    [Senate Hearing 117-570]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 117-570

       SAFE AT HOME: PRESERVING AND IMPROVING FEDERALLY ASSISTED HOUSING

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                                SUBCOMMITTEE ON
               HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

                                     of the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                       BANKING,HOUSING,AND URBAN AFFAIRS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       ON

       EXAMINING HEALTH THREATS IN HOUSING AND ESPECIALLY PUBLIC HOUSING

                                   __________

                                 JULY 20, 2021

                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
                                    Affairs

                     [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                    Available at: https: //www.govinfo.gov /

                                     ______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    50-749 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2023

                COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS

                         SHERROD BROWN, Ohio, Chairman

    JACK REED, Rhode Island              PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania
    ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey          RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
    JON TESTER, Montana                  MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
    MARK R. WARNER, Virginia             TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
    ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts      MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
    CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
    CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada       JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
    TINA SMITH, Minnesota                BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
    KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming
    JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  JERRY MORAN, Kansas
    RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia             KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
                                         STEVE DAINES, Montana

                         Laura Swanson, Staff Director

                     Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director

                          Cameron Ricker, Chief Clerk

                          Shelvin Simmons, IT Director

                        Charles J. Moffat, Hearing Clerk

                                     ______

       Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development

                          TINA SMITH, Minnesota, Chair

              MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota, Ranking Republican Member

    JACK REED, Rhode Island              RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
    ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey          MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
    JON TESTER, Montana                  BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
    CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada       CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming
    CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           JERRY MORAN, Kansas
    JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
    RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia             STEVE DAINES, Montana

                    Tim Everett, Subcommittee Staff Director

    Caroline Hunsicker, Senior Policy Advisor for Housing, Transportation,
                               and Native Affairs

             Jackie Bossman, Republican Subcommittee Staff Director

                                      (ii)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, JULY 20, 2021

                                                                       Page

    Opening statement of Chair Smith.................................     1

    Opening statements, comments, or prepared statements of:
        Senator Rounds...............................................     4

                                   WITNESSES

    Dave Jacobs, Chief Scientist, National Center for Healthy
      Housing, Columbia, Maryland....................................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................    20
    Jennifer Keogh, Deputy Executive Director, Minneapolis Public
      Housing Authority, Minneapolis, Minnesota......................     7
        Prepared statement...........................................    39
    Sharon Vogel, Executive Director, Cheyenne River Housing
      Authority, Eagle Butte, South Dakota...........................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................    43

                  Additional Material Supplied for the Record

    Statement of Captain John Gardell, Pittsburgh Bureau of Fire.....    47
    Joint Statement of the Leading Organizations of the Nation's Fire
      and Emergency Services.........................................    51
    Statement of Mary McGovern, President, Minneapolis Highrise
      Representative Council.........................................    53

                                     (iii)

       SAFE AT HOME: PRESERVING AND IMPROVING FEDERALLY ASSISTED HOUSING

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, JULY 20, 2021

                                   U.S. Senate,
      Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,
        Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community
                                                   Development,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met at 2:45 p.m., in room 538, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Tina Smith, Chair of the
    Subcommittee, presiding.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIR TINA SMITH

        Chair Smith. The Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation,
    and Community Development will come to order. This hearing is
    in hybrid format. Our Members are in person, but we will have
    witnesses testifying both in person and by video.
        So thank you so much, Senator Rounds, for joining me in
    this bipartisan hearing to look at health threats in housing
    and especially public housing. And thank you to all of our
    panelists, our three panelists, for joining us in this
    important hearing.
        On Wednesday morning, at 3:56 a.m. on November 27th, 2019,
    one day before Thanksgiving, Minneapolis firefighters were
    dispatched to the Cedar High Apartments, a 49-year-old public
    housing highrise at 630 Cedar Avenue. And as they arrived,
    through the light snow and fog, firefighters discovered that
    alarms had been triggered for a fire on the 14th floor of the
    25-story building.
        Firefighters quickly recognized the magnitude of the
    challenge and immediately called for backup. The first three
    firefighters on the scene attacked the fire and attempted to
    rescue the victims, but the overwhelming heat of the fire soon
    forced them to turn back. As backup arrived, the firefighters
    launched a second attack, but the fire quickly spread
    throughout the 14th floor and on to the units on the upper
    floors, fueled by gusting wind blowing through a window that
    had come open.
        As the fire spread, residents clamored to get out.
    Stairwells and corridors filled with smoke and heat, and people
    struggled to get down the highrise stairs. For hours, brave
    firefighters battled the blaze and worked to rescue people from
    the inferno. It is tragic that not everyone made it out safely
    that frigid morning. Five residents, ranging in age from 32 to
    79, perished. Four were on the 14th floor and one on the 17th
    floor.
        There are a number of factors that contributed to the
    deaths in the 630 Cedar fire, but many experts point to the
    building's lack of fire sprinklers as a leading cause. Under
    Federal law, highrise public housing buildings built before
    1992, like 630 Cedar, are not required to have fire sprinklers.
    The Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that
    there could be as many as 184,000 public housing units across
    the country that lack fire sprinklers, just like the Cedar
    highrise.
        The loss of life in the 630 Cedar fire is tragic, and
    nothing that we do will bring back those lost to their families
    and their loved ones. But, colleagues, I hope that today's
    hearing will galvanize us to understand these life and safety
    risks and then take action to protect our constituents from
    further tragedy because fires are not the only life and safety
    risk that people face in their homes.
        Today, more than 500,000 children in the United States live
    with elevated levels of lead in their blood, according to the
    Centers for Disease Control. Children exposed to lead face
    significant health risks, including lower intelligence scores,
    behavioral problems, and hearing and speech issues. Black
    children and lower-income children are disproportionately
    victims of lead paint exposure. The leading cause of exposure
    is lead paint on walls and window sills, and this problem
    exists in every State.
        According to the National Center for Healthy Housing, 54
    percent of homes in Minnesota were built before 1978 and are
    likely to contain lead-based paint. In South Dakota, the number
    is exactly the same, 54 percent. In Ohio, it is 68 percent. In
    Pennsylvania, it is 69 percent.
        Another significant risk at home is exposure to radon gas.
    Radon, which is colorless, odorless, and radioactive, is the
    leading cause of lung cancer among nonsmokers, resulting in
    21,000 deaths per year, according to the EPA. In Minnesota,
    estimates are that two of every five homes has unsafe radon
    levels. And in South Dakota, the National Center for Healthy
    Housing estimates that 48 counties have average indoor radon
    levels higher than the EPA's action level.
        Yet, many Americans have no idea of the risks that they
    face in their homes. So these health and safety risks are not
    limited to public housing and federally assisted housing alone,
    but the Federal Government, I think, has a special obligation
    to make sure that homes supported by, or funded by, taxpayers
    are safe and free of known hazards. And I hope that this
    hearing will raise awareness for all Americans about these
    health and safety risks.
        Mitigating these risks will not be easy, public housing
    authorities operate on tight budgets and face billions of
    dollars of maintenance backlog. The reality is that we need
    significant investments in fire sprinklers and fire safety
    measures and carbon monoxide detectors, and in lead paint
    testing and remediation, and in radon testing and remediation.
        But the good news is that many of us are working on a
    solution. The American Jobs Plan would invest $40 billion for
    life-safety upgrades and other renovations in our Nation's
    public housing stock, and this investment will save lives. We
    should all push to secure funding specifically for fire
    sprinklers and other fire prevention efforts in public housing
    and support funding for programs to test for and remediate lead
    paint and radon in public and privately owned housing.
        I have introduced legislation to fund fire sprinkler
    installation in public housing, which has bipartisan support in
    the House, and I ask my Republican and Democratic colleagues to
    join me on this bill.
        Now before I turn to Senator Rounds, I would like to just
    briefly share excerpts from three letters that I have received
    from Minnesotans and from firefighters in this last week, and I
    would ask that these letters be inserted in the record in full,
    without objection.
        The first comes from Hawo Geyre, a resident of the Cedar
    High apartment complex, and she said, ``We still feel the loss
    of the five beloved community members, and every day we can
    still see where the fire happened. It is time to require the
    retrofitting of sprinklers in highrises, and it is time for the
    Federal Government to provide the funds to make this happen. We
    do not want to see any more lives lost to fire.''
        And another is a letter signed by the International
    Association of Fire Chiefs, the National Association of State
    Fire Marshals, and 10 other fire safety associations, and they
    write, ``There is no single investment that HUD can make when
    it comes to addressing life-safety issues that is more
    important than retrofitting public housing with fire sprinkler
    systems. In buildings with sprinkler systems, the death rate
    per fire can be reduced by at least 87 percent. In fact, the
    risk of death to firefighters is nearly eliminated, and the
    injury rate is lowered by 67 percent in structures with fire
    sprinklers.''
        And, colleagues, finally I want to read a bit of a letter
    from Captain John Gardell of the Pittsburgh Bureau of Fire on
    behalf of the International Association of Firefighters, and he
    shares his personal experience with a highrise fire in
    Pittsburgh during his first year on the job. The blaze was on
    the fifth floor of an eight-story highrise, and Captain Gardell
    writes, ``Arriving at the door of the apartment, my crewmates
    and I made entry into the residence. Through the thick, black
    smoke and elevated temperatures, we located the victim and
    extracted her from the building. Once outside, we turned her
    over to the on-the-scene paramedics. Alive but in critical
    condition, she received advanced life-support medical care on
    the scene while being transported to the hospital. Sadly, our
    rescued fire victim did not survive. She died in the hospital a
    few days later.''
        ``I tell you this story,'' says Captain Gardell, ``because
    I have thought about this call many times over my career. I am
    very confident this fire death was preventable. I am certain
    that had an automatic fire sprinkler system been present in the
    building, the victim would likely have survived.''
        So this issue of home health and fire safety is critical to
    every American. Many have recently seen footage of the tragic
    highrise condo collapse in Florida and are asking themselves
    for the first time whether their own homes are safe. So in this
    moment, I hope that we can join together to raise awareness of
    these critical life and safety hazards and commit ourselves to
    doing everything we can to stopping preventable deaths and
    dangers in our communities.
        I look forward to hearing from our witnesses, and I thank
    you and will now turn to Senator Rounds for his opening
    Statement.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MIKE ROUNDS

