for Sanitation Facilities
Construction to provide potable water and waste disposal
facilities for American Indian and Alaska Native people. As a
result--and you have seen this data before--the rates of infant
mortality and mortality rate for gastroenteritis and other
environmentally related diseases have been dramatically reduced
by about 80 percent since 1973. IHS physicians and health
professionals credit many of these health status improvements
to IHS' provision of water supplies, sewage disposal
facilities, development of solid waste sites, and the provision
of technical assistance to tribally owned/operated sewer
utility organizations. An important part of our partnership is
to work with tribes. Our first partner is the tribes. And the
most important piece I can leave you with today is our
consultation with tribes to develop the Sanitation Deficiency
data system, where we map out the entire needs across the
country and by areas, rank-order the projects that we want to
address, and that becomes our total system.
As of November, the list to correct sanitation deficiencies
totaled $3.1 billion, with those projects that are considered
economically and technically feasible totaling $1.46 billion.
We can talk about what is feasible and what is not, and you
probably know that already.
Relative to coordination with other agencies, the IHS has
coordinated with States, tribes, local governments, and other
Federal agencies since the first sanitation facility that was
built in Elko, Nevada, in 1958, which led to the passage of
Public Law 86-121 in 1959.
In 2007, as was mentioned by my colleague, certainly the
Department, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of
Interior, Housing and Urban Development, and Health and Human
Services formed an Infrastructure Task Force that was
referenced earlier, and the important part of this is that this
is, in fact, an ability to coordinate amongst all agencies that
have a vital interest in Indian housing and Indian--certainly
Indian housing and the support infrastructure that occurs.
Approximately 43 percent of all IHS SFC-funded projects
over the last 5 years were funded either partially or entirely
with contributions from others. You will hear all of us talk
about leveraging the other, and that is what we do. That is
what we work with the tribes to do.
The challenge before us, though, is that the sanitation
facilities infrastructure grows every year--the needs grow, the
population grows. And, of course, then what has happened in the
meantime was in 2006 the EPA did change the arsenic rule, and
immediately we had 18,000 homes that were impacted. Currently,
we have now 36 systems serving 42,000 people that are out of
compliance with the new arsenic rules.
Tribally owned and operated facilities is huge, and let me
just close by saying that the most important part we can do is
work with tribes on operation and maintenance. There has got to
be training. There has got to be certainly startup supplies and
equipment to help them maintain their systems when we have
built them and transferred them.
With that, this concludes my remarks, and I would be happy
to answer any questions you may have, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Mr. McSwain.
Ms. Gillette, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF JODI GILLETTE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
INDIAN AFFAIRS FOR POLICY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Gillette. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Senator Akaka
and Members of the Committee. My name is Jodi Archambault
Gillette, and I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian
Affairs at the Department of the Interior. I thank you for
shining a spotlight on this very important housing situation in
Indian Country as well. Growing up on the Pine Ridge Indian
Reservation, I know firsthand the lack of adequate housing has
an incredible strain on a community of family and a nation. I
only can talk about the agency perspective, but you well know,
as Mr. McSwain noted, that the population continues to grow,
and unless we take measured steps that will result in a great
degree of success, the conditions may only worsen.
I am pleased to provide you with the Bureau of Indian
Affairs' activity in providing home improvement assistance and
our role in assisting individual Indians in the pursuit of
homeownership. The BIA's Office of Indian Services runs the
Housing Improvement Program. This program addresses the
Department's strategic goal of serving Indian communities by
improving the quality of life of eligible Indians by helping to
eliminate substandard housing and homelessness. The program's
activities include housing repairs and renovations of existing
homes and construction of modest homes for families who do not
own a home but own or lease land where a home can be built. The
BIA's policy and methodology ensures that we are providing
housing assistance to the neediest of the needy. We look at
qualifications that include disability, elderly, children,
number of children in the household, and income to determine
who would qualify for this program. Consistent with the goals
of this self-determination, the program is 95 percent operated
by tribes through 638 contracts or self-governance compacts.
Those tribes participating in the program must comply with
appropriate regulations.
In addition to providing home improvement assistance, we
also have an important role in the mortgage process. The BIA's
Land Titles and Records Office is the official Federal office
for recording all title conveyance and encumbrance documents
for Indian lands within the LTRO's jurisdiction. The LTRO is
also the Federal office for the examination and certification
of title to Indian trust and restricted lands. The LTRO issues
an official Federal certificate of title to Indian lands known
as the Title Status Report, or TSR, which is the legal land
description, the current ownership, and the recorded liens and
encumbrances on the ownership for a specific tract of Indian
trust or restricted land. The TSR is required by lending
institutions to verify that the loan applicant has acquired a
leasehold interest on tribal land or that the loan applicant
has total ownership of the trust land, and that the title is
clean and clear of any liens against the property so that the
loan application process can move forward.
In 2004, the BIA entered into an MOU with the Departments
of Agriculture and Housing and Urban Development for the
purposes of establishing a framework for partnering among the
agencies to improve assistance to American Indians and Alaska
Natives in the development of affordable housing on trust and
restricted lands, reservations, and in approved service areas.
Our goal is to assist tribes in improving their living
environment through the delivery of quality housing and
resolving issues that delay processing of mortgage loans to
eligible Indians.
Additionally, we have partnered with HUD's Office of Native
American Programs, Rodger Boyd and folks, to provide training
to lenders in order to educate the lenders concerning the title
process for Indian mortgages and to better facilitate and
improve the efficiency of the mortgage process. Anytime a
mortgage is approved, it has the potential to improve the
quality of life for Indians, and requests for Title Status
Reports for the mortgage purposes are and will remain a high
priority within the BIA.
Also, we are in the process of revising leasing regulations
as part of the effort to return control of land use decisions
to tribal management and to streamline surface leasing
processes to promote homeownership, economic development, and
clean energy. We anticipate issuing final regulations later
this year. We have gone through two rounds of tribal
consultation, and we look forward to having some finality on
this shortly.
In addition to these proposed leasing regulation revisions,
the Department strongly supports the Helping Expedite and
Advance Responsible Tribal Homeownership Act, or HEARTH Act,
both the House and Senate versions. The HEARTH Act would
restore tribal authority to govern leasing on tribal lands and
to promulgate regulations for the governance of those leases,
while preserving the statutory tools available to the Secretary
for carrying out the trust responsibility to tribes. Passage of
the HEARTH Act has the potential to significantly reduce the
time it takes to approve leases for homes and small businesses.
This concludes my prepared statement, and I would be happy
to respond to any questions you may have.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Gillette.
We will now begin asking questions of our witnesses. Will
the clerk please put 5 minutes on the clock for each Member for
their questions?
Ms. Henriquez, I was pleased to see HUD issued a notice
earlier this week announcing a revised tribal consultation
process for the needs assessment. Meaningful tribal
consultation is key to ensuring a sound study. Can you briefly
explain how HUD addressed tribal concerns about this initial
process?
Ms. Henriquez. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
Initially, we set out to do listening sessions or, I would say,
consultations, small ``C.'' We really met in seven
consultations around the Nation. We asked people to attend, to
both look at the--to talk about the housing needs survey to be
done, to look at the survey that had been done and the
instrument used in 1996, and then to build upon that with
changes in recommendations and so on.
As that process went forward, we began to hear more
conversation among tribal leaders that it was not a full
consultation process, formal consultation. And with
conversations both with two of the industry groups representing
both tribal housing entities and tribal leaders, both NCAI and
NAIHC, we decided that we should take a step back and that we
should go into a formal consultation, much more formalized,
deliberative process with tribal leaders. We held one of those
sessions last July here in Washington. We just did another one
on Monday afternoon in conjunction with NCAI's leadership
meeting that is being held this week. And we have planned to do
five others across the country between now and June.
We find, as I said in my testimony, and all of us find that
when--we want to make this successful, we want to make sure
that it is done well and it is done right, and we want to make
sure that it is responsive in as many ways as possible with
what tribal leaders really want to have come out of this
survey. And so that's why we decided we should take a deep
breath, take a step back, re-engage in a much more formalized
way and go forward.
So we are doing some groundwork, background work right now
that can go forward, but the formal design will wait until the
end of this formal consultation period.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. McSwain, for years Congress has
prohibited IHS from using appropriated funds to pay for
sanitation facilities infrastructure for HUD-funded homes. To
what extent has this prohibition led to homes being constructed
with inadequate drinking and wastewater systems? And should
Congress remove the prohibition?
Mr. McSwain. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The prohibition, as
you described, appears in our bill language every year in our
appropriation that says we cannot support infrastructure for
new HUD homes. Part of that is a history related to NAHASDA and
how the dollars were actually routing. When NAHASDA was passed,
the dollars went directly to the various housing authorities
and did not come to the Indian Health Service. And so there
was--and I cannot say for certain if that is the absolute
cause, but that was part of it.
But I would want to assure you, Mr. Chairman, that, for
example, on average we still serve 200 homes a year, even
though we are not providing the infrastructure, it is coming
through the housing authorities, the fact that we have the
engineers on the ground, they are actually sitting there and
working with the community on the what the total housing needs
are. And, granted, we ensure that the water systems we are
allowed to put in have sufficient capacity for any additions
that may come, the tribe has planned through HUD housing. But
that has been the prohibition, and it has not really--we kind
of work with the tribes to leverage resources to pick up the
gap. But that is a prohibition, and we have been mindful of
that.
Chairman Johnson. Should Congress remove the prohibition,
in your opinion?
Mr. McSwain. In my opinion, if they fix the other end of
it, which is the way that the dollars come from HUD to the
tribal housing authorities, that they really do include
infrastructure or work out something else, I think I would--
before I express my final opinion, I would certainly need to
consult with my Director, Dr. Roubideaux, before I would
respond.
Chairman Johnson. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I want to tell this panel that your testimonies were well
received here, and thank you so much for what you all are
doing.
