[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]