        Senator Rounds. Thank you, Madam Chair. And let me just
    being once again by apologizing for being late to this. Once
    again, we are intermixing votes along with the Committee
    schedule, but thank you, Madam Chair.
        And thank you to our witnesses for taking the time to
    attend today's hearing. I would especially like to thank Ms.
    Sharon Vogel from my home State of South Dakota for her
    willingness to testify. I look forward to hearing from all of
    you.
        When it comes to federally assisted housing, I think we all
    can agree that the goal is to provide a safe living space for
    those who need it. However, the means to achieve that end can
    be debated. Now is the perfect time to take a step back and to
    evaluate how current allocations are being utilized and how to
    better tackle these issues. While a lack of resources could be
    seen as a primary problem, I believe that agencies across the
    board can be more efficient with their program implementation
    and mission-critical functions. After these bureaucratic
    inefficiency problems are addressed, that is when additional
    funding can be considered.
        For example, HUD has instituted mitigation efforts to
    decrease radon exposure. However, for the 6 years between 2013
    and 2018, HUD did not test for radon in a single unit operated
    by a housing authority directly managed by the Department. How
    can we justify additional allocations for a program that is not
    utilizing its resources in the first place? Sometimes it really
    is not a funding issue; it is a utilization and implementation
    issue.
        There are similar issues when it comes to Native American
    housing as well. Native housing funds come from both HUD and
    the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The BIA has been dubbed the least
    effective and most mismanaged Federal agency, which becomes
    apparent when you take a deeper look into the conditions of
    federally assisted Native American housing. According to the
    National American Indian Housing Council, 40 percent of on-
    reservation housing is inadequate, a fact that is unmistakable
    to me every time I drive through a reservation back home and
    see many of the homes boarded up and unfit for use.
        One of the most pressing housing issues prevalent on
    reservations is overcrowding. According to a 2017 HUD report,
    nearly 16 percent of American Indians' and Alaska Natives'
    households experienced overcrowding compared to the national
    average of 2.2 percent. This level of overcrowding not only
    affects those living in the houses but the structures
    themselves. A staggering 12 percent of these households have
    heating issues compared to just one-tenth of 1 percent of the
    total in the United States. This is simply unacceptable.
        However, there is a bit more to tell in regards to the
    struggles Native Americans face with housing. Despite having
    mismanaged funds and inefficiencies at the agency level, there
    is a true lack of resources available to this population. This
    issue is perpetuated by the fact that much of the population
    data coming from reservations is significantly undercounted.
    The undercounting happens for a multitude of reasons, one being
    that families are afraid to admit the number of people they
    have living in their homes. When the population is not
    adequately counted, it results in inadequate funding levels,
    and the problems such as overcrowding persist.
        It is apparent there are a wide range of public housing
    safety issues across the country. It is time we work to address
    these problems, and I look forward to joining Chairman Smith in
    this effort, especially in regards to some of the most
    prevalent and least addressed safety issues that are found on
    reservations in South Dakota.
        Again, we welcome all of you here today, and I do look
    forward to hearing from our witnesses on the State of housing
    safety in our country. Thank you.
        Chair Smith. Thank you, Senator Rounds. I am now going to
    introduce our witnesses, and I will introduce all three and
    then turn to each of you to make your opening Statements. We
    are grateful to welcome today Dr. David Jacobs, who is the
    Chief Scientist at the National Center for Healthy Housing,
    Jennifer Keogh, who is the Deputy Executive Director of the
    Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, and Sharon Vogel, who is
    the Executive Director of the Cheyenne River Housing Authority
    in Eagle Butte, South Dakota. Welcome and thank you for your
    willingness to be with us today, and I look forward to hearing
    from each of you.
        Before the witnesses begin, I have just a few reminders.
    This hearing is in a hybrid format. Our Members are in person,
    but we will have witnesses testifying both in person and by
    video. If there is a technology issue, we will move to the next
    witness and then come back again.
        For each of you, you have 5 minutes for your opening
    Statements, and you have a clock in front of you or on your
    screen to guide you. And your full written Statement will be
    made part of the record. For Ms. Vogel, who is joining
    virtually, you will hear a bell ring when you have 30 seconds
    remaining and then again when your time is expired. And the
    speaking order will work out here at the podium amongst the
    Senators.
        I will now turn to Dr. Jacobs for 5 minutes for his opening
    Statement. Thank you.

    STATEMENT OF DAVE JACOBS, CHIEF SCIENTIST, NATIONAL CENTER FOR
                  HEALTHY HOUSING, COLUMBIA, MARYLAND

        Mr. Jacobs. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before
    you today. I come before you not only as scientist but also as
    a low-income housing provider. I have served on the board of
    Lincoln Westmoreland Housing. Here in the District in the Shaw
    neighborhood, we provide housing for over 150 families. So I
    sort of straddle both worlds.
        I think in general the link between housing and health is
    pretty still poorly understood. If you think about it, these
    are two biggest parts of our economy that are at risk. We are
    dealing with an affordable housing crisis, and we are still
    trying to figure out how to deal with our health care financing
    system. So there is an enormous cost and burden here. If we
    were to understand the links, we could avoid some of the
    unnecessary expenditures and optimize both worlds.
        A lot of the burden that we have talked about is not only
    lack of funding, but as Senator Rounds said, it is also
    implementation issues. But in general, we have as a Nation
    failed to construct, maintain, preserve housing that not only
    prevents injury or illness but actually supports good health.
    If you think about it, it just makes no sense in the world to
    have a child go to the emergency room with an asthma attack or
    a lead poisoning and then treat the symptoms, only to release
    him back into the home with mold or with asthma triggers or
    lead-based paint hazards. That causes increased costs
    needlessly.
        There is some alarming new evidence that I want to put
    before the Committee today. Blood lead testing, according to
    CDC, has been down by 34 percent during the pandemic. There is
    some preliminary evidence that hospitalizations for serious
    lead poisoning cases may actually be increasing. And HUD's new
    survey on housing shows that there is an additional 4.6 million
    homes that have deteriorated lead-based paint. Half a million
    kids still have blood lead levels above the CDC reference
    value, and in my book, that is an epidemic, in anybody's
    counting.
        Thirty-five million homes have at least one health and
    safety hazard. As we have heard, these problems are most severe
    among low-income and populations of color, but I do want to
    note that HUD's survey also shows the problem is just as bad in
    the rural areas. We did a study in Illinois on private well
    waters, and we found that 48 percent of those wells had lead in
    the water. Now that is the bad news.
        The good news is that solutions do exist. We have
    researched this extensively. We have the systems that we know
    how to prevent a lot of these, and so we only need to take them
    to scale and release our people's ability to make the right
    decisions and to expend the resources wisely.
        We sent letters on both appropriations and infrastructure.
    So I want to, first of all, thank the Congress in recent years
    for increasing the appropriations for a long neglected issue of
    lead in healthy homes. The House provided 460 million in its--
    in its appropriations bill. The National Safe and Healthy
    Housing Coalition, which, I would note, is cochaired by someone
    from Indian Country, has recommended a figure of $600 million.
    We also need increases at CDC and EPA. I would note CDC has not
    updated its blood lead surveillance data since 2017.
        I also think that it is important to include lead in the
    infrastructure bill, lead paint specifically, and specifically
    window replacement. There is a friend of mine in Minnesota who
    has probably replaced more windows than anybody else in the
    country. Windows have the highest levels of lead paint. They
    create--if we replace them, it creates jobs, it creates
    improved energy value, it eliminates a major source of lead
    poisoning, and it increases home value and reduces fuel bills.
    So what is not to like?
        We, at the Center for Healthy Housing, talk to many
    jurisdictions, and the need for increased technical assistance
    remains dire. For example, we provided technical assistance to
    Cleveland, which was able to pass its own local lead poisoning
    prevention law. And I think that gets to Senator Rounds' issue
    about implementation. The technical assistance does not really
    happen if it is not included in the bills.
        We have some specific recommendations with regard to
    disclosure. Most houses in this country remain uninspected, and
    that means parents do not know exactly where the lead or other
    hazards are located in their own homes.
        We have different income eligibility criteria across
    different programs. So CDBG, Lead Hazard Control, HOME
    weatherization, LIHEAP, Medicaid, they all have slightly
    different income requirements, and there is just no good reason
    to have these different definitions of ``low income.'' We could
    streamline that.
        I agree with Senator Smith that Congress should also
    increase radon testing. It is shameful that they did not do
    more in previous years. We just did a study on this that showed
    the importance of testing all homes.
        So I want to close with a--quickly with a quote from
    President Roosevelt, who said, ``A Nation must believe in three
    things: It must believe in the past. It must believe in the
    future. And it must, above all, believe in the capacity of its
    own people to learn from the past so that they can gain in
    judgment in creating their own future.''
        So I think lead hazards and other healthy homes issues
    belong in our past. Let us do something so that they do not
    remain in our future. Thank you.
        Chair Smith. Thank you very much, Dr. Jacobs. We will now
    turn to Ms. Keogh.