Ms. Henriquez, in the last reauthorization of the Native
American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act, the
Native Hawaiian provision was not reauthorized. Title 8 is a
block grant housing program for Native Hawaiians who reside on
Hawaiian homelands. This title was added to NAHASDA in the year
2000. In the year 2008, NAHASDA was reauthorized without Title
8. Without congressional reauthorization, the risk that funding
could be cutoff has had a detrimental effect on Native Hawaiian
housing programs.
Would your Department support the reauthorization of the
Native Hawaiian provisions within the next reauthorization of
NAHASDA?
Ms. Henriquez. Thank you for the question, Senator. I would
answer your question in this way: We continue both in our
budget and in the President's budget to include funding for
Native Hawaiian homelands for the infrastructure and for the
building of homes under NAHASDA. I think that expresses our
commitment moving forward and continuing, and we would like to
work with you and Members of this Committee and the Chairman
moving forward to make sure that all peoples in both Indian
Country and in Native Hawaiian homeland and Native Alaskan
lands are protected and covered.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much.
Mr. O'Brien, Secretary O'Brien, USDA is in the process of
streamlining to address budget shortfalls in the rural
development programs. What impact will this have on tribal
assistance within these programs?
Mr. O'Brien. Senator, thank you for that question. As you
pointed out, in particular in the last two appropriations
cycles, the rural development mission area as well as, of
course, many other components of the Federal Government, has
experienced decreases in its appropriations. About 2 or 3
months ago, Secretary Vilsack announced a blueprint for
stronger service that indicated how we were going to manage
this change, and for rural development, it included the closure
of 43 of our 500 or so offices across the country for rural
development. Those offices were chosen, looking at some farm
bill legislation that actually directed a sister agency on how
they choose to close offices, by looking at those that had two
or fewer staff as well as those that were 20 miles or closer to
another office. Also, Rural Development has the discretion to
look at workload, to look at the needs of the community, and we
are in the process of closing those 43 offices.
Now, that said, Rural Development continues to have more
than 450 offices throughout rural America, and work continues
and we will continue to work closely with tribal communities
and other communities in rural places.
The USDA, the President's budget for 2013 continued to
propose and request almost $50 million in set-asides for
infrastructure and business programs for tribal communities,
for Hawaiian homelands, and Alaska Native communities. And most
of USDA's rural development programs continue to have a
priority for distressed communities, many of which, of course,
as was pointed out by both Senators today, are included in
tribal communities.
It does present challenges because the people in distressed
communities tend to be some of the most resource intensive to
serve, but it has changed that we are proactively trying to
manage.
Of course, and last, a key component of being able to
continue to serve these communities will be to work with our
sister agencies to make sure that we leverage our dollars most
efficiently and, most importantly, that we continue the
consultation process so we know what the governments in the 575
individual tribal communities, nations, need most.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. O'Brien, the GAO found in a 2010
study that several tribal housing authorities had little or no
interaction with or knowledge of USDA programs that could
assist them meet their housing needs. I have not heard that in
South Dakota where Elsie Meeks, who comes from the Pine Ridge
Indian Reservation, is the State Rural Development Director and
has worked closely with the tribes. Nationally, what has USDA
done to enhance outreach to American Indian tribes?
Mr. O'Brien. Senator, thank you for that question, and
thank you for pointing out the exemplary work that our State
Director Meeks does in South Dakota. In many ways, the work
that is done in South Dakota is looked to as a model in how we
can expand and improve upon our delivery across the country.
Since that GAO report, I will talk about three things very
quickly. One is that we have had an aggressive public service
announcement campaign in both print and radio where we have
utilized real stories of tribal citizens who have utilized our
housing business infrastructure programs and have used the
media outlets that are most listened to or read by tribal
communities.
We have also had an aggressive training program within the
USDA itself because, you know, to address the problem of lack
of access and knowledge by the tribal communities, we really
need to educate our own workforce. So our national Native
American Coordinator has worked with different components
within Rural Development to make sure that our own employees
understand how we can work and partner with tribal communities.
The final thing I will mention is our aggressive agenda on
tribal consultation that we find so valuable as we work through
many, many issues--regulatory issues, funding issues, just
basic process issues. We have had in the last 2 years more than
25 either formal consultations, roundtables with national
tribal leaders or national virtual convenings. I have had the
privilege to participate in a number of those. In fact, just
this morning I spent an hour with Chief Baker of the Cherokee
Nation to talk about the issues there. So thank you for that
question.
Chairman Johnson. Ms. Gillette, the BIA administers a
Housing Improvement Program, a home repair, renovation, and
replacement grant program. How does this program interact with
HUD and other programs?
Ms. Gillette. Well, as I stated earlier, we do have an
existing MOU, and we try to ensure that we do not have overlap
between the different programs. We have specific regulations
that govern the Housing Improvement Program, and they really
are, we feel, meeting the needs of a specific part of the
population on reservations that are not able to qualify for
some of the programs at other agencies. And so this is really
trying to address the needs of the very needy residents of the
reservation.
Chairman Johnson. For the whole panel, each of your
agencies has a specific mission but collectively play an
important role in helping ensure high-quality housing
opportunities are available in Indian Country. How do you
coordinate efforts on this front? Do you have formal agreements
established with other agencies to provide housing and related
services in Indian Country? Do agencies provide training to
employees through the agreements so the agreements are
implemented on the ground? Let us begin with you, Ms.
Henriquez.
Ms. Henriquez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would say that,
first of all, our mission and our vision at HUD, particularly
as it relates to housing in Indian Country, is to understand,
most importantly, the mission and vision of tribes themselves,
and our role is to help them accomplish their mission. And we
see our partnership role from that lens directly.
We have a number of formal agreements we have discussed
here with a number of agencies both here and others that are
not here, such as FEMA and so on. And we provide training not
just for our own employees through our six regional Native
American program offices across the country. We also provide
training and working with Native American industry groups
through their auspices as well, both for our employees but
also, in addition, for Native American tribes and their
members, again, to figure out what their vision is and help
them reach and attain those goals.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. O'Brien?
Mr. O'Brien. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question. I
will just mention three sort of formal relationships that we
have with our Federal partners to better serve tribal
communities.
The first is the Tribal Interagency Infrastructure Task
Force, as was referred to in prior testimony, where we work
with our sister agencies on infrastructure issues. Some of the
difficult issues, for instance, how we deal with the
environmental process when you are leveraging funds in a
particular project and the different avenues that the tribal
community--they need to deal with, you know, two or three or
maybe even four different Federal agencies on their
environmental processes.
We have been able to make progress so that in a number of
instances we have been able to work with our Federal agencies
so that one of the agencies is the lead agency, so that the
tribal community can work with one contact person. And to the
degree that we are able, we coordinate our processes and,
looking at our regulations, how we can better match our
regulations to make it easier for the tribal communities to
deal with.
The other one I will mention is the memorandum of
understanding we have with BIA--or that we are working on
drafting with BIA to deal with the complicated leasehold and
property interest when we are trying to provide funding that
requires secured interest.
And the final one I will mention is the Administrative
Flexibility Task Force that the White House has led to help
Federal agencies have a platform of conversation to make sure
that we are not be duplicitous and that we can be the best
partner possible on tribal lands.
Chairman Johnson. Mr. McSwain?
Mr. McSwain. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Mr. O'Brien has
mentioned, certainly the ITF is one that we have operated, and
one of the people that is not at the table is EPA, which we do
a lot of work with EPA in partnership in addressing Indian
communities as well as my other colleagues here.
One of the major accomplishments I can point out is that
during certainly the appropriation for the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act, in a partnership we actually partnered
with EPA, and by doing so we cobbled our money that we got with
their money, and it actually resulted in 160 new projects off
that long list. And I want to point out that we basically share
our Sanitation Deficiency System list with all of our
colleagues, and it becomes sort of a working punch list for all
of us so that we all can--so it is an ability for all of us to
look at the list and pick and choose what meets our particular
agency's authorities.
So if we can do one thing and certainly USDA or HUD or BIA
or EPA can do something else, then we kind of work it together,
and we are constantly talking with tribes, and tribes come in
to talk to us. And they are making the rounds. They are
actually talking to all of us. And I want to echo the comment
by Mr. O'Brien about the President's flexibility Executive
order. I happen to be on a housing group that is having a
dialogue in that group on how we can simplify the process for
tribes to really access resources to meet their needs, and that
is one that I think is another venue that has really been
successful.
Chairman Johnson. Ms. Gillette, do you have any comments to
follow up with, including on Mr. O'Brien's MOU? Please provide
us with a timeline.
Ms. Gillette. We have been engaged in discussions for at
least a year on the MOU, and from the discussions in creating
an MOU, we have also found different areas that we need to
collaborate better on, including improving communication
between not just the people in Washington, D.C., but throughout
the field. Part of that is having interpreters that are cross-
trained in understanding both the USDA systems, because USDA is
a very large agency, and then the unique trust status of the
lands in Indian Country.
So you have two systems that are needing to have better
communication, and we are trying to do that through regular
conversations and training, and that is actually growing out of
the MOU discussions. MOU discussions have been taking place,
like I said, for a year, and we really wanted to identify some
of the places that make the most sense. So we are in a first-
draft process. How soon we can get that out, you know, we are
hopeful by the fall we will have something. That is being
pretty conservative. I think we can do it quicker than that,
but I am going to probably have to work with USDA to try to
make some kind of timeline like that.
But also from the discussions on the MOU, we have also
identified places that we really do have to look at our own
regulations and find ways to accommodate for the unique status
of Indian lands, and then also for the different kinds of
programs that are available through USDA that tribes and
individual Indian landowners traditionally have not been able
to access because of their unique status.
So we are looking at both regulatory changes in that
respect as well as the statutory changes that could improve the
access for everyone in Indian country.