        STATEMENT OF JENNIFER KEOGH, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
      MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

        Ms. Keogh. Chairwoman Smith, Ranking Member Rounds, Members
    of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify
    today. My name is Jennifer Keogh, and I am the Deputy Executive
    Director of the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority in
    Minneapolis, Minnesota. I am also the Chair of the Legislative
    Network Advocacy Committee of the National Association of
    Housing and Redevelopment Officials, also known as NAHRO.
        The Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, or MPHA, is the
    largest housing authority in the State of Minnesota, and our
    mission is to deliver quality, well-managed homes to a diverse,
    low-income population. MPHA provides rental assistance to
    26,000 people through our Public Housing and Housing Choice
    Voucher Programs. We own and operate 6,000 units of public
    housing, including 900 family units and 42 highrise
    communities. Our highrise population is 60 percent elderly and
    disabled; 80 percent identify as a person of color. And our
    average household income is under $13,000 annually, which is
    approximately 18 percent of the area median income.
        I am here today to support Senator Tina Smith and Senator
    Amy Klobuchar's Public Housing Fire Safety Act, which would
    provide needed resources to PHAs, including MPHA, to install
    fire sprinklers. Additionally, I am here to support the
    investment of at least $70 billion to address the capital needs
    of public housing properties across the country. Housing is
    critical infrastructure.
        In November 19, a fire occurred in one of MPHA's highrises
    that took the lives of 5 residents. In April 20, I was selected
    to serve as MPHA's new Deputy Executive Director alongside Abdi
    Warsame, MPHA's new Executive Director and CEO. Despite
    overwhelming physical needs throughout the entire portfolio, we
    have made the installation of fire suppression systems a top
    priority. In doing so, due to the lack of funding, we are
    forced to ignore other critical needs of aging building
    systems.
        MPHA is implementing a plan in 2021 to install sprinkler
    systems in 10 of its buildings. Sixteen of our buildings are
    already retrofitted with sprinkler systems, and we have plans
    to complete installations in all remaining buildings within the
    next 3 years. Retrofitting a sprinkler system is costly. It can
    cost $1 million or more, and the overall cost for this year's
    installation in those 10 additional units is estimated at
    approximately $12 million.
        While we recognize that the investment in sprinklers is
    essential, the results of prioritizing the sprinkler work is
    that other crucial capital needs remain unmet. These needs
    include not just sprinklers but electrical, plumbing, heating,
    elevators, and other essential building systems. MPHA has an
    estimated $164 million capital repair backlog across our 6,000-
    unit portfolio, and this figure does not include important
    upgrades to actually improve the housing we provide.
        We cannot make these needed repairs without significant
    resources provided by Congress. Our residents are depending on
    Congress to finally provide MPHA with the funding it needs to
    improve and preserved our units. Minneapolis is not the only
    PHA that struggles to keep up with growing capital needs and
    few Federal resources to preserve our affordable housing. The
    State of Minnesota's estimated capital backlog is $355 million,
    and this problem is mirrored across the country.
        In 2010, the National Public Housing Capital Needs
    Assessment found that the backlog for public housing capital
    funding was $26 billion, with an annual growth rate of $3.4
    billion. The report noted that deferring maintenance each year
    causes the amount of backlog to compound at an 8.7 percent
    inflation rate. As a result, even when accounting for other
    Federal capital programs, NAHRO estimates that the capital fund
    backlog was approximately $70 billion in 2019.
        Housing is critical infrastructure. We need Congress to
    meet their obligation to provide safe housing to our residents
    by fully funding the $70 billion capital backlog. We also need
    targeted investments through the passage of the Public Housing
    Fire Safety Act to help us quickly address pressing safety
    issues.
        Chairwoman Smith, Ranking Member Rounds, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify today. I am happy to answer any
    questions.
        Chair Smith. Thank you so much. And we will now turn to Ms.
    Sharon Vogel.

     STATEMENT OF SHARON VOGEL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CHEYENNE RIVER
              HOUSING AUTHORITY, EAGLE BUTTE, SOUTH DAKOTA

        Ms. Vogel. Good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman Smith and
    Ranking Member Rounds, and Members of the Subcommittee, for the
    opportunity to testify before you today on preserving and
    improving our federally assisted homes.
        [Technical difficulties.]
        Chair Smith. OK. Ms. Vogel is having technical
    difficulties. So while we are waiting, maybe I will start with
    a couple of questions, and then when she comes back in, we can
    get going. That is great.
        OK. Ms. Keogh, I would like to start with you a little bit.
    I appreciate your testimony about the Cedar High apartment fire
    in 2019, which was the impetus for the bill that Senator
    Klobuchar and I are working on. Could you just tell us a little
    bit more about what Minneapolis has done since that fire?
        And in your testimony, you described how you have had to
    prioritize sprinklers as opposed to other deferred maintenance.
    Could you tell us a little bit more about what you have not
    been able to get done as a result of that reprioritizing?
        Ms. Keogh. Thank you, Chairwoman Smith. So as you know, I
    was not--I certainly was not there in November when the fire
    happened. So when I came into leadership with Abdi, what we--
    what presented before us was they had a fire suppression plan,
    which I know we have shared with you, and it was over a period
    of time. So that fire suppression plan that we evaluated was
    that we would do fire suppression as--not as a standalone
    project but during major rehabilitation projects and as dollars
    were available. That plan--as we came into leadership, very
    clearly fire suppression became a top priority. So we went into
    our first budget process and determined how can we accelerate
    this plan in a shorter amount of time, and that is where--that
    is where that three--that 3-year plan came.
        So that plan, though, as you asked, is we have to ignore
    other critical needs. So the toughest part of this job is when
    you have to compare what are all critical life and safety
    issues: Catastrophic fire. Elevators go down in the middle of
    the night, and it is a 284, you know, story highrise of
    seniors. They are all--it is--they are all difficult decisions.
    But it is elevator repair. It is--it is our heating systems. It
    is our windows and facades. It is our roofs. All of those types
    of things you make decisions on, what will get funded that year
    and what will not, based on appropriations coming in from the
    capital fund.
        Chair Smith. Right. And your deferred maintenance gap
    backlog is about 160?
        Ms. Keogh. $164 million.
        Chair Smith. $164 million, right. So I think that this just
    illustrates the scope of the challenge that we have--that we
    have in front of us.
        Dr. Jacobs--I want to thank you for that, Ms. Keogh.
        Dr. Jacobs, I wanted to touch base with you on a related
    issue. The COVID-19 pandemic has made abundantly clear the
    connections between health and housing. The CDC identifies
    housing as a key social determinant of health, meaning that the
    environment and the conditions that you live in have a big
    impact on what health risks you face and what health outcomes
    you get. And I think this is an important foundation for this
    conversation that we are having about health and safety risks
    in housing generally.
        So, Dr. Jacobs, could you talk a bit about housing as a
    social determinant for health, what that means, and how housing
    conditions impact outcomes, and especially what impact this has
    on children when they are living in substandard housing?
        Mr. Jacobs. Thank you for the question. I will open with a
    speech I heard in Minnesota from the CEO of the Blue Cross Blue
    Shield Foundation, and he opens it with a picture of a salmon
    swimming upstream. And he said: Those of us in the health
    world, we need to do what this fish is doing. We need to swim
    upstream and look at the root causes. It is not enough to just
    treat people after they get sick.
        So as you indicated, housing is clearly one of those. Over
    a hundred years ago, housing and health were actually joined at
    the hip through the sanitation movement. We had cholera. We had
    typhoid. We had tuberculosis. And while better medicine played
    a key role in conquering those diseases, it was also by
    improving ventilation, improving potable water supply in the
    buildings.
        And then over the years, that connection atrophied, and so
    people lost the connection between housing and health. The
    housing world became more financial. The medical world became
    more treatment oriented. And only now we are realizing when it
    comes to chronic diseases, like lead poisoning and asthma and
    mold-induced illness and certain injuries, if we do not attack
    the root causes, we will pay the cost down the road, which is
    illogical. Right? It does not make sense.
        So making the investment in building systems so that we
    reduce the health care cost is--it has been shown over and over
    again through lots of cost-benefit analyses. It just makes
    simple sense.
        We should not have to choose between--I remember a housing
    authority director once told me, ``Well, you pick one. I have
    got enough money to keep my furnaces working in the winter, or
    I can take care of my lead paint problem. Which one would you
    pick?''
        Chair Smith. Right.
        Mr. Jacobs. We should not be in a world where we have to
    make those kinds of choices. We can do the right thing.
        Chair Smith. Thank you so much.
        I think, Senator Rounds, Ms. Vogel is back on the phone, so
    we will get her. But I think that that is very much the point
    that you were making about the substandard housing that we see
    so often in Indian Country.
        All right, Ms. Vogel. Welcome back and you may begin your
    testimony.
        Ms. Vogel. Thank you very much, and good afternoon,
    Chairwoman Smith and Ranking Member Rounds and Members of the
    Subcommittee, for the opportunity to testify before you today
    on preserving and improving our federally assisted homes.
        My name is Sharon Vogel. I am the Executive Director of the
    Cheyenne River Housing Authority located on the Cheyenne River
    Sioux Reservation in South Dakota. I am also the Chairwoman of
    the United Native American Housing Association, comprised of 33
    tribally designated housing entities from the States of North
    and South Dakota, Nebraska, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and
    Colorado. I am also proudly serving my first term on the Board
    of Directors of the National Low Income Housing Coalition and
    continue my service as a board member of the National American
    Indian Housing Council.
        The Cheyenne River Housing Authority currently provides
    low-income housing to over 800 families. We serve primarily a
    Native American population throughout 19 communities on our
    reservation. The Cheyenne River Housing Authority is the
    tribally designated housing entity for the Cheyenne River Sioux
    Tribe. We currently manage 735 rental units, 86 home ownership
    units, with 42 new rental units under construction, and we
    continue to build our successful record of developing
    affordable housing by designing and financing rental and home
    ownership homes for eligible families.
        Native Americans living in tribal areas and remote Alaskan
    villages experience some of the greatest housing needs in the
    country, with high poverty rates, low incomes, overcrowding,
    lack of plumbing and heat, and unique development issues. Due
    in part to these unique conditions, Native American households
    have been especially hard hit by the pandemic and its resultant
    economic downturn, being more likely to develop serious illness
    as a result of the pandemic.
        But overcrowding of available housing stresses both the
    occupants and the structures themselves. Homes on Cheyenne
    River require much more maintenance than the average wear and
    tear to remain safe and livable. This is not for the lack of
    property management. It is because there are not enough homes
    to go around. A 3-bedroom house is designed for a family of 5
    or 6, but often because of overcrowding these units are
    occupied by 3 or more families, sometimes as many 15
    individuals sharing a house.
        Preserving limited Indian housing resources nationwide
    makes it essential that Indian housing be remembered in the
    upcoming infrastructure legislation, including the 70 billion
    being targeted for rehabilitation of federally assisted
    housing.
        We strongly support the recently introduced bill to
    reauthorize the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-
    Determination Act, sponsored by Senators Smith and Rounds. In
    particular, the proposed provisions reinstating the highly
    successful drug elimination program and the long-awaited
    changes to the NAHASDA program requirements, many of which were
    originated by our UNAHA region.
        In order to bring NAHASDA resources where they are needed
    the most, we also support the proposed 9 billion increase for
    the competitive IHBG program.
        The pandemic has exposed significant gaps in our Federal
    housing safety net. Housing inequities contributed to the
    spread of COVID cases and deaths. And the lack of a universal
    housing assistance program placed tens of millions of renters
    at risk of losing their homes and, with that, the ability to
    keep themselves and their families safe. We can build back
    better by closing gaps in our safety net so that our tribal
    governments and our Nation are better prepared for the next
    crisis. Thank you.
        Chair Smith. Thank you so much, Ms. Vogel, and to all of
    our testifiers. And I will now turn to Senator Rounds for 5
    minutes of questioning.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, Madam Chair. And look, first of
    all, let me just say thanks to Ms. Vogel for taking the time to
    speak with us today as well as our other two panelists. Your
    information is critical that we share it and that we look at
    ways to improve housing across this country for those
    individuals that simply do not have other alternatives.
        Ms. Vogel, I would like to thank you for taking the time
    out of your day to join us all the way from Eagle Butte in
    South Dakota. You may be familiar with a member of my personal
    staff, Kyle Chase, who is also an enrolled member of the
    Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. He is also my chief legal counsel,
    and he has been a real asset in terms of providing us with
    additional information about working through some of these
    issues.
        But I want to begin by inquiring as to the unique
    vulnerabilities that Native American communities face when it
    comes to housing safety. Ms. Vogel, can you expand on the
    specific housing safety issues facing tribes today and how
    those issues differ from off-reservation public housing?
        Ms. Vogel. Thank you for that question, Senator Rounds. The
    unique threats that are facing our--the safety of our families
    is, of course, one, the rural isolation of our communities, the
    response time for any first responders. You know, not having
    firefighting equipment stationed locally, that is one.
        Another is the meth contamination of our units. We have an
    epidemic of meth use in our tribal communities, and the
    residual effects of the use of meth in our homes leaves our
    elders and our young children, those with compromised health
    conditions, in very vulnerable positions. That is also a big
    concern of ours.
        Others is, you know, that the overcrowding creates a lot of
    stress on the house. Mold is a problem, you know, from just all
    the moisture in the house and not having proper ventilation.
    You know, the lack of heating and upgrades to keep up with the
    demand. You know, we face, you know, serious problems with
    heating and cooling costs, making, you know, families choose
    between, you know, do I pay my light bill, do I pay my heating
    bill, or you know, do I buy groceries.
        So there is a lot of stresses because of the threats that
    face our families to ensure--that are not the same as what the
    others testified. There is not enough money to address every
    threat, and so we, too, have to prioritize. Thank you.
        Senator Rounds. Ms. Vogel, thanks for that. And I would
    like to follow up a little bit. You indicated earlier that
    Chair Smith and I have promoted the reauthorization of NAHASDA,
    and part of that is it reinstates the HUD drug elimination
    program. I am curious. Sometimes I do not think folks realize
    what an impact a meth house is or what impacts that has in
    terms of getting somebody new into a home that has had meth in
    the past. Could you talk just a little bit about what it takes
    to rehab a home where meth has been a problem?
        Ms. Vogel. Yes. That is--that has been an increasing cost.
    You know, when we discover--when we have a vacant unit, we test
    that unit to see if it tests positive for meth. So if it tests
    positive for meth, then it is the cleanup cost, the
    remediation, before we can even start to address the
    rehabilitation of it.
        But the condition of the homes that--when there is meth
    used and the behaviors of the tenants themselves is there is a
    lot of tenant damage to the unit. And so, you know, we have
    gone in where we have had to strip the sheetrock down, and
    because of holes in the walls we find dirty needles behind the
    sheetrock, and so we have to be very careful in removing
    things. Doors are missing. There is broken windows. So there is
    just structural damage to the unit. So you know, when we go in,
    we have to replace cabinets. We have to replace vanities,
    doors. We have to re-sheetrock. There is just an extensive lot
    of damage unfortunately because of the drug use and the
    behaviors, violent behaviors, that come with that.
        So we always have catchup. So we try to do as many as we
    can, you know, throughout the year, but at the end of the
    fiscal year, we are carrying vacant units into the next year.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you for that, and my time is expired.
    But I think you lay out some of the additional costs that maybe
    a lot of folks out there are not aware of that go into trying
    to rehab a home that in the past worked, but with someone on
    meth or using meth in that home, the type of damage that it
    does to the home and what it takes to get it all put back
    together. Thank you very much for participating this afternoon.
        Chair Smith. Thank you, Senator Rounds.
        Senator Cortez Masto.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and
    Ranking Member. Let me follow up on Ms. Vogel's conversation
    with Senator Rounds. I am a proud cosponsor of the bipartisan
    NAHASDA reauthorization. Based on the challenges, Ms. Vogel,
    that you highlighted, how would the NAHASDA reauthorization
    improve the State of Indian housing? What would you be able to
    do with this reauthorization?
        Ms. Vogel. Well, there are so many improvements to it just
    for program-wise. You know, having the reinstatement of the
    drug elimination program would allow us to really focus on
    prevention and engaging our youth in drug-free activities,
    which would give them options.
        Other improvements, of course, would be the--allowing the
    rent structures to be determined by the TDHE, working with our
    tribal government. We have such--some of our families have zero
    income. I mean, they go months without income because of the
    general assistance is sporadic. And so we do not get the
    revenues from them, you know, on an ongoing basis.
        The other improvements, of course, would happen is that,
    you know, we would be eligible. The HUD-VASH would be
    permanent. We would be able to apply for those vouchers for our
    veterans and be able to house our homeless veterans.
        The--just the inclusion of making sure that, you know, we
    could use the Federal funds that are program funds as matching
    funds for other Federal programs, and so we would be able to
    leverage our dollars with other Federal funding opportunities
    to do infrastructure or build homes. So there are so many
    improvements that would make a difference for our TDHEs and
    just have an immediate impact.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. And then, Ms. Keogh, same
    question to you, with respect to reauthorization of NAHASDA but
    also some of the ways that Congress can support efforts by
    State housing authorities, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
    Development, to make federally assisted housing more resilient
    to fires, floods, or other natural disasters.
        Ms. Keogh. Thank you for the question. Regarding NAHASDA,
    we do not have any Indian housing within my portfolio. So I