Then the other thing I wanted to just reiterate is this
work is all complementary to the Administrative Flexibility
Initiative that the President directed all of the agencies to
find ways to work together to reduce the unnecessary
administrative burdens that are placed on tribes and local
governments and State agencies so that we can use most of those
resources to look at producing better outcomes rather than
duplicative processes throughout the agencies. Although the
Administrative Flexibility Initiative is just a year old, we
have a number of conversations that have been ongoing, and this
initiative is really going to allow us to provide deliverables
within a specific timeline in the Administration, and that is
being run out of the Office of Management and Budget and the
Domestic Policy Council.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you.
Senator Akaka?
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Again, I want to repeat that I like what you all are saying
and that you are working jointly to help the indigenous people
here with MOUs, also being partnered with the tribes, and
working 95 percent programs operated by the tribes. And so this
indicates joint efforts on your part, and I commend you for
that.
Mr. McSwain, there is a significant need in Indian Country
for wastewater infrastructure, and you mentioned that the IHS
mission is to raise the health status of American Indian and
Alaska Native people to the highest possible level by providing
comprehensive health care and preventive health services. To
support the IHS mission, the Sanitation Facilities Construction
program provides American Indian and Alaska Native homes and
communities with essential water supply, sewage disposal, and
solid waste disposal facilities.
My question to you is: How does IHS prioritize tribal need
in its SFC program?
Mr. McSwain. Thank you, Senator Akaka. It begins with us
having a conversation at the community level with each of the
tribes, and from that we actually develop their needs as they
have them. And then we compile them into certainly the national
need, but it is basically every area--Alaska would be sitting
down with their villages and corporations--and determining what
the total need is, and that gets captured in a national setting
in terms of the total need, and that is the total need I talked
about, which is $3.4 billion.
Each of the areas then meets with their tribes, and the
tribes in their discussion will rate and rank their particular
needs across the State, and we represent those. And when we get
an appropriation, we go work that list again with those tribes.
So every tribe, certainly we break it down between water,
sewer, and solid waste disposal for each of the tribes, and so
we have a rate and ranking even within each of those.
So we are able to really cast a very detailed description
of what the needs are, but they are reflective of the
fundamental tribal consultation, tribes telling us what their
needs are. After all, when we go on to the reservation, we need
their permission. We also give them the option if they want to
build it, they can assume it and build it. It is their choice.
But if we build it, we build it with their approval, site
selection, architecture, how we deliver the actual three major
services. But that is essentially--I hope I have answered your
question, but basically it is this $3.4 billion and $1.4
feasible is--obviously there is a big difference when it is
going to cost a lot to--and maybe it is--I found out on the
Navajo, for example, you have to go quite a ways to find
potable water, which means you are doing pipelines and you are
finding places to build. And this is not unique to Navajo but
certainly an example.
But, again, those particular projects are consulted with
the tribes, and we have that list, and the very first dollar we
get for the allocation goes to the one that they choose.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for your response.
Ms. Gillette, how does the housing situation in Indian
Country impact the Department's ability to provide teachers to
BIA schools and law enforcement officers to Native communities?
Ms. Gillette. Well, it is something that impacts our
ability to recruit and retain key employees in those different
agencies. And as you noted in your opening remarks, housing not
only affects needy tribal members, but it also affects the
ability for professionals to stay home as well, and it affects
our ability to bring people in as employees for different law
enforcement or education roles. And so this is something that
we do provide. We have approximately 3,419 units across Indian
Country in 131 different sites. We know that there is
difficulty in how this is all structured because we have
limited funds to expand the units that are out there. We also
have an issue with the ability for us to maintain that because
the only way we can maintain the units is by the rental income
that we receive, and that rental income has to be set based on
similar units in the local community, and sometimes the local
community does not have comparable units.
So we struggle with maintaining, even when we do build, but
we are looking at different ways to revise some of those
regulations to establish rental rates and trying to find
innovations and making sure that we have a more realistic
approach to providing housing for professionals in our
agencies.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Thank you very much, all of you,
for your responses, and I want to thank our Chairman for his
leadership in this area as he continues to work on this.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you, Senator Akaka.
I have just a couple more questions. Ms. Gillette, given
the BIA's responsibility for managing American Indian trust
land, how have delays in approving leases impacted housing
construction and economic development in Indian Country? I have
heard numerous horror stories related to the delays in
approving leases over the years.
Ms. Gillette. With our undertaking of revising the leasing
regulations as it relates to home sites, we have looked at
these since the beginning of this Administration. Actually,
this is the first time these regulations are going to be fully
revamped in 50 years, and so this is a huge undertaking for the
Department. In the past, the leasing regulations were grouped
under agricultural and nonagricultural, so you had all of the
different types of leasings grouped into other leases.
The proposed rule, what we plan to do with that is separate
the different types of leases out to homeownership, renewable
energy, and business leasing. And so the homeownership aspect
of it, you know, generally the revisions make the procedures
for leasing more transparent and as explicit as possible. We
have also provided procedures for amendments, assignments, sub-
leases, which they have--they are not in there currently, and
we are addressing leases for single-family homes and housing
for public purposes on Indian lands. The proposed regulations
will provide for a 30-day timeframe in which the BIA must issue
a decision on a complete residential lease application;
otherwise, it is deemed approved. And that is something that
timeframes have not been imposed with the current regulations.
We also have standards for disapproving leases that have not
been in place either, so we are trying to make those more
consistent. We also have provisions in there that really talk
to the specifics of enforcement of lease violations.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you.
Mr. McSwain, given IHS' primary mission to provide for the
health of American Indians, can you give us a sense of the
negative impact unsafe and overcrowded housing has on the
health of Native communities? In South Dakota, I have seen far
too many inadequate homes on reservations that house two,
three, or more families, which causes a number of problems,
including black mold.
Mr. McSwain. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not have the
actual numbers, but anecdotally, hearing about black mold, in
particularly North and South Dakota, is really, I believe,
clearly on our radar. The biggest issue is sort of the
recurrent issues that are happening with black mold up
particularly in the higher parts of North Dakota.
I am personally aware of some of those, and actually had
discussion with the tribal leaders, about how to address those.
A lot of it has to do with the fact that they have low-lying
water and how homes are built and the fact that they are not
really built properly to deal with those particular
environmental conditions.
But I do not have any numbers on it, but I am aware,
certainly hearing from tribal leaders about the overcrowding
and the numbers of families that are in a particular house
certainly indicates that a few more houses would be appreciated
by them. But certainly I do not have the numbers that would
correlate to how extensive and quantify the overcrowding, but
anecdotally, it is occurring.
Chairman Johnson. Thank you all for your testimony and for
being here with us today. Each of the agencies you represent
plays an important role in providing American Indian families
with safe, affordable, and high-quality housing options.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:09 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Prepared statements and responses to written questions
supplied for the record follow:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN TIM JOHNSON
Good morning. I call this hearing to order.
Today, the Committee will continue examining an issue of great
importance to me and so many in my home State of South Dakota----the
lack of safe, affordable, high-quality housing opportunities in Indian
Country. During my time in Congress, I have worked to improve the
housing options available to American Indians, including being an
original cosponsor of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act of 1996. Unfortunately, as those living in Native
communities know all too well, the critical housing needs far outpace
the resources devoted to the problem.
The Census Bureau reported in 2008 that Native Americans are almost
twice as likely to live in poverty as the rest of the population. For
the same year, the GAO reported that nearly 46 percent of Native
households were overcrowded, a rate that was almost three times as high
as the rest of the country. According to the 2009 Annual Homeless
Assessment Report, American Indians make up less than 1 percent of the
general population, but 8 percent of the country's homeless population.
Together, we must work to reverse this trend.
In 2010, I chaired a joint Banking and Indian Affairs Committee
field hearing in Rapid City, South Dakota to examine creative solutions
to the Indian housing crisis. Prior to the hearing, I brought HUD
Secretary Donovan to the Rosebud Sioux Reservation so that he could see
first-hand the immediate challenges facing Native communities. We heard
from several witnesses who all echoed the need for housing funds. I
support their calls for sufficient funding and will continue fighting
for such funding as a member of the Appropriations Committee. But, it
is also important that we collaborate and leverage existing resources
to provide housing in these tough economic times. These resourceful
ideas are not meant to free the Federal Government of its treaty and
trust responsibility. Rather, these ideas should serve as another
avenue for us to work together to address the housing crisis facing
Indian Country.
As Chairman of this Committee, I'm committed to ensuring that
programs across many Federal agencies that address Indian housing,
infrastructure, and community development are easily accessible to
tribes and their housing organizations. It's also critically important
that Federal agencies engage in a government-to-government relationship
and participate in meaningful consultation with tribes on housing
issues and other important matters. That's why I've invited all of you
to testify today. Each of your agencies plays an important role in
Indian housing or housing-related infrastructure and community
development. I look forward to hearing from you about how your agencies
collaborate to make sure your work provides the most efficient and
effective housing assistance possible in Indian Country.
Longer term, the Committee is beginning to lay the foundation for
the reauthorization of NAHASDA next year. It will be important for all
of us concerned about Indian housing to work closely on this
reauthorization, including tribes and their housing agencies.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SANDRA B. HENRIQUEZ
Assistant Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development
March 8, 2012
Good morning Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Shelby and Members of
the Committee. It is a pleasure to appear before you, and I would like
to express my appreciation for your continuing efforts to improve the
housing conditions of American Indian, Alaska Native and Native
Hawaiian peoples.
The Office of Public and Indian Housing is responsible for the
management, operation and oversight of HUD's Native American and Native
Hawaiian housing and community development programs. These programs are
available to all 565 federally recognized Indian tribes and the State
of Hawaii's Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. We serve these entities
directly, or through their tribally designated housing entities (TDHE),
by providing formula-based housing block grants and loan guarantees
designed to support affordable housing and community development. Our
partners are diverse; they are located on Indian reservations, in
Alaska Native Villages, and on the Hawaiian Home Lands.
Before we begin exploring the ways that Federal agencies working in
Indian Country can do a better job of coordinating efforts to broaden
economic development opportunities, I would like to provide the
committee with a brief overview of the programs administered by the
Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) at HUD.