    cannot address that, but thank you for the question in regards
    to what can we do for federally assisted housing. For years
    right now, we are receiving 10 cents on the dollar for the
    dollars that we need for capital repairs. And so the bill that
    Senator Smith and Senator Amy Klobuchar have out for fire
    safety having standalone dollars that are set aside just for
    fire suppression would be incredibly impactful for housing
    authorities like mine as well as the other housing authorities
    nationally that still have work to do with fire suppression.
        In regards to the other critical life and safety issues,
    again 10 cents on the dollar, so funding a housing authority is
    at levels that allow them to make all of the repairs necessary
    so that we are providing decent, safe, and sanitary housing.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. And, Dr. Jacobs, you said
    it best. We know that safe and stable housing was critical to
    preventing additional illness and deaths due to the COVID-19
    pandemic. Housing is health care; it is. And in your testimony,
    you point to a specific downside of stay-at-home practices for
    low-income children, especially Black and Latino children:
    higher levels of lead paint poisoning and asthma from mold.
    What did your research find about an increase in housing-
    related illnesses? What else should we be aware of?
        Mr. Jacobs. This underscores the importance of CDC's
    surveillance system. We have a pretty good surveillance system
    for medical care. When it comes to housing, there is not really
    a good way to track ongoing housing deficiencies that can
    impact health in the long run. So CDC needs to release its data
    on blood lead levels. It looks actually like asthma, for
    example, improved a little bit, along with certain other
    communicable diseases. On the other hand, it appears that
    injuries, home-based injuries, might have increased a little
    bit.
        It is still very preliminary, but it is logical, if you
    think about it, that because children or elders spend more time
    at home during the pandemic we want our homes to be healthy. If
    they do not--because they shield us in part from the pandemic.
    But as you spend more time at home, your exposure goes up. And
    with exposure going up, then other things can happen, whether
    it is carbon monoxide poisoning or others. So it is important
    that houses be built in a resilient manner, and that means
    increasingly using green standards.
        You may remember Superstorm Sandy looked at--when they did
    the rebuilding, beyond the rescue they also said, let us not
    just build it back the way it used to be; let us build it back
    in a more resilient fashion. And therefore, if you are going to
    rebuild using HUD dollars, you have to comply with green
    standards. Green standards is sort of an emerging area, if you
    will, but the evidence is increasingly clear that they improve
    health, improve resilience, and also, of course, have an energy
    benefit.
        Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
        Chair Smith. Senator Van Hollen.
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member
    Rounds. Thank you to all our witnesses today.
        Dr. Jacobs, thank you for your work in this area. I am
    proud of the fact that the National Center for Healthy Housing
    is in Maryland. Columbia, Maryland.
        Let me ask you this. We know that communities across
    Maryland, in fact across the United States, including Baltimore
    in our State, you can see the legacy of disinvestment. You can
    see the legacy of segregation and redlining. And in fact,
    nationally, 60 percent of Black Americans live in historically
    redlined communities, the same communities that also have a
    much higher risk of lead poisoning, and that, as you know, has
    been an ongoing issue in Baltimore City as well.
        We have had hearings in this Committee that, you know,
    talked about the correlation between that redlining and
    segregation and the wealth gap. And can you talk a bit about
    how housing safety issues are also intimately tied to health
    equity outcomes, especially in low-income communities and
    communities of color?
        Mr. Jacobs. Thank you for the question. It is critically
    important. It seems to me that this issue is sort of the poster
    child, if you will, of environmental justice or environmental
    injustice, if you will. We pay the price over the long run for
    not making sure that not only we have adequate health standards
    for housing but that it is equitable. Equity matters a great
    deal. And increasingly, what we need to do is think about,
    well, how do we build resilient communities so that they are
    mixed income, so that they are diverse, so that people can use
    the strengths that all of us have to overcome each of our own
    weaknesses. So I think there are some models out there that
    point to that direction, but building mixed-income
    neighborhoods from a housing perspective, it is tough.
        I opened the hearing by saying I am president of the board
    of a low-income housing development here in DC, in the Shaw
    neighborhood. Now 10 years ago, that was a struggling
    neighborhood. Now it is going upscale, and some people no
    longer want us in that neighborhood. We are the only affordable
    housing left there.
        So overcoming the barriers, helping people to grasp why
    mixed-income neighborhoods, why diverse neighborhoods, and why
    that is good for the Nation seems to me an ongoing challenge
    that those of us in both housing and health need to think
    through more thoroughly. It is a great question.
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, I appreciate your answer because,
    as you have heard from my colleagues on the Committee and as
    you know, we are in the process now of looking at major
    investments in housing, both in terms of greater potential for
    first-time ownership but also more rental assistance. And one
    of the proposals that we have put forward, actually on a
    bipartisan basis, in legislation has been affordable housing
    vouchers that allow families with younger kids to move to areas
    of greater opportunity, which would increase diversity of
    neighborhoods. Are there other policies we should be thinking
    about here at the Federal level as we work on this legislation
    that would address the issues that you are talking about?
        Mr. Jacobs. The research based on this is pretty clear.
    There is a long-running study called ``Moving to
    Opportunities''. I am sure you are familiar with that. But it
    shows the positive health and many other benefits that accrue
    when we build these sorts of diverse neighborhoods.
        When it comes to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
    Program, I think it is important that we think through how
    those housing units qualify for the program. We have talked
    about carbon monoxide. We talked about lead. You cannot see
    those things with the naked eye, and yet most of HUD's
    inspection systems rely on visual assessment, which is not
    adequate for a number of these health concerns. So those
    inspection systems need to be reformed and based on good
    scientific evidence.
        And we should increasingly use standards like the National
    Healthy Housing Standard that two HUD secretaries released
    along with us and the American Public Health Association. That
    seems to me to be the trajectory of where we should go, and all
    federally assisted programs should comply with it. It is not
    enough to just leave it up to local jurisdictions to figure out
    how their own housing stock can be made safe and healthy and
    resilient. It is going to take some leadership from the Federal
    Government to clarify that.
        Senator Van Hollen. Can I do one quick follow-on, Madam
    Chair?
        And I know you are applying that idea across the board, and
    I think that is exactly right. I know that you have also done
    some specific work in the area of asthma. Is there an ongoing
    effort that those proposals that you just referenced include
    establishing certain standards with respect to protecting
    people from asthma in federally assisted housing programs?
        Mr. Jacobs. Yes, absolutely. So for example, one key
    component is ventilation. It turns out to be a rather
    complicated issue, but in multifamily housing, a lot of which
    is federally subsidized, there are not--there are not actually
    clear requirements when it comes to ventilation. I spent time
    in Chicago. It is good enough to open the bathroom window,
    according to the local code. But in the winter time, people do
    not do that. So asthma is highly correlated with inadequate
    ventilation.
        And clearly, if we were to reduce--if we were to improve
    ventilation standards--and there are some voluntary ones that
    are out there that should be used. I sit on the American
    Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air Conditioning
    Engineers, which has a voluntarily standard. There is no reason
    why federally assisted housing should not adopt that standard.
    It says specifically how much air should be brought in, how it
    is going to be distributed, how it can be optimized so that you
    do not pay a huge energy penalty. And the evidence base is
    pretty clear that when you do that you have lower rates not
    only of asthma but moisture problems and the like.
        So housing needs to be thought of as a system, not as these
    sort of disparate, substandard elements.
        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Smith. Thank you so much.
        Senator Rounds I do not believe has any follow-up
    questions. And, Senator Cortez Masto, do you have any other
    questions you would like to ask? OK.
        Right. I just have two things I would like to follow up on
    briefly and before we wrap up. I appreciate the questions that
    Senator Van Hollen was getting at, really focusing on issues of
    housing and equity. And in most places around the country, the
    residents of federally assisted housing are low-income; they
    are more likely to be elderly people, people living with
    disabilities, and people of color.
        Ms. Keogh, could you talk--this is clearly then an equity
    issue as we think about the much-needed investments in these
    federally supported housing. Ms. Keogh, could you tell us a
    little bit about the demographics of folks living in the
    residences that you serve in Minneapolis and why this lens,
    this equity lens, is so important?
        Ms. Keogh. Thank you for the question. So across our public
    housing portfolio, over 80 percent identify as a person of
    color, over 30 percent are Somali head of household, and
    specific to our highrise population, over 60 percent are
    elderly and/or a person with disabilities.
        So using an equity lens is imperative. It is imperative as
    we create policies, policies whether at the Federal level or
    policies that we get to create as housing authorities in how we
    in how we implement our programs, how we create new programs,
    whether again it is at the HUD level or at the local level, and
    how we balance our budgets. We have to be using an equity lens
    to address the disparities that exist across racial and ethnic
    lines.
        Communities were designed intentionally, and Senator Van
    Hollen talked about that, through redlining. In Minneapolis in
    particular, racial covenants were recorded. They are recorded
    back into homes back to 1910, and the use of those racial
    covenants forced our Black community to live in segregated
    communities. And we see that living out today in our city that
    is incredibly segregated, and the racial disparities along
    those lines are deep.
        And if we want to be a thriving community, we know that we
    need to make better investments in the city of Minneapolis as
    well as within our region. We have this--we have an opportunity
    to be intentional. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity, I
    think, with the investments that are at stake, to intentionally
    repair what has resulted in displacement, racial segregation,
    and inequitable communities.
        Chair Smith. Thank you. Thank you so much for that.
        The last thing I want to just touch on has come up in the
    conversation is the issue of HUD inspections. And, Dr. Jacobs,
    HUD has procedures to inspect public housing buildings and HUD-
    assisted multifamily buildings on a routine basis, and they
    look at conditions inside the building walls and doors and
    ceilings and so forth. And theoretically, HUD is equipped to
    identify and address the issues that they find. But what can
    you tell us about how these inspections work in practice? What
    is--you know. What in this process is not working? And does HUD
    have the staffing and the resources and the capacity to do what
    Congress is asking them to do?
        Mr. Jacobs. So there are disparate inspection protocols
    that different programs use. There is one for public housing.
    There is one for project-based Section 8 housing. There is one
    for Housing Choice Vouchers.
        I think it was in 2017 Congress asked HUD to consolidate
    all of those inspection protocols and also think about
    specialized inspection protocols, like for lead paint or asthma
    triggers or injury assessments. So HUD has not done that. We
    are trying to help them do exactly that. The National Healthy
    Housing Standard has annotated, scientific, evidence base that
    shows which housing defects are important, how the
    interventions can be done to improve them.
        I think it is a little--it is not clear who is in charge at
    HUD, frankly, on this. There is the Real Estate Assessment
    Center. There is the Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard
    Control, which I previously ran back in the 90s and the aughts.
    It is a little disparate. And so I think it is probably worth
    thinking through how can Congress mandate a true consolidation
    so that the inspection systems are reliable, they have been
    validated, and they are based on good evidence so that we can
    direct our scarce dollars to the remediations that make the
    most sense and the repairs. If we do not do the inspections
    properly, we will not be able to respond intelligently.
        So I think HUD could use some direction to proceed. It is
    not--they have been doing demonstrations now for, I do not
    know, a few years. It is time to marshal the evidence of what
    those demonstrations actually showed and develop a unified
    inspection protocol.
        Chair Smith. Thank you. And I just want to double-check if
    Ms. Vogel or Ms. Keogh would like to add anything to that HUD
    inspections issue.
        Ms. Keogh. Senator Smith, I can tell you I am certified in
    HQS. So I can do inspections for the voucher program, and I
    have done thousands of inspections in units across the Twin
    Cities' area.
        And this is just--I am going to just go on the record that
    this is my own personal thought, that you are right on the
    money, Doctor. They are very subjective. The way we do
    inspections for vouchers, what is required for public housing
    units are different. And from a voucher standpoint, it is
    incredibly subjective because it is based on a person's
    assessment of what they are going into. We are not trained to
    identify mold. Mold is something by sight. And so when we think
    about all of the healthy hazards that lie within units, having
    some type of standard protocol across all of our federally
    assisted programs, to me, just makes good sense.
        Chair Smith. Thank you. Ms. Vogel, would you like to add
    anything?
        Ms. Vogel. Yes. Thank you. I do support that, of
    establishing some standards. Currently, we do inspections. It
    is a requirement under our grant conditions that we do annual
    physical inspections of all of our rental units. And we do
    comply with that, but it is all done in-house. And so having
    the additional training and the resources to be able to become
    an industry standard is something that we definitely support.
        Chair Smith. Thank you so much. Well, I want to thank all
    of our witnesses for being here today and for providing
    testimony.
        And for Senators who wish to submit any questions for the
    record, those questions are due 1 week from today, which will
    be Tuesday, July 26th. For our witnesses, you will have 45 days
    to respond to any questions for the record. And thank you again
    so much.
        Thank you, Senator Rounds.
        And with that, our hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:48 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
        [Prepared statements and additional material supplied for
    the record follow:]
                       PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVE JACOBS
        Chief Scientist, National Center for Healthy Housing, Columbia,
                                    Maryland
                                 July 20, 2021