ONAP Programs
HUD administers four programs specifically targeted to Native
American and Alaska Native individuals and families:
Indian Housing Block Grant program;
Title VI--loan guarantee program;
Section 184--Single Family Home Loan Guarantees; and
the Indian Community Development Block Grant Program
(ICDBG).
In implementing these programs, the Department recognizes the right
of tribal self-governance and the unique relationship between the
Federal Government and tribal governments, established by long-standing
treaties, court decisions, statutes, Executive Orders, and the United
States Constitution. Each of the 566 federally recognized tribes has
its own culture, traditions, and government. The Department strives to
balance respect for these individual tribes with regulations and
procedures that ensure accountability and consistency.
HUD also administers two programs specifically targeted to Native
Hawaiians eligible to reside on the Hawaiian Home Lands.--Native
Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program and the Native Hawaiian Loan
Guarantee Program. The block grant program for Native Hawaiians is
administered through the State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and is
augmented by a home loan guarantee program.
Indian Housing Block Grant
The Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG) is ONAP's largest program,
both in terms of dollars appropriated and population served. It was
authorized by the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
Determination Act (NAHASDA) in 1996. IHBGs are awarded to eligible
Indian tribes or their tribally designated housing entities (TDHE) for
a range of affordable housing activities that primarily benefit low-
income Indian families living on Indian reservations or in other Indian
service areas. The amount of each grant is based on a formula that
considers local needs and the number of units developed with 1937
Housing Act funding and currently managed by the tribe or its tribally
designated housing entity (TDHE). The block grant approach offers each
tribe the flexibility to design, implement, and administer unique,
innovative housing programs, based on local need.
Title VI_Loan Guarantees
NAHASDA also authorized the Title VI program, which offers
recipients of the IHBG (tribes and their TDHEs) a loan guarantee
program that encourages long-term projects and the leveraging of a
variety of funding sources. Under Title VI, HUD can guarantee 95
percent of a loan for affordable housing activities. Borrowers pledge a
portion of their current and future IHBG funds as security. This
program has provided an incentive for lenders to get involved in the
development of tribal housing.
Section 184_Single Family Home Loan Guarantees
The Section 184 program was authorized by the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1992, as amended. It is a single-family mortgage
loan program that provides a 100 percent guarantee for private mortgage
loans issued to eligible borrowers. Eligible borrowers include American
Indian and Alaska Native families and individuals, Indian tribes, and
TDHEs. There are no income limits. Loans are used to purchase,
construct, rehabilitate, refinance, or purchase and rehabilitate a home
located on a reservation or within an Indian area. A one-time, 1
percent guarantee fee is charged; it can be financed or paid in cash at
closing. The maximum mortgage term is 30 years.
Indian Community Development Block Grant Program (ICDBG)
This program was authorized by the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974. ICDBG is a competitive program, open to
federally recognized tribes and certain tribal organizations. Each
year, approximately 1 percent of the Community Development Block Grant
appropriation is set-aside for ICDBG.
Some examples of ICDBG projects include construction of health
clinics and other public facilities including gymnasiums and cultural
centers; housing rehabilitation; health and education facilities;
infrastructure, including roads, power, water, and phone lines; and
waste water systems.
Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant (NHHBG)
The NHHBG program, Title VIII of NAHASDA, was authorized by the
Hawaiian Home Lands Homeownership Act of 2000. The Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) is the sole recipient. The NHHBG is designed
to primarily benefit low-income Native Hawaiians who are eligible to
reside on the Hawaiian Home Lands. Eligible activities are the same as
for the IHBG program. DHHL provides many housing services, including
counseling and technical assistance, to prepare families for home
purchase and ownership. DHHL is also using NHHBG and other funds to
invest in infrastructure for future housing development.
Section 184A_Native Hawaiian Loan Guarantee Program
Section 184A was established by Section 514 of the American
Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000, which amended the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The program is similar
to Section 184, but is intended for Native Hawaiians eligible to reside
on the Hawaiian Home Lands.
Collaborations that Improve Service Delivery and Foster Economic
Opportunities
Federal Partnerships
HUD collaborates with several Federal agencies that serve Indian
Country; specifically the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Indian Health
Services (IHS), the Departments of Agriculture (USDA) and Energy (DOE),
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
Although short and/or long-term cost savings are difficult to
project, economies of scale should result from enhanced coordination
and collaboration among Federal agencies. Increased collaboration among
and within agencies will help ensure that Native Americans are
receiving the support they need from Federal programs.
HUD-BIA Partnership
In 2004, Assistant Secretaries' from HUD, U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) executed an
Interagency Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to improve the delivery
of Federal programs and services for the benefit of Native Americans.
While the primary focus of the MOU is to reduce the BIA's Title Status
Reports (TSR) process down to 30 days.
The inability to secure title in a timely fashion has reduced
access to capital for Native Americans and Alaska Natives living on
tribal trust, allotted, and individual trust land (tribal lands). With
evidence of clear title, land-use decisions can be more easily made and
enacted, and business opportunities and job creation is possible.
Building an efficient system for title delivery will pave the way for
increased collaboration between tribes and government agencies,
financial institutions, corporations, and builders.
Since the MOU was executed, the HUD-BIA partnership has produced
several advancements including a reduction of processing time for TSRs,
streamlined and synchronized administrative functions between the BIA
and HUD offices when obtaining a mortgage on tribal lands, and
developed staff training on a national recordation process. While the
partnership has produced many positive results, there is still room for
improvement in order to bring the titling process to market rate
standards, and ultimately encourage economic development in Indian
Country.
HUD and FEMA
Since its inception in 2008, HUD and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) have partnered to distribute nearly 1,900
mobile homes to Tribes all across the country. These homes were
originally purchased by FEMA as emergency disaster housing but were
never occupied.
In 2011, HUD decided to use our partnership with FEMA to tackle a
very specific another housing issue in Indian Country--retaining good
teachers. Teacher turnover rates on tribal land are very high due to
the lack of affordable housing options. HUD's 2011 mobile home
distribution became a Teacher Housing Initiative designed to retain
good Native teachers in Indian Country. HUD distributed over 550 mobile
homes in 2011 under this initiative. The tribes only pay for set-up and
transportation costs and can use HUD's Indian Housing Block Grant funds
or any other tribal funds to pay for these expenses.
Infrastructure Task Force
An Inter-Agency Infrastructure Task Force (``Task Force'') came
into effect on June 2007 following the signature by the Department
Secretaries of two Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) to develop
strategies to improve access to safe drinking water and basic
sanitation in Indian country.
The Federal partners of the Task Force are the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (Rural Development--USDA-RD), the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services through the Indian Health Service, the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the U.S. Department of the
Interior (Bureau of Indian Affairs--BIA).
This group continues to meet on a routine basis to address the
provision of quality water and waste water infrastructure services in
support of tribal housing and tribal communities. As part of this
effort a workgroup was established to develop a plan of action with all
the possible recommendations for streamlining the multi-agency
requirements placed on Tribes in order to receive Federal funding for
water and wastewater infrastructure construction projects.
This working group provided their recommendations in February 2011
in a report titled, Overview of Tribal Water Infrastructure Funding
Application Processes and Recommended Paperwork Streamlining
Opportunities. The report contains 10 recommendations including:
coordination of agency grant funding cycles, additional use of IHS
sanitation deficiency system priority list by all Federal partners,
develop a standard environmental review process and Federal agency
cross training.
The larger Task Force is currently focusing on issues of
sustainability in an effort to improve the quality and long-term
viability of water and waste water infrastructure projects.
Greener Homes National Summit
In September 2011, the third annual Greener Homes National Summit
was held in Denver, sponsored by ONAP. This conference brought together
HUD, DOE, EPA and USDA, and is considered a hallmark of tribal and
Federal participation. This 3-day conference fostered discussions to
promote energy efficient tribal homes and communities, and encouraged
economic development of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency
technologies.
Federal agencies collaborated on a strategy to provide tribes with
a coordinated, ``one-stop'' approach to training and technical
assistance in energy efficiency and sustainability, which would
eliminate duplicative efforts and conserve resources for both tribes
and the Federal agencies involved.
Tribal Collaboration
Housing Needs Study
HUD is conducting a comprehensive, nationally representative HUD
study on the extent of housing needs in Indian Country and Hawaii. The
last comparable study was conducted in 1996. In 2010 and 2011, HUD held
seven regional outreach meetings with tribal housing stakeholders as
well has a national tribal consultation meeting in Washington, DC to
seek tribal input on the research approach and survey instrument
design. The study's outreach plan and survey instruments have been
refined based on input from these sessions and comments from the expert
panel convened specifically for the study.
Despite these efforts, there was concern from the tribal community
that tribal leaders did not have the opportunity to review the study
through formal tribal consultation. In response to that concern, HUD
committed to hold additional tribal consultations on the survey
instruments and study design in 2012 and begin the field survey work in
2013.
HUD is working with the National Congress of American Indians
(NCAI) and the National American Indian Housing Council to host six
regional consultations and two national consultations beginning in
March of this year. The first national consultation took place earlier
this week in conjunction with NCAI's Executive Council Winter Session.
The second national meeting will take place in June. Dates and
locations for the regional meetings are being finalized.
In the meantime, the secondary data collection and analyses are
underway.
Negotiated Rulemaking to Implement the NAHASDA Reauthorization Act
On October 14, 2008, the President signed into law the Native
American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act
of 2008 (the Act). Section 105 of the Act contains the requirement to
engage in negotiated rulemaking to create regulations for those
provisions of the Act that are not self-implementing. HUD held six
negotiated rulemaking sessions in fiscal year 2010, which produced a
draft proposed rule.
This proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on
November 18, 2011. Public comments were due on January 17, 2012. HUD
received 20 public comments and is currently reviewing them.
Preparations are being made to review the public comments and make any
final adjustments. The rule will again be placed into Departmental and
OMB clearance. After that process is complete, the final rule will be
published in the Federal Register.
In May of this year, HUD will publish a Federal Register notice
announcing the creation of a separate negotiated rulemaking committee
to propose changes to the IHBG formula. The notice will request
nominations to represent tribes on this new committee. HUD anticipates
holding its first meeting of this negotiated rulemaking committee in
the fall of CY 2012.
Indian Housing Plan (IHP) Conversion Update
In 2005, the Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) started the
process of converting the Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG) program
from a grant-based program to a fiscal year-based program. This major
administrative change was the number one priority requested through the
eight consultation sessions that were held around the country that
year.
Since then, a tribal workgroup assisted HUD in developing the new
IHP/APR form that is being implemented now. The new IHP/APR
incorporates statutory changes from the 2008 NAHASDA Reauthorization,
and extensively streamlines the planning and reporting process for IHBG
funding.
The new IHP/APR also collects new data on program activities and
tribal housing need. In response to the GAO report Tribes Generally
View Block Grant Program Effective, but tracking of Infrastructure
Plans and Investments Needs Improvements, the IHP will now track
infrastructure in the section where the grantee identifies their low
income and all families `needs', as wells as adding `infrastructure to
support housing' as a specific eligible activity. The APR will track as
a specific outcome `improve quality of existing infrastructure'.
In the past year, there has been intensive training around the
country to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to learn about the
new IHP/APR, and the administrative changes that are occurring with the
shift to a fiscal year-based program. Additional training sessions will
be available starting this summer.
The transition thus far has been a success. Over the next year we
should see the benefits of this change. Improvements include: the
ability to track activities and expenditures using only one IHBG grant
rather than having multiple open grants; expenditure of the oldest IHBG
funds first; ONAP obligation of most the fiscal year funding by late
June rather than in September or later.
Administrative Flexibility Working Groups on Native American Issues
In February 2011, the President issued a Memorandum to Federal
agencies entitled ``Administrative Flexibility, Lower Costs, and Better
Results for State, Local, and Tribal Governments.'' This memorandum
instructed Federal agencies to work with tribal governments--as well as
States and localities--to reduce unnecessary administrative burdens and
focus available resources to achieve better program outcomes. Based on
comments and input from tribes and Native American business leaders,
the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) convened five interagency working groups, comprised of
senior program managers, to focus on areas that Indian Country
identified as priorities. HUD is actively involved in working groups on
Housing and also Loans and Credit (the other working groups include
Training and Employment, Broadband Service, and Workforce Development).
Goals for these groups include:
Housing. This group is developing a matrix of Federal
housing, community, and economic development programs across
the various agencies to increase the visibility of available
resources and determine how to make these programs more
accessible.
Loans and Credit. The goal of this group is to ensure that
Federal loan and credit programs are deployed to tribal
economies through: improved flexibility under existing loan and
credit program authority; improved and innovative deployment,
oversight and accountability of loan programs in Indian
Country; reduction in inefficiencies or disconnections between
existing programs; and improvement in knowledge of programs
through better training and technical assistance.
Working groups have reached out to Tribes to receive input through
written comments, conference calls, and discussions at conferences and
other events.
Closing
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee, for
the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to
continuing to work with you and your staffs on these issues. I would be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF DOUG O'BRIEN
Deputy Under Secretary for Rural Development
Department of Agriculture
March 8, 2012
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Shelby, and Members of the
Committee, I want to start by thanking you for inviting me to testify
here today and to represent United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) on the issue of housing in Indian Country.
When we talk about housing at Rural Development, we often speak of
the entire rural community--its infrastructure and facilities, its
businesses, as well as the individual homeowner. Programs at USDA span
a wide range of areas that have an impact on Indian Country, including
food safety, housing, business development, telecommunications, water
systems, crop insurance, nutrition, research, and of course the
programs designed to assist farmers. According to the National Congress
of American Indians, agriculture is the second largest employer in
Indian Country. As such, Secretary Vilsack is committed to a USDA that
faithfully serves Tribal governments, Tribal communities, and
individual American Indians and Alaska Natives.
The Office of Tribal Relations (OTR), located within the Office of
the Secretary, is the primary point of contact for Tribal consultation
and collaboration within USDA and works with all USDA agencies to
ensure that relevant programs and policies are efficient, easy to
understand, accessible, and developed in consultation and collaboration
with the American Indian and Alaskan Native governments they impact.
OTR is responsible for improving our government-to-government relations
between USDA's various agencies and Tribal governments, advising
Secretary Vilsack on Tribal issues and concerns, Tribal consultation,
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), and issues impacting
Tribal members. OTR works cooperatively and collaboratively across USDA
to build an integrated approach to issues, programs, and services that
address the needs of American Indians and Alaskan Natives. We believe
that the efforts and commitment of OTR in partnership with all USDA is
guiding the Department toward a more flexible and sustainable approach
in addressing the needs of Tribal governments, the communities they
serve, and the individuals living on Tribal lands.
Since President Obama's 2009 Memorandum on Tribal Consultation and
Collaboration, a dedicated team from across USDA has been working to
re-examine existing departmental policies and regulations regarding
Tribal collaboration and consultation and how USDA programs are
utilized in Indian Country. In 2010 we held a series of joint
consultation regional events where we heard from Tribal elected
officials and their representatives about program rules and the
challenges to stronger utilization of USDA programs in Indian Country.
Rural Development took part in those regional venues and RD staff and
leadership have participated many times at the local, regional and
national level in ongoing dialogue with Tribal leadership.
On June 9th, 2011 President Obama signed an Executive Order
establishing the first White House Rural Council. The White House Rural
Council's goal is to improve coordination of programs across Government
and encourage public-private partnerships to promote increased economic
prosperity and improved quality of life in rural communities. Chaired
by Secretary Vilsack, the Council is responsible for helping coordinate
Federal investments in rural areas and continues to hear from a wide
variety of rural stakeholders, including Tribal governments. The
Council breaks down program silos and finds areas for better
collaboration and improved flexibility in Government programs. To
further this objective, in August 2011 the Rural Council convened the
White House Native American Business Leaders Roundtable with Tribal
representatives, economic development experts, and Federal
policymakers. At this roundtable participants discussed challenges
Tribal businesses face, including access to capital, job skills and
training shortfalls, and limited broadband deployment and adoption in
Tribal communities. Just last week, Federal representatives and Tribal
business and Government leaders participated in a Capital Access
roundtable at the Reservation Economic Summit (RES) 2012, where we
continued to delve deeper into the challenges and barriers faced in
accessing necessary capital to build strong rural economies in Indian
Country. The feedback and insight gained by my colleagues is being
incorporated into our ongoing efforts to address economic growth in
Indian Country, and USDA looks forward to all we can achieve with our
partners in the Federal Government and in Indian Country to create more
opportunity in Native American communities.
USDA is also addressing civil rights complaints that go back
decades in order to pave the way for new and stronger relationships
with the rural farming and ranching communities found throughout Indian
Country. In October 2010, Secretary Vilsack announced the settlement of
a decades-long discrimination case brought against the Department by
Native farmers and ranchers: Keepseagle v. Vilsack. Up to $760 million
in monetary relief, debt relief, and tax relief is available to
successful claimants. The claims period closed in December 2011 and we
anticipate payments to successful claimants this calendar year. As part
of the settlement of the Keepseagle case, the Secretary will appoint a
Council on Native American Farming and Ranching that will meet
regularly to further advise USDA on how our programs can build strong
rural farming and ranching communities. We expect the appointment of
the Council members to occur in the coming months.
Furthermore, USDA continues to be an active participant on the
Tribal Infrastructure Task Force to address the ongoing need for safe
drinking water and basic sanitation in Indian Country. Between 2003 and
2009, the combined funding from the Task Force Agencies--USDA,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Indian Health Service (IHS) and
the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)--provided 80,941
Tribal homes access to safe drinking water and 43,562 Tribal homes
access to basic sanitation. In August 2011, USDA Rural Development
provided a $12 million grant and $3.34 million loan to Mni Waste Water
Company to complete phase II of a multi phase project to replace a
failing water system that serves the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
Reservation, as well as Meade and Perkins Counties in South Dakota. In
fact, prior to this investment Rural Development hosted an interagency
funding meeting with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe where the tribe
spelled out its priorities and challenges associated with this project
in front of Federal officials from USDA, the Indian Health Service, HUD
and EPA--all of which also actively participate in the task force.
These numbers demonstrate significant progress made by the Task Force
agencies, but we recognize that more work is needed. To this end, the
Task Force is refocusing its goals around the principle that access to
safe drinking water and basic sanitation should be provided through
entities that are sustainable and implemented through integrated agency
planning that links the development goals of the tribe with the need
for such services and infrastructure. This principle fits well with
USDA Rural Development programs that are committed to improving the
economy and quality of life in rural areas.
In recent months, USDA has been working to improve our program
delivery to Tribal governments, communities and individuals they serve.
As an outgrowth of the Keepseagle settlement, USDA has established a
technical assistance network in partnership with the Intertribal
Agriculture Council. The network works across Indian Country in 13
regional locations to provide needed technical assistance on the ground
so that Tribal governments, communities and individuals have a stronger
understanding of USDA programs and of how to strategically plan for
their communities' growth. And finally, USDA launched a Strike Force
initiative in southeastern States that is now expanding to western
States with substantial Native American populations. The Strike Force
initiative ensures that the Federal agencies (both within and beyond
USDA) partner to provide effective and targeted technical assistance.
These technical assistance efforts do not duplicate one another;
instead, they complement and catalyze the efforts of staff from
numerous agencies. USDA recognizes that Federal program managers need
to strive to provide seamless technical assistance and we also
recognize that in many rural communities, this type of targeted
technical assistance is needed to uncover the best strategies to vision
and build strong communities and families. We believe that these
efforts will ensure the unique challenges of Native Americans, living
both on and off reservations, will be addressed.