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                      PREPARED STATEMENT OF JENNIFER KEOGH
       Deputy Executive Director, Minneapolis Public Housing Authority,
                             Minneapolis, Minnesota
                                 July 20, 2021

        The Minneapolis Public Housing Authority (MPHA) is the largest
    housing authority in the State of Minnesota and our mission is to
    promote and deliver quality, well-managed homes to a diverse low-income
    population and, with partners, contribute to the well-being of the
    individuals and families in the community we serve. MPHA provides
    rental assistance to over 26,000 people through our public housing and
    Housing Choice Voucher Programs. MPHA owns and operates over 6,000
    units of public housing, including over 900 single family homes/
    townhomes and 42 highrise apartment communities. Our highrise
    population is over 60 percent elderly and disabled, over 80 percent
    identify as a person of color, and our average household income is
    under $13K annually, which is approximately 18 percent of the Area
    Median Income.
        I am also the Chair of the Legislative Network Advisory Committee
    of the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
    (NAHRO). NAHRO, which was established in 1933, is a membership
    organization of 20,000 housing and community development providers and
    professionals throughout the United States. NAHRO members create and
    manage affordable housing for low- and middle-income families and
    support vibrant communities that enhance the quality of life for all.
    They administer more than 3 million homes for more than 8 million
    people.
        I come here today to support Sen. Tina Smith's and Sen. Amy
    Klobuchar's Public Housing Fire Safety Act (S. 265), which would
    provide needed resources to Public Housing Agencies (PHAs), including
    MPHA, to install fire sprinklers. Additionally, I am here to support
    the investment of at least $70 billion to address the capital needs of
    public housing properties across the country.
    Why Sprinkler Systems Are Critical Infrastructure: Minneapolis Public
            Housing Authority's Story
        In November of 2019, a fire occurred in one of MPHA's 42 highrises
    that took the lives of 5 MPHA residents. In April 2020, I was selected
    to serve as MPHA's new Deputy ED alongside Abdi Warsame, MPHA's new
    Executive/CEO. Despite overwhelming physical needs throughout the
    entire portfolio, we have made the installation of fire suppression
    systems a top priority. In doing so, constrained by a severe lack of
    funding, we are forced to ignore other critical needs of our aging
    building systems.
        MPHA is implementing a plan to install sprinkler systems in 10 of
    its buildings in 2021 (16 are already retrofitted with sprinkler
    systems) and plans to complete installations in all remaining buildings
    within the next 3 years. Retrofitting a single sprinkler system can
    cost $1 million or more, with the overall cost for this year's
    installation in ten additional highrises estimated at over $9.3
    million. Each of these buildings has many additional urgent needs that
    demand attention at the same time, but this work alone will consume
    more than one-half of all capital funds appropriated from Congress to
    MPHA for 2021. While we recognize that the investment in sprinklers is
    essential, the result of prioritizing the sprinkler work is that other
    crucial capital needs remain unmet.
        Federal investment in public housing has declined for many years
    and there is a growing backlog of capital needs. These needs include
    not just sprinklers, but electrical, plumbing, heat, and other
    essential building systems. MPHA estimates a $164 million capital
    repair backlog across our 6,000-unit portfolio and this figure does not
    include important upgrades to improve the housing we provide for the
    long-term.
        Despite inadequate funding, MPHA has made progress on addressing
    the health and safety needs in our public housing buildings. We have
    installed radon mitigation systems in all new builds since the mid-late
    2000s. This includes a few scattered sites, 350 Van White, Feeney
    Manor, and most recently Minnehaha Townhomes. Funding/dates as follows:

        350 Van White: primarily HUD HOPE VI funds, 2005

        Feeney Manor: primarily Federal competitive stimulus
            dollars (ARRA), 2009/10

        Minnehaha: State, county, city, Federal Home Loan bank and
            MPHA/HUD resources, 2018/19

        We have installed a few radon mitigation systems in existing
    scattered sites, as issues were identified in the course of major
    rehabilitation work. For the scattered sites rehab effort, we plan to
    test all units as part of lender due diligence and install mitigation
    systems as part of construction in all units that have radon levels
    that require mitigation. We plan to test in fall 2021 and work from
    2022-24. We have installed soil vapor mitigation systems at three
    highrise properties--the two Elliot Twins and Signe Burkhardt Manor. We
    received a Brownfield Gap grant from Hennepin County for the
    consulting/design work associated with the Elliot Twins.
        Minnesota Statute 299F.50 requires approved carbon monoxide (CO)
    alarms in all single-family homes and multifamily apartment units. MPHA
    installed combo smoke-carbon monoxide (CO) detectors in all units in
    the mid-late 2000s and we replace in kind as required/needed in
    accordance with State requirements.
        Finally, like all PHAs nationwide, in 1992 MPHA evaluated its
    scattered sites portfolio for lead-based paint hazards; remediation
    efforts were completed in the 426 homes where hazards were identified.
    In 2018, MPHA applied for and was awarded a $1M HUD LBP capital grant
    to reevaluate and remediate identified LBP hazards in our scattered
    sites homes. MPHA identified and remediated LBP hazards in interiors/
    exteriors of 26 units and the exteriors only at 180 units. The exterior
    work identified was primarily soils remediation work.
        In recent years, our Minnesota State lawmakers and Congressional
    delegation have been working on a variety of bills that would help
    address the need for fire sprinkler systems in highrise buildings. The
    Minnesota National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
    has estimated that in addition to MPHA, at least 1,000 other public
    housing units in the State are not fully sprinkled. In July 2021, the
    MN Legislature passed a bill that will mandate sprinklers in public
    housing highrise apartments by 2033, but the bill did not include any
    type of funding to support this mandate. MPHA hoped that the State
    legislature would have recognized the scale of the expense and public
    housing's overall unmet capital needs along with its recognition of the
    need for sprinklers. The funding proposed in the Public Housing Fire
    Safety Act would help us address this unfunded State mandate.
    Housing Is Infrastructure: Federal Disinvestment in Public Housing Is a
            National Problem
        Minneapolis is not the only agency that struggles to keep up with
    growing capital needs and few Federal resources to preserve our
    affordable housing. The State of Minnesota has units in all 87 counties
    with a total estimated backlog of $355M. The National Association of
    Housing and Redevelopment Officials estimates that the current backlog
    of capital needs for public housing properties nationwide exceeds $70
    billion.
    What Is the Capital Fund Backlog?
        PHAs own and operate approximately one million units of federally
    subsidized public housing, providing affordable housing to families,
    the elderly, persons with disabilities, and veterans. Funding for
    public housing comes from two sources, the Operating Fund, which covers
    day-to-day maintenance and operations, and the Capital Fund. PHAs use
    Capital Fund dollars to repair and improve their public housing sites
    and buildings, address deferred maintenance needs, and replace obsolete
    utility systems. Sadly, chronic underfunding of the program has placed
    the inventory at risk, and Capital Fund appropriations lag dangerously
    behind accruing modernization needs.
        In 2010, the national Public Housing Capital Needs Assessment
    showed that the total backlog for public housing capital funding was
    $26 billion, with a projected growth rate of approximately $3.4 billion
    per year. Furthermore, the report noted that each year the cost of the
    backlog compounds at a rate of 8.7 percent due to inflation and the
    increased cost of addressing deferred maintenance. As a result, even
    when accounting for other Federal capital programs, including the
    Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) and Choice Neighborhood Grants,
    NAHRO estimates the Capital Fund backlog was approximately $70 billion
    in 2019.
    NAHRO Capital Fund Backlog Methodology
        Since 2010, the number of public housing units across the country
    has decreased from the 1,079,561 units included in the 2010 assessment
    to 957,971 units in 2020, based on HUD Picture of Subsidized Housing
    (POSH) data. This represents an 11.26 percent reduction in units. To
    address this, we have decreased the backlog by 11.26 percent,
    representing the percentage of units that have left the Public Housing
    program through RAD, demolition, disposition, and voluntary conversion
    since 2010. This places the backlog at $78.828 billion.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        PHAs have been able to reduce the Capital Needs backlog through RAD
    and Choice Neighborhood Grants. PHAs have used $12.6 billion through
    RAD and have received $487.425 million in Choice Neighborhood
    Implementation Grants specifically for housing rehabilitation and new
    construction through those grants since 2010. RAD and Choice
    Neighborhoods have only reduced the backlog by about $13.087 billion.
    In June 2020, MPHA completed their first RAD conversion, which enabled
    us to do a complete rehabilitation, including sprinkler retrofitting.
        In addition, MPHA has turned to looking for resources outside of
    the Capital Fund to complete our sprinkler projects. In February 2020,
    I, along with Resident Commissioner Tamir Mohamud testified before the
    State legislature about the Capital Fund backlog and advocated for
    State dollars to fill the gap to allow for the completion of important
    health and safety projects. We have advocated and applied for dollars
    at the city, State, and Federal levels. Most recently we applied for
    Congressionally Directed Spending within all 3 of our MN delegation
    offices.
    What Can Be Done To Save Public Housing?
        Eradicating the public housing capital needs backlog is an
    investment in people and a cost-saving mechanism that prevents
    additional expenditures downstream. Each year the Capital Fund backlog
    grows, resulting in deferred maintenance costs add additional strains
    to the public housing portfolio. Accounting for underfunding,
    inflation, and the costs of deferred maintenance, the Capital Needs
    backlog has grown significantly in the past decade. Congress must
    provide the funding necessary to ensure communities can provide safe,
    secure housing to current residents of public housing and families who
    will need access to low-income housing in the future.
        This is unlikely to happen through annual appropriations. Congress
    must make a large-scale investment in public housing to preserve this
    affordable housing asset for future generations. Congress must include
    at least $70 billion for the Public Housing Capital Fund, including a
    robust allocation to Capital Fund formula funding.
        Additionally, funding targeted specifically at health and safety
    issues in public housing would ensure that any issues with properties
    that could endanger residents' lives are quickly addressed. The Public
    Housing Fire Safety Act, in conjunction with a large-scale investment
    in the Public Housing Capital Fund, is needed to ensure that the
    critical needs of public housing across this country are being met.
        MPHA cannot make these needed repairs without significant resources
    provided by Congress. My residents are depending on Congress to finally
    provide MPHA with the funding it needs to improve and preserve their
    units.
    Public Housing Is Worth Preserving
        Public Housing is a critical piece of the affordable housing
    landscape. It provides permanently affordable units to the lowest
    income families across our Nation. According to a recent report by the
    National Low-Income Housing Coalition, there were only about 37
    affordable and available rental units for every 100 extremely low-
    income renter households prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. At that point,
    70 percent of extremely low-income renters spent more than half of
    their incomes on housing costs. Preserving public housing for future
    generations is crucial to meeting the growing need for more affordable
    units in every community.
        In Minneapolis, public housing is an integral part of the
    community, serving 5 percent of the city's population. In March,
    Minneapolis High Rise Representative Council Vice President Tamir Ali
    Mohammad testified before the House Financial Services Housing,
    Insurance, and Community Development Subcommittee on the importance
    public housing played in his community during the pandemic. I want to
    share with you his testimony that in his words shows the importance of
    having a safe and affordable place to call home:

            When the pandemic hit and Gov. Walz issued the first stay-at-
            home order last March, MPHA closed the highrise community rooms
            and asked residents to stay in their apartments and only go out
            for appointments, necessary shopping, and exercise.

            MPHA stopped staff from entering resident apartments for
            routine maintenance and instead had them do extra cleaning of
            building entrances and elevators. MPHA provided food boxes and
            boxed meals by working with community partners when congregate
            dining and mobile food shelves had to close, including
            providing halal meals during Ramadan. MPHA hosted a mask drive
            and through community donations, including Dunwoody Institute,
            they were able to provide masks for all residents and staff
            when that became a recommendation for preventing COVID. Through
            community donations and a grant from the Pohlad foundation,
            MPHA organized delivery of personal hygiene products to
            residents after many stores were looted and burned following
            the police killing of George Floyd in May.

            MPHA posted informational signs about mask wearing and physical
            distancing and worked with Resident Council members and
            Security to enforce mask mandates. MPHA also restricted the
            number of visitors that could come into the buildings and added
            extra security guards to help control traffic and enforce the
            mask-wearing rules. Throughout the year, MPHA staff shared
            information and answered questions at ongoing resident meetings
            held via teleconference due to the pandemic.

            MPHA organized onsite COVID testing throughout the pandemic and
            offered onsite flu shots in the fall. On March 8, MPHA, through
            its collaboration with the city health department, began
            vaccinations in highrises and today nearly all 1st round of
            COVID vaccination clinics have been completed at all 42
            highrises at MPHA.

            Not only has MPHA provided me with stable housing, MPHA has
            been an important partner with residents. Through resident
            councils and MHRC board and committee meetings, residents
            regularly communicate, and problem solve with MPHA staff on
            individual highrise and citywide issues, like safety and
            building maintenance. This partnership and cooperation has been
            invaluable in improving the quality of lives of people living
            in public housing highrises.

            Public housing is a valuable resource to the city of
            Minneapolis as it means safe and affordable housing for the
            members of our community who have the greatest need.
            Homelessness has grown in Minneapolis. We see ``tent cities''
            spring up all around us and there are not enough shelter beds
            to meet the need. Public housing is one answer to the housing
            shortage. It is critical that it is preserved and increased. We
            depend on Congress to provide enough funding to preserve and
            expand public housing. It has failed in this role for too long.
            It's time to provide sufficient funds so that existing public
            housing homes are no longer lost to disrepair and it's time to
            end the prohibitions on construction of new public housing.
    Conclusion
        In order for MPHA to make the needed investments in its public
    housing stock, including the addition of fire sprinklers in its towers,
    we need Congress to meet their obligation to provide safe housing to
    our residents and fully fund the $70 billion Public Housing Capital
    Fund backlog. We also need targeted investments to help us quickly
    address this pressing safety issue through the passage of the Public
    Housing Fire Safety Act.
        Chairwoman Smith, Ranking Member Rounds, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify today. I am happy to answer any questions.
                                     ______

                       PREPARED STATEMENT OF SHARON VOGEL
      Executive Director, Cheyenne River Housing Authority, Eagle Butte,
                                  South Dakota
                                 July 20, 2021