To better serve tribes and to ensure Rural Development investments
flow onto Tribal lands, it is both pragmatic and necessary that we work
in cooperation with elected Tribal officials, adhere to Tribal
ordinances and laws, and partner with other Federal agencies such as
the Indian Health Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), HUD, and
many other Federal partners. Rural Development has exceptional staff in
our nationwide network of State-level field offices and area offices
across the rural landscape. These individuals work closely with Tribes
and dedicated partners on a daily basis in the for-profit and nonprofit
sectors. Rural Development staff in the local offices deliver programs
for all three agencies in the Rural Development mission area-the Rural
Business and Cooperative Service, Rural Housing Service and Rural
Utilities Service. By being located in rural communities, we are able
to cultivate important relationships with Tribal leaders, Tribal
professional staff, lenders, realtors, community-based organizations,
redevelopment authorities, leadership groups, and others. Each State-
level Rural Development office maintains a Native American Tribal
Coordinator to assist Tribes with their development interests by
providing technical assistance and programmatic knowledge throughout
the application process. Rural Development provides financial programs
to support essential public facilities and services such as water and
sewer systems, housing, health clinics, emergency service facilities,
electric, telephone and broadband services. Rural Development promotes
economic development in rural areas by providing loans, loan
guarantees, grants, and other assistance to applicants, including
tribes, Tribal members, individuals and families, banks, and community-
managed lending pools. And RD, I am proud to say, has a long history of
investing in Tribal economies. From 2001 to 2011, Rural Development
assistance benefiting tribes totaled more than $3 billion. I believe we
can continue on this path and even do more, if funds are available.
On the issue of housing in Indian Country, Rural Development
understands the history of challenges as well as the opportunities that
lie before us. USDA Rural Development continues to work closely with
national organizations like the National Congress of American Indians,
the National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC), and the National
Center for American Indian Enterprise Development to communicate Rural
Development's program information to their members and affiliates. Over
the past 10 years, our Rural Housing Service has invested nearly $1.3
billion dollars that has benefited American Indians and Alaska Natives.
Our Single Family Housing (SFH) Direct and Guaranteed loan programs
helped over 7,200 American Indian and Alaska Native families become
homeowners. RD's SFH Home Repair program funded home repairs for over
2,900 American Indian and Alaska Native families.
Over the same period, our Multi-Family Housing (MFH) Direct Loan
program supported the construction of 67 properties and made nearly
1,200 rental units available to Tribal members. Housing Preservation
Grants have helped repair or improve 1,412 American Indian and Alaska
Native occupied housing units. Our MFH Guaranteed Loan program has
supported the construction of 5 properties with 217 rental units
available to Tribal members.
We have seen the impact of such projects first-hand. Just last
month, our Under Secretary for Rural Development, Dallas Tonsager, had
the privilege of taking part in a ribbon cutting ceremony held by the
Maliseet Tribe to celebrate their first multi-family apartment complex.
Working with our State office in Maine, the Maliseet Tribe broke ground
in November 2010 at a time when the Tribal Housing Authority had 40
families on a waiting list for housing. This six unit housing complex,
the first Multi-family housing facility funded in part by USDA Rural
Development on Maliseet land, is a step in the right direction toward
providing affordable housing to this community. But we would like to do
more throughout Indian Country, and we are working to develop
additional solutions to increase the availability of our loan programs
to Tribal lands.
Over the last year, USDA staff have been meeting regularly with BIA
staff to discuss land and lending issues that create challenges when
extending credit for projects on trust land. As a result of these
meetings a new MOU between USDA and BIA is currently being drafted
which will improve the working relationships between USDA and BIA
staff, allowing BIA personnel to better understand each of RD's
programs and the associated technical requirements for delivery to
American Indians, Alaska Natives and Indian tribes, and our own staff
to better understand BIA responsibilities On the subject of home
ownership, the MOU will also foster collaboration to increase home
ownership as well as home repair and rehabilitation opportunities by
identifying and addressing barriers to leasing, mortgage approval, lien
perfection, and foreclosure proceedings in Tribal courts. I am hopeful
that this MOU will pave the way toward easier access to RD programs and
ultimately provide increased homeownership opportunities in Indian
Country.
RD has also been working hard to reduce the burden of costs
associated with homeownership on Tribal lands. Historically, insurance
and insurance-like products have been unavailable, difficult to access,
or expensive on trust lands owned by tribes and Tribal members. In some
instances this lack of insurance may have been an impediment to
utilizing Rural Development financing for projects on Tribal lands. In
practice, Rural Development requires Federal and applicable State laws
and regulations to be followed when insuring Rural Development financed
projects, but barring those limitations there is no legal or
programmatic reason to deny the use of an appropriate insurance-like
product on any project financed through Rural Development's Single
Family Housing Direct Loan programs, and RD is working to develop
solutions. The AMERIND Risk Management Corporation is a risk management
agency that administers a tribally owned risk management pool for
coverage of homes and other structures on Indian lands where there has
been a lack of affordable insurance. Through discussions with AMERIND,
RD is optimistic that we will be able to bring them into the insurer
pool for RD projects, and normalize the use of this product, which will
make access to our housing products more amenable in Indian Country. A
Rural Development Administrative Notice was published in November 2011
advising staff that the use of AMERIND coverage could save borrowers
money and increase the available capital in Native communities.
We have worked hard with the BIA, HUD, the VA and NAIHC on all of
these issues over the years. But we still need to improve access to our
programs in any way that we can. Hopefully, trust reform and the BIA's
new leasing regulations will help. But agencies, Rural Development
included, will need to think creatively about how they can best provide
their financing products to Tribal lands.
We look forward to publishing a final rule on the Substantially
Underserved Trust Areas (or SUTA) provision in the weeks ahead. RUS
published a Proposed Rule in December 2011 and closed the comment
period on January 17th, 2012. Once published, the final rule will allow
RUS to make our water, electric, telecom and broadband programs more
affordable and accessible for projects financed within Trust Areas. We
need to do a better job of working across agencies, both in the field
and in Washington, DC, so that we better know each of our missions and
capabilities, which will better enable us to resolve issues when they
arise. We also need to work more closely with tribes so that Tribal
leaders, Tribal councils and Tribal courts better understand the steps
that they can take on their own as well as in partnership with Federal
agencies to create more homeownership opportunities on Tribal lands.
And finally, we need to work more closely with lenders to make sure the
proper incentives are in place so that Federal loan guarantee programs
are also used on Tribal lands. Our recent work with Tribal communities
and other government entities makes me hopeful that we can continue to
make progress on these issues.
I want to thank you for the Committee for the opportunity to speak
here before you today.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT McSWAIN
Deputy Director, Management Operations
Department of Health and Human Services
March 8, 2012
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
Good afternoon. My name is Robert McSwain and I am the Deputy
Director for Management Operations of the Indian Health Service (IHS).
I am pleased to have this opportunity to appear before you today, and
discuss the important issue of Native American housing and
infrastructure development.
We are keenly aware of the need for adequate housing throughout
Indian Country and of equal importance is the requirement for adequate
infrastructure to support new and existing housing. Housing and
supporting infrastructure are critical factors for a healthy living
environment.
The IHS has the primary responsibility for providing water supply,
along with solid and liquid waste disposal facilities for American
Indian and Alaskan Native (AI/AN) homes and communities as part of
delivering a comprehensive health program. The IHS provides sanitation
facilities through construction projects to serve existing homes and
communities, and for most new and like new homes. The IHS works
cooperatively, as close partners, with tribes in providing these
essential sanitation facilities. Enhancing tribal capabilities and
building partnerships based on mutual respect are key factors in the
success of this IHS program. The IHS also coordinates and advocates on
behalf--of and in--cooperation with Tribes to seek resources from other
Federal Agencies to support needed facilities.
IHS/Federal Special Trust Responsibilities
The IHS plays a unique role within the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS), to meet the Federal special trust
responsibility by providing health services and resources to the 565
federally recognized AI/AN Tribes. IHS provides comprehensive health
services to approximately 2.1 million AI/ANs through a system of IHS,
Tribal, and Urban Indian (I/T/U) operated health service units and
programs, based on authorities founded in treaties, judicial
determinations, and Acts of Congress.
The mission of the Agency is to raise the physical, mental, social,
and spiritual health of AI/ANs to the highest level, in partnership
with the population we serve. The Agency aims to assure that
comprehensive, culturally acceptable personal and public health
services, including traditional medicine, are available and accessible
to the service population. Our obligation is to promote healthy AI/AN
people, communities, and cultures, and to honor the inherent sovereign
rights of Tribes.
The IHS seeks to work in partnership with the Tribal communities it
serves and, as such, IHS health care facilities and their
administration includes Tribal representatives who closely participate,
as key stakeholders, in the health services preparedness and delivery
system. Current public laws, Federal policies, and individual Tribal
governance decisions determine the role and relationship IHS has with
each Tribe, and the corresponding level and methods of health services
delivery, support, oversight, control, and resources IHS provides.
IHS Organization and Capabilities
The IHS Headquarters (IHS-HQ) is located in Rockville, Maryland.
The Agency has 12 strategically located Area Offices across the United
States, which include IHS and Tribally operated hospitals and
ambulatory health centers, as well as 34 Urban Indian health programs,
located in 36 States. The I/T/U health care system provides patient
care and public health services within Indian reservations and
communities, and has well-established ongoing partnerships with Tribal
governments and programs.
Role of the IHS in the Provision of Sanitation Facilities
Infrastructure
Sanitation Facilities Construction (SFC) is an integral component
of the IHS disease prevention activities. The IHS has carried out this
program since 1959 using funds appropriated for SFC to provide potable
water and waste disposal facilities for AI/AN people. As a result,
rates of infant mortality, the mortality rate for gastroenteritis and
other environmentally related diseases have been dramatically reduced
by about 80 percent since 1973. IHS Physicians and health professionals
credit many of these health status improvements to IHS's provision of
water supplies, sewage disposal facilities, development of solid waste
sites, and the provision of technical assistance to Tribally owned
water and sewer utility organizations. Today, while less than 1 percent
of the U.S. population is without access to safe water more than 12
percent or about 48,000 AI/AN homes, are without access to safe water
or adequate wastewater disposal facilities and those families that live
in these homes are still at an extremely high risk for gastrointestinal
and respiratory diseases at rates similar to developing countries. Many
of these homes without service are very remote and may have limited
access to health care which increases the importance of improving
environmental conditions in the home as part of a comprehensive public
health program.