        Good afternoon, thank you, Chairwoman Smith and Ranking Member
    Rounds, and Members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to testify
    before you today on preserving and improving our federally assisted
    homes. My name is Sharon Vogel, I am the Executive Director of the
    Cheyenne River Housing Authority located on the Cheyenne River Sioux
    Reservation. I am also the Chairwoman of the United Native American
    Housing Association (UNAHA), with 33 member tribally designated housing
    entities (TDHEs) from the States of North and South Dakota, Nebraska,
    Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado. I am also proudly serving my
    first term on the Board of Directors of the National Low Income Housing
    Coalition (NLIHC) and continue my service as a Board Member of the
    National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC).
        The Cheyenne River Housing Authority currently provides low-income
    housing to over 800 families. The Cheyenne River Housing Authority
    serves a primarily Native American population in communities throughout
    the Reservation. The Cheyenne River Housing Authority is the tribally
    designated housing entity for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, and we
    currently manage 735 rental units, 86 home ownership units--with 42 new
    rental units under construction and we continue to build on our
    successful record of developing affordable housing by designing and
    financing rental and home ownership homes for eligible families.
        Native Americans living in tribal areas and remote Alaskan villages
    experience some of the greatest housing needs in the country, with high
    poverty rates, low incomes, overcrowding, lack of plumbing and heat,
    and unique development issues. Due in part to these unique conditions,
    Native American households have been especially hard hit by the
    pandemic and its resultant economic downturn--being more likely to
    develop serious illness as a result of the pandemic. But overcrowding
    of available housing stresses both the occupants and the structures
    themselves--homes on the Cheyenne River Reservation require much more
    maintenance than the average wear-and-tear to remain safe and livable--
    this is not for lack of property management, it is because there are
    not enough homes to go around. A three-bedroom house is designed for a
    family of 5 or 6, but often because of overcrowding these units are
    occupied by three or more families--sometimes as many as 15 individuals
    sharing the house. Preserving limited Indian housing resources
    nationwide makes it essential that Indian housing be remembered in the
    upcoming infrastructure legislation, including the $70 billion being
    targeted for rehabilitation of federally assisted housing.
        We strongly support the recently introduced bill to reauthorize the
    Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA)
    sponsored by Senators Smith and Rounds. In particular the proposed
    provisions reinstating the highly successful Drug-Elimination program
    and the long-awaited changes to the NAHASDA program requirements, many
    of which were originally proposed by the UNAHA region.
        In order to bring NAHASDA resources where they are needed the most,
    we also support the proposed $1B increase for the competitive IHBG
    program.
        The pandemic has exposed significant gaps in our Federal housing
    safety net. Housing inequities contributed to the spread of COVID-19
    cases and deaths, and the lack of universal housing assistance placed
    tens of millions of renters at risk of losing their homes and with
    them, the ability to keep themselves and their families safe. We can
    build back better by closing gaps in our safety net so that our tribal
    governments and our Nation are better prepared for the next crisis.
        Severe substandard housing exists on Native lands in a much higher
    percentage than anywhere else in the Country. These conditions have
    been confirmed by nearly every Indian and Alaska Native housing study,
    and were highlighted in HUD's most comprehensive and recent ``Housing
    Needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives in Tribal Areas: A Report
    From the Assessment of Americans Indian, Alaska Native, and Native
    Hawaiian Housing Needs'', by HUD PD&R and the Urban Institute, January
    2017--which was commissioned by Congress and funded through HUD several
    years ago. Although these housing conditions exist in many Indian
    communities and Alaska Native villages throughout the country, they are
    rampant in three particular regions: Arizona/New Mexico, the Northern
    Plains, and in Northwest Alaska Native villages. Not surprisingly,
    these three regions also have the highest poverty levels in Indian
    country. The Report summarizes that ``[H]ousing problems of American
    Indians and Alaska, particularly in reservations and other tribal lands
    are extreme by any standards.'' We are aware of these conditions and
    their impact on Native reservations and communities--in part because a
    majority of our UNAHA members are suffering from extremely poor housing
    conditions. We understand and live with these conditions and their
    consequences even when there is not a devastating global pandemic. It
    should be unacceptable that our Country inadequately funds its Indian
    housing program and continually fails to address both the severe
    shortage of housing and the unhealthy and unsafe conditions that
    continue unabated. Tribes and TDHEs battle each day to provide decent,
    safe, and sanitary housing to their people, but many of us simply do
    not have the necessary financial resources to address these conditions.
        The effects of the pandemic and the housing crisis have also
    persisted all throughout the United States. Last week, NLIHC and State
    partners around the country, including the Cheyenne River Housing
    Authority, released Out of Reach, the annual, national report that
    determines the housing wage--or hourly wage a full-time worker would
    need to earn in order to afford their housing--for every State,
    metropolitan area, combined nonmetropolitan area, and county in the
    United States. For individuals working at the minimum wage in South
    Dakota a person must work 51 hours to afford a modest 1-bedroom rental
    home at Fair Market Rent--thus highlighting the need for Cheyenne River
    Housing Authority to continue to increase its stock of subsidized
    affordable housing.
        The 2021 national housing wage is $24.90, for a full-time worker to
    afford a modest two-bedroom apartment. This is more than three times
    the Federal hourly minimum wage of $7.25. A full-time minimum-wage
    worker can afford a one-bedroom rental home at fair market rent in just
    218 of the Nation's 3,000 counties. All of these 218 counties are
    located in States with a minimum wage higher than the Federal minimum.
    On the Cheyenne River Reservation the average general assistance (GA)
    recipient gets only $278 a month or $3,336 annually--well below the
    amount necessary for them to be housed without a deep subsidy.
        Early this year NLIHC's The Gap report, the annual, national report
    that measures the availability of rental housing affordable to
    extremely low-income households and other income groups was released.
    Based on the American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample (ACS
    PUMS), The Gap presents data on the affordable housing supply and
    housing cost burdens at the national, State, and metropolitan levels.
    The report also examines the demographics, disability and work status,
    and other characteristics of extremely low-income households most
    impacted by the national shortage of affordable and available rental
    homes. The U.S. has a shortage of 7 million rental homes affordable and
    available to extremely low-income renters, whose household incomes are
    at or below the poverty guideline or 30 percent of their area median
    income. Only 37 affordable and available rental homes exist for every
    100 extremely low-income renter households. 72.5 percent of extremely
    low-income households are severely housing cost-burdened, meaning that
    these households are spending more than 50 percent of household income
    on housing costs. In South Dakota, there are 58 affordable and
    available rental homes for every 100 extremely low-income renter
    households with 61 percent of these renter households being severely
    cost burdened with housing expenses. While the State as a whole does a
    bit better than the rest of the Nation, we know that there are unique
    challenges for not only Native Americans, but also African-American and
    Latino households who often face systemic and racial discrimination,
    tend to be worse off than White households.
    Policy Solutions
        This year we have an enormous opportunity to invest in not only the
    future of Native American Tribes but the future of housing in America.
    Housing is Infrastructure and it is time that Congress can come
    together to undo the decades of discrimination and inequity for the
    most marginalized groups in the United States. While we do appreciate
    that Congress has allocated money under both the CARES Act and the
    Appropriations Act of 2021, including the Emergency Rental Assistance
    Program (ERAP), to alleviate the short-term effects of the COVID-19
    pandemic. We can confirm that this money had an immediate and vital
    impact on preserving and protecting housing services and resources in
    our tribal communities. Our proposal is to now address the more long-
    term and sustainable solutions to improving Indian housing.
        First, we support the bipartisan legislation reintroduced by
    Senators Brain Schatz (D-HI), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mike Rounds (R-
    SD), and Tina Smith (D-MN) that would reauthorize the Native American
    Housing Assistance Self-Determination Act of 1996. Funding under
    NAHASDA programs is the main source of Federal assistance to ensure
    American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians have access to
    safe, accessible, and affordable housing. Authorization for most
    NAHASDA programs expired in 2013, although Congress has continued to
    fund them. The Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG) under NAHASDA the main
    source of housing assistance for Native communities, primarily benefits
    low-income American Indian families. This bill also includes new
    provisions to address the housing crisis in tribal areas including the
    reinstatement of the highly successful HUD Drug Elimination program and
    would permanently authorize the Tribal HUD-VASH veteran's housing
    program which is currently a demonstration. Such formal reauthorization
    is long overdue.
        Since the inception of NAHASDA in 1997, Indian Housing Block Grants
    have had an average flatline funding of approximately only $625,000,000
    a year. Because no adjustment has ever been made for inflation, the
    value of that funding has sharply declined over the past 25 years. In
    addition, the amounts received by individual tribes have further been
    reduced by more previously nonfunded tribes joining the program. Adding
    to this is that Native populations have increased and TDHEs have had to
    divert development funding to the rehabilitation of existing units to
    keep their aging units from disrepair.
        Tens of thousands of new units are needed. Thousands of existing
    units, some of which are currently boarded up because of lack of
    funding and severe methamphetamine contamination, are also in need of
    substantial rehabilitation. The simple fact is that $2,000,000,000 (two
    billion dollars) of additional new funding is needed for the each of
    the next 7 years if these conditions are going to be effectively
    addressed. This funding is vitally needed for Tribes and their TDHEs to
    build and rehabilitate their housing. Most observers know and most
    studies show, including the Report, that TDHEs have, or if needed can
    quickly reacquire, the capacity to build housing and other related
    infrastructure construction on this scale. TDHEs are prepared to
    quickly gear up to produce a substantial number of new units. This will
    help tribes and Alaska villages generate for their communities and the
    country postpandemic economic recovery--just as they did successfully
    10 years ago after the Great Recession with American Recovery and
    Reinvestment Act (ARRA) moneys.
        It is our recommendation and opinion that these new funds should be
    evenly divided between HUD's Indian Housing Block Grants (IHBG) and its
    IHBG Competitive Grants. Using the existing IHBG program to deliver
    some of this money would allow some of the grants to be allocated using
    the NAHASDA allocation formula. By this method, half of the money would
    be divided up among all the tribal and Alaska Native TDHEs. Then using
    IHBG Competitive Grants, HUD can award the other half of the funds to
    those TDHEs that have the greatest need, but who also have the capacity
    required to quickly and effectively deliver this badly needed housing
    and to contribute to economic resurgence. This is exactly how TDHEs
    were successful when called upon a decade ago to use ARRA moneys.
        We also recommend and support the passage of the Native American
    Rural Homeownership Improvement Act introduced by Chairwoman Smith (D-
    MN) and Ranking Member Rounds (R-SD). The Section 502 program is
    credited with building more than $40 billion in wealth for our Nation's
    poorest families, while also being one of the most cost-effective
    Federal housing programs. The program provides low and very low-income
    applicants with payment assistance so that they can purchase safe,
    decent, and sanitary housing in eligible rural areas. This program
    could help address the relatively low home ownership rates in rural
    Native communities, however, from 2016-2021 only 2.6 percent of those
    loans were made to borrowers who identified as Native Americans. USDA
    currently operates a pilot program in South and North Dakota, where the
    Department has partnered with Four Bands Community Fund located on the
    Cheyenne River Reservation and Mazaka located on the Pine Ridge
    Reservation, two Native Community Development Financial Institutions
    (CDFIs), to leverage their deep ties in local communities and deploy
    Section 502 loans to eligible Native borrowers. The pilot program has
    demonstrated that Native CDFIs can help the Department reach Native
    homebuyers more effectively, especially homebuyers living on Tribal
    land. This bipartisan legislation would expand this pilot program
    federally and create a national relending program within the Section
    502 Direct Loan these mortgage loans for Native American Families. This
    year we have a great opportunity to redress the damage caused by
    discriminatory housing practices and the housing crisis through once in
    a generation infrastructure legislation. Congress has to not only
    improve housing and home ownership rates but to eliminate homelessness
    for the future. Housing is Infrastructure, and there is no better time
    for Congress to act on that message than right now. Congress should
    include in any infrastructure bill the HoUSed campaign's top
    priorities. These include:

        A major expansion of Housing Choice Vouchers to pave the
            way toward universal rental assistance for all eligible
            households. Our members, who are working directly with people
            experiencing or at risk of homelessness, report to us that this
            would be the biggest achievement needed to ensure everyone has
            a home.

        $70 billion to repair and preserve public housing for
            current and future generations. Public and Indian housing is
            home to some of the lowest-income renters in America. Over the
            years, we have seen a drastic reduction in funding going for
            repair and a reduction in the number of homes available. People
            who live in federally assisted housing deserve quality housing.

        $45 billion for the national Housing Trust Fund (HTF) to
            build and preserve new homes affordable to America's lowest-
            income and most marginalized households. The HTF is the only
            Federal housing program exclusively focused on providing States
            with resources targeted to serve households with the clearest,
            most acute housing needs. In 2016, the Cheyenne River Housing
            Authority was the first TDHE recipient of an HTF grant and
            received a second grant in 2018--which resulted in construction
            of a total of 24 units of affordable housing for very-low and
            low-income families.

        The American Jobs Plan proposal included two of these three
    priorities along with the $2 billion to meet the housing needs of
    tribal communities. All three of the HoUSed campaign's top priorities
    and the $2 billion for the Native American Housing Block grants are
    included in House Financial Services Committee Chair Maxine Waters' (D-
    CA)--bills ``Housing is Infrastructure Act'' and ``Ending Homelessness
    Act'', both of which we support and still encourage that at least $1
    billion allocated for Native American housing go through competitive
    funds.
        Finally, The FY22 House Appropriations bill also saw an increase
    for NAHASDA programs, up increasing by $75 million from FY21 levels for
    formula programs and $150 million for the competitive programs. We, of
    course, support these significant increases and the priority
    consideration within the competitive program to projects that would
    improve water and energy efficiency or increase resilience to natural
    disasters, we will continue to encourage the highest possible
    allocation.
        If the Country fails now to address the plight of Indian housing,
    it would be disastrous to tribes and Alaska Native communities, and to
    those hundreds of thousands of Native people and families who suffer so
    greatly with overcrowded and severely substandard housing. Most tribal
    and Alaska Native people that today live in Indian areas, their
    Governments, and their TDHEs, have no other option but to look to the
    Federal Government for the housing funds that they so badly need. For
    the United States to continue, at this particular moment, to ignore
    these tribal needs would be nothing short of a tragedy and sadly yet
    another abandonment by the United States of longstanding concerns and
    obligations to tribal sovereigns, Indian people, and Alaska Natives.
        The pandemic has exposed significant gaps in our Federal housing
    safety net. Housing inequities contributed to the spread of COVID-19
    cases and deaths, and the lack of universal housing assistance placed
    tens of millions of renters at risk of losing their homes and with
    them, the ability to keep themselves and their families safe. We can
    build back better by closing gaps in our safety net so that our tribal
    governments and our Nation are better prepared for the next crisis.

                  Additional Material Supplied for the Record

          STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN JOHN GARDELL, PITTSBURGH BUREAU OF FIRE

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

     JOINT STATEMENT OF THE LEADING ORGANIZATIONS OF THE NATION'S FIRE AND
                               EMERGENCY SERVICES

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

          STATEMENT OF MARY MCGOVERN, PRESIDENT, MINNEAPOLIS HIGHRISE
                            REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]