IHS plans, designs and provides professional engineering and
construction project management services for approximately 400 SFC
projects annually with a total cost of over $190 million, which
includes contributions from other agencies. The program manages annual
project funding that includes contributions from Tribes, States and
other Federal agencies. SFC projects can be managed by IHS or by tribes
under the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act. All
SFC projects are carried out from beginning to end in cooperation with
the Tribes to be served by the facilities. Projects are funded and
implemented through an agreement between the Tribe and IHS. In these
agreements tribes agree to ownership of the provided facilities as well
as operation and maintenance responsibilities.
Annually, IHS works with Tribes to develop an inventory of needed
sanitation facilities known as the Sanitation Deficiency system (SDS).
The SDS data has sanitation deficiencies of homes by community and a
priority ordered list of projects to address all of those deficiencies.
As of November 2011, the list of all projects to correct sanitation
deficiencies totaled almost $3.1 billion, with those projects that are
considered economically and technically feasible totaling almost $1.46
billion. About 231,000 or 60 percent of AI/AN homes are in need of new
or improved sanitation facilities. Maximum health benefits are achieved
by addressing existing sanitation needs and by providing needed
facilities to new homes as they are constructed.
Over 97 percent of IHS SFC funds are utilized for two types of
projects. Regular projects to serve existing homes are selected in
priority order from SDS. Housing projects to serve new and like new
homes, serve Indian homes being constructed or rehabilitated by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs Housing Improvement Program, Tribes,
individual homeowners, or other Federal agencies except for new HUD
housing. Housing projects are funded based on a priority based
classification system.
Coordination with States, Tribes and other Federal Agencies
The IHS has coordinated with States, Tribes, local government and
other Federal agencies since the first sanitation facilities project at
Elko, Nevada, in 1958 which led to the passage of P.L.86-121, the
Indian Sanitation Facilities Construction Act, in 1959. Now
coordination occurs at all levels of Federal agencies from HQ to the
local level for specific projects.
In 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of
Agriculture (USDA), Department of Interior (DOI), Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), and Health and Human Services (HHS) formed an
Infrastructure Task Force (ITF) and signed two Memoranda of
Understanding (MOU) to achieve the commitments made by the United
States in 2002 under the United Nations Millennium Development Goals
for improved access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation in
Indian Country. Specifically, the United States committed to reduce the
number of tribal homes lacking access to safe drinking water and basic
sanitation by 50 percent by 2015. The ITF has Federal agency members as
well as tribal representatives. A subgroup of the ITF was chartered to
identify, prioritize and categorize barriers and recommended solutions.
The barriers and recommended solutions developed by the subgroup can be
divided into three major themes:
1. Infrastructure Funding,
2. Operation and Maintenance funding, including support for tribal
capacity development,
3. Programmatic Coordination
The ITF continues to meet quarterly and have continued to work on
these themes. To track progress in meeting the goal the agencies use
IHS SDS data. A current priority of the ITF is to develop and implement
strategies to support sustainable tribal operation and maintenance
(O&M) organizations with the intent to target limited infrastructure
funding specifically toward access.
A positive outcome of the ITF was the coordination of American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act sanitation projects by IHS and EPA.
Projects were agreed upon in consultation with tribes at the IHS Area
and EPA Regional level and two agreements were developed to move the
EPA projects and funding to IHS for nearly 160 projects totaling $90
million. We have been able to agree upon standard reporting requirement
which are now used for all IHS and EPA projects. We have also
standardized and streamlined interagency agreements between the two
programs.
All members of the ITF have been working to streamline all
paperwork and processes for tribal programs from the application
process through National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
determinations. Last year a process was developed in Alaska with EPA,
IHS, USDA and the State of Alaska to streamline sanitation project
implementation in Alaska.
In Arizona, as a result of the efforts of the agencies under the
ITF two regular coordination activities are ongoing. There is a Multi-
Agency Tribal Infrastructure Collaborative which has representatives
from various Arizona State agencies, EPA, HUD, USDA, DOI, the Navajo,
Phoenix and Tucson IHS Areas, the Intertribal Council of Arizona, plus
other participants. We also have seen a group of water and waste water
system technical assistance providers start to meet and coordinate
technical assistance for Tribal O&M groups.
For IHS projects, coordination with other Federal agencies has
always been a priority. We have historically handled this at the
project level beginning with project preplanning. For projects serving
existing homes, this begins in the SDS inventory of projects and is
used by IHS and the Tribes to determine funding needs and possible
contributions from the State, and other Federal agencies. This
information is used by IHS and the Tribes to seek and secure these
sources of funding before IHS can execute the project. Many projects on
SDS require funding from more than the IHS appropriations because of
the vast number and scale of the projects on the list. EPA uses SDS
data to select EPA Indian Set-Aside projects to access Clean Water Act
and Safe Drinking Water Act State Revolving Funds. So, coordination
with other Federal agencies is imperative.
Those projects that serve new and like new homes funded with SFC
housing funds, are also often partially funded with outside
contributions especially those for renovated homes also known as like
new homes. IHS does not have the authorization to provide household
plumbing, so, in many cases, other sources of funds are used to
complete renovations and provide household plumbing. These projects
also require advanced coordination and planning.
Approximately 43 percent of all IHS SFC funded projects over the
last 5 years are funded either partially or entirely with contributions
from others. Using these contributions IHS is able to serve homes or
buildings that are not eligible for IHS funding, such as using
contributed funds for provision of offsite sanitation facilities for
new HUD homes funded through the Native American Housing Assistance and
Self Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA). We use contributed funds to
serve new NAHASDA homes because IHS is not authorized to use IHS
construction funds for this purpose.
All projects require some coordination between IHS, the Tribes,
States and other Federal agencies. In addition to funding, there is
coordination that occurs under NEPA determinations which progresses to
acquisition of easements. With mixed sources of funding in many IHS
projects, the NEPA processes can become much more complex. After the
systems are constructed, coordination still occurs to support long term
technical assistance for operations.
Challenges in Providing Safe Water and Waste Disposal Facilities in
Indian Country
The needs for sanitation facilities infrastructure grow every year.
Growth is partially from population growth and inflation, but changing
environmental laws and regulations have an impact on need which can
create a long term O&M impact. This long term O&M impact is due to the
operational cost and complexity of some of the facilities needed.
For example, the arsenic rule went into effect in 2006 and promptly
our data indicated 18,000 additional homes impacted in 38 communities.
Currently, EPA data shows there are now 36 systems on tribal lands
serving 42,700 people out of compliance for Arsenic. EPA data includes
BIA and other systems that are not part of the IHS needs data. While
treatment may be possible, in most cases, the types of treatment needed
may double or more the costs of water service. In addition, treatment
requires highly trained and certified operators who may not be
supportable by a small rural water system. In many of these systems, we
are working with the tribes to regionalize water systems or looking to
new water sources to avoid treatment. It is necessary to balance
upfront costs with long term operation costs. Arsenic is just one
example. The groundwater and disinfection bi-products rules also add
new complexity of operations for all of rural America.
Tribally owned and operated water and waste water systems are
aging. Much of the major infrastructure components were constructed
nearly 30 years ago. Population growth, new environmental laws and the
need for system repairs and replacement also affects the annual
infrastructure need.
IHS along with other Federal agencies is seeking a way to make the
operation and maintenance of sanitation facilities constructed in
Indian Country sustainable. This requires a multi-tiered approach,
beginning with the design and construction of facilities appropriate to
the operational capacity of the local community. Federal agencies need
to support operator training, and necessary startup supplies and
equipment to the O&M organization to improve the operating capacity of
the community as we construct new facilities. To have sustainable
facilities there needs to be sustainable O&M organizations that, in
addition to operating the facilities, can set and charge user fees,
along with disconnecting users for nonpayment. All Federal agencies are
seeking ways to coordinate the activities of our O&M technical
assistance providers to support this vision.
Since 1982, Congress prohibited the use of IHS sanitation
facilities construction funds for HUD funded homes in appropriations
bills. Before NAHASDA was passed in 1996, the IHS received funding
directly from HUD to serve HUD homes. Afterwards, all funds went to the
Tribally Designated Housing Entities (TDHEs) across the country and
reduced funding provided to the IHS through HUD to address
infrastructure for HUD homes. This has reduced coordination between HUD
and IHS. IHS is willing to assist in site selection, planning design
and construction if the TDHE desires. We can also assist in the
coordination with other Federal agencies to fund the needed facilities
Summary
In summary, IHS seeks to provide the best culturally acceptable
health services to all federally recognized Tribes, while respecting
their tribal sovereignty, and tribal self-determination. IHS is
committed to providing comprehensive health services to Indian Country
including the provision of sanitation facilities to support housing. In
addition, IHS will continually seek opportunities to improve our
communication, integration, and coordination with all Federal, State,
local, and Tribal partners.
Finally, IHS participates in forums to review, discuss, and improve
Federal-level coordination of infrastructure to improve access to safe
water supply and wastewater disposal facilities throughout Indian
Country.
This concludes my remarks, and I will be happy to answer any
questions you may have. Thank you.
______
PREPARED STATEMENT OF JODI GILLETTE
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs
Department of the Interior
March 8, 2012
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is
Jodi Gillette; I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs.
I am here today to provide the Department of the Interior's
(Department) testimony on the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) role in
assisting individual Indians in the pursuit of homeownership. While we
recognize that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
has primary responsibility for the development of new housing for the
Federal Government and for development of affordable housing in Indian
Country, my statement will provide some background information on the
BIA's Housing Improvement Program (HIP). I will also discuss the
current process and procedures for obtaining a Title Status Report
(TSR) within the BIA, and our efforts to promote homeownership.
Housing Improvement Program
The HIP addresses the Department's strategic goal of serving Indian
communities by improving the quality of life of eligible Indians by
helping to eliminate substandard housing and homelessness in or near
federally recognized reservation communities. The program includes
housing repairs and renovations of existing homes and construction of
modest homes for families who do not own a home but have ownership of
or lease sufficient land suitable for housing. The BIA policy and
methodology ensures that the neediest of the needy are provided housing
assistance by implementing eligibility criteria that is identified in
25 C.F.R. Part 256.14.
The HIP is 95 percent contracted or compacted by tribes. Tribes
participating in the program must comply with regulations found in 25
of C.F.R. Part 256 (Housing Improvement Program).
On September 28, 2004, the BIA entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Departments of Agriculture and HUD for the
purpose of establishing a framework for partnering among the agencies
to improve assistance to American Indians and Alaska Natives in the
development and operation of affordable housing on trust or restricted
lands, reservations, and in approved service areas. Our goal is to
assist tribes in improving their living environment through the
delivery of quality housing and in resolving issues that delay
processing of mortgage loans to eligible Indians.
Land Title Grant Procedures
The BIA has Land Titles and Records Offices (LTRO) located at 8 of
its 12 regional offices: the Alaska Regional Office in Anchorage,
Alaska; the Eastern Oklahoma Regional Office in Muskogee, Oklahoma; the
Great Plains Regional Office in Aberdeen, South Dakota; the Northwest
Regional Office in Portland, Oregon; the Pacific Regional Office in
Sacramento, California; the Rocky Mountain Regional Office in Billings,
Montana; the Southern Plains Regional Office in Anadarko, Oklahoma; and
the Southwest Regional Office in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Each LTRO is
the official Federal office for recording all title conveyance and
encumbrance documents for Indian lands within the LTRO's jurisdiction.
The LTRO is also the Federal office for the examination and
certification of title to Indian trust and restricted lands. The
official Federal certificate of title to Indian lands is the Title
Status Report (TSR). The TSR reports the legal land description, the
current ownership, and the recorded liens and encumbrances on ownership
for a specific tract of Indian trust or restricted land. The issuance
of TSR's for mortgages is the top priority of the Land Title and
Records Offices. We strongly support programs that improve or develop
housing on Indian lands for Indian people.
The certified title is required by the lending institution to
verify that the loan applicant has acquired a leasehold interest on
Tribal land or that the loan applicant has total ownership of the trust
land, and that the title is clean and clear of any liens against the
property so the loan application process can move forward.
Once the mortgage has been approved using the BIA-generated TSR,
the document is sent to the LTRO for recording purposes with a request
for a second certified TSR. HUD requires the subsequent TSR showing the
mortgage as an encumbrance to the Title before the loan is guaranteed.
Some lending institutions also require this additional TSR before
releasing the funds.
There are very few differences in the production of TSR's from
location to location. When there are, often those differences are
dictated by the particular lending institution or Federal agency
providing the loan. Requirements and standard operating procedures vary
from Federal agency to Federal agency. The BIA LTRO's strive to
accommodate these differences, as we support the mission to provide
home loans to Indian people. Private lending institutions also have
varying requirements and procedures, consequently our process for
providing TSR's may vary to accommodate the lender.
Since the inception of the Federal loan programs, the mortgage
requests for certified titles have been a high priority for the LTROs.
We have made significant changes to our title program over the past
several years aimed at improving our ability to deliver in an accurate
and timely manner in all aspects of our Indian land title operations,
including the processing of TSRs. Previously, the procedure to request
a TSR for mortgage purposes required that all requests first go through
the Agency Superintendent at the relevant BIA office through the
Regional Director on behalf of the tribal member. Recently, the BIA
Division of Land Title and Records (DLTR) and its Land Titles and
Records Offices changed their business model from a passive model or
``examine-and-certify-title-only when-requested'' to a proactive
business model of ``title-on-demand'' that requires the title to all
Indian trust and restricted lands be maintained in an up-to-date
certified status at all times. In December, 2011, the DLTR redesigned
the TSR to improve its readability and to make it similar to commercial
title products. The redesigned TSR is produced and certified as a
completely digital title report that is stored in a TSR repository as
part of the Trust Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS). The
certified digital TSR can be retrieved from TAAMS as an electronic
digital image file that can be printed and mailed or can be attached to
an email message and sent directly to the TSR requestor, whether the
requestor is a BIA agency office or a mortgage lender. Beginning in
January 2012, the LTROs began the process of producing digitally
certified TSRs for more than 212,000 tracts of Indian trust and
restricted land. The title ownership to each tract of land is re-
certified and a new digital certified TSR produced after any conveyance
of ownership, whether by deed or probate order. We have additional
changes planned in the near future which will further improve the
quality of the data in our title system, thus improving our overall
product.
In the 2004 MOU between the Departments of Housing and Urban
Development, Agriculture, and the Interior, the BIA's Realty and LTRO
programs agreed to provide the necessary products and services within
30 days to keep the process moving forward to assist Indians in
becoming homeowners. Lenders can utilize the information in those TSR's
to insure that the lands are free of liens and are available for
mortgaging.
The BIA Division of Land Titles and Records has partnered with the
HUD Office of Native American Programs to provide training to lenders
in order to educate the lenders concerning the title process for Indian
mortgages, and to facilitate and improve the efficiency of the mortgage
process. Anytime a mortgage is approved it has the potential to improve
the quality of life for Indians. As stated earlier, requests for title
status reports for mortgage purposes are and will remain a high
priority for the Bureau. The implementation of TAAMS has increased
efficiency and cost savings in the management of Indian lands and in
the production of TSRs for mortgage purposes.
Proposed Leasing Regulations and the HEARTH Act
Indian Affairs is in the process of revising leasing regulations as
part of the effort to return control of land use decisions to tribal
management and to streamline surface leasing processes to promote
homeownership, economic development, and clean energy. The comment
period on those proposed regulations ended over a month ago, and we
anticipate issuing final regulations later this year.
In addition to proposing revisions to existing leasing regulations,
the Department strongly supports the Helping Expedite and Advance
Responsible Tribal Homeownership Act (HEARTH Act), both the House and
Senate versions, H.R. 205 and S. 703 respectively. The HEARTH Act would
restore tribal authority to govern leasing on tribal lands and to
promulgate regulations for the governance of those leases, while
preserving the statutory tools available to the Secretary for carrying
out the trust responsibility to tribes. This model ensures that tribal
regulations provide a mechanism for environmental review and public
comment, exempting the Secretary for liability from claims by parties
to the lease, and authorizing the Secretary to cancel a lease that is
not in accordance with approved tribal regulations.
Both versions of the HEARTH Act would amend certain sections of 25
U.S.C. 415 (the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act) to permit tribes that
choose to develop their own leasing program to approve and enter into
certain leases without prior express approval from the Secretary of the
Interior. Under both pieces of legislation, willing tribes would
initially submit their own leasing regulations to the Secretary of the
Interior for approval. Following Secretarial approval of such leasing
regulations, tribal governments would process leases for tribal trust
land at the tribal level, pursuant to their own laws, without a
requirement for further approval of the Secretary. This has the
potential to significantly reduce the time it takes to approve leases
for homes and small businesses.
This concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to respond to
any questions you may have.
RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION OF CHAIRMAN JOHNSON FROM SANDRA B.
HENRIQUEZ
Q.1. Ms. Henriquez, I'd like to get your thoughts on the
question I posed to Mr. McSwain regarding health effects of
poor housing conditions. As I've said, I've seen far too many
inadequate homes on reservations that house two or more
families, which cause a number of problems such as black mold.
Tribal leaders and those involved with the schools have also
raised the issue that kids living in overcrowded conditions
have trouble finding places to study or even rest at night.
Can you give us your sense of the negative impact unsafe
and overcrowded housing has on the health and well being of
Native communities?
PIH Response
A.1. The Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) has received
anecdotal evidence about the negative impact overcrowded
housing has on the health and well-being of Native American
families, and in particular, children. Children living in
overcrowded homes are more likely to have immediate health and
safety issues. Children are often doubled up in bedrooms with
siblings or other family members, or sleep in other areas of
the house, such as the living room or kitchen. Poor ventilation
in overcrowded conditions spreads disease and contributes to
mold growth.
Children in overcrowded housing conditions are often
exposed to drug and alcohol abuse at a much younger age--either
within the household by a family member or outside the
household as the child is seeking to avoid the overcrowded
situation. The stress created by overcrowded living conditions
can contribute to increased verbal and physical abuse as well.
Overcrowding affects learning and education. There is often
no space or a quiet place for a child to do school work.
Without an appropriate place to sleep or study, these children
do not perform well in school. Some tribally designated housing
entities (TDHEs) have made a connection between children living
in overcrowded conditions and high truancy rates. Ultimately,
families and children living in overcrowded units suffer long-
term financial consequences.
From a housing management standpoint, overcrowding
conditions make it more difficult to maintain a home and causes
additional wear and tear on the unit, which contributes to such
factors as mold growth. Mold growth can cause respiratory
illness and exacerbate asthma symptoms. Children, the elderly
and pregnant women are the most vulnerable to mold-related
illnesses.
To combat this situation, Tribes and TDHEs have developed
youth programs to give children a place to go after school.
However, the most effective measure to combat the negative
effects of overcrowding is to provide additional units to
reduce the number of overcrowded units.
HUD's Indian Housing Needs Study will attempt to quantify
the number of overcrowded units and delineate between units
that are overcrowded due to a lack of housing options (i.e.,
homelessness) and units that are overcrowded by choice--through
multigenerational living. To address the latter, TDHEs are
constructing units to take into consideration cultural
preferences such as multigenerational living, cooking, heating
and storage needs.
HUD has taken a proactive stance on mold abatement and
remediation in Indian Housing. This includes annual training on
mold prevention in each ONAP region and site visits and
technical assistance in areas hardest hit by mold and poor air
quality. ONAP has also provided Imminent Threat grants through
the Indian Community Development Block Grant program for severe
mold infestation.