[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 64 (Thursday, May 9, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H4786-H4787]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       HUD HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Doyle] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, since we just completed consideration of the 
U.S. Housing Act, I believe it is appropriate that I rise this evening 
to discuss a public housing issue that is now being played out in 
western Pennsylvania.
  In the suburban communities of Pittsburgh, which I represent in 
Congress, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, county 
housing authority, county government, and lawyers representing 
plaintiffs from a 1988 lawsuit are in the process of implementing a 
plan to provide public housing for those plaintiffs. And, while I am 
sure that lawyers could argue the merits of this case for days on end, 
my dispute is with the manner in which the implementation is being 
conducted.
  In the last year, when decisions were made to purchase single-family 
houses in seven municipalities within two school districts, the elected 
officials and residents of these municipalities were not informed and 
not consulted. The first word of this plan to purchase single-family 
houses in six communities out of 100 eligible communities in Allegheny 
County, was this undated form letter notifying them that houses in 
their communities would be purchased for section 8 housing.
  I became involved when the mayors of these affected communities 
wondered why they had not been brought into the decisionmaking process 
until it was too late, and then only for appearances. They were at a 
loss for what could be done about HUD forcing its will on their 
citizens. I suggested that they form an intermunicipal working group 
and offer an alternative plan to the proposal by the parties of the 
consent decree.
  There are three basic problems with the path HUD is taking in my 
district: The lack of community notification and participation, the 
concentrated loss of tax revenues to the municipalities and school 
districts, and the extravagant use of taxpayer funds to provide public 
housing.
  First, HUD has shown little interest in communicating with local 
officials

[[Page H4787]]

during the decisionmaking process. HUD, and the other parties to this 
consent decree, deliberately contrived to purchase houses using 
national guidelines in an original price range between $74,500 and 
$104,500 for a single unit of housing. When asked only as recently as 
last week, the communities, where six of the homes were to be 
purchased, provided lists of more reasonably priced houses as 
alternatives for purchase. The community leaders are making a good 
faith effort that is certainly more of a commonsense approach.
  By concentrating the first 18 of these 23 house purchases in three 
communities, the tax revenue losses due to the tax exemptions for 
section 8 housing were directed unfairly at a relatively small number 
of communities and only one school district. We proposed that the 
scattered-site distribution be made throughout a wider geographic area 
so any revenue losses would be a burden shared fairly among the entire 
region. After all, the consent decree calls for the public housing to 
be located throughout Allegheny County, not just a limited portion of 
the county. And that brings me to the third area that HUD disregarded 
in its implementation. By purchasing less expensive houses, the tax 
revenue losses would be more bearable by the local governments and this 
would be a fair way to treat the citizens who already live in those 
communities.
  The case concluded with a judge's consent decree which requires HUD 
to acquire 100 units of public housing within Allegheny County to be 
maintained by the county's housing authority. This still left open the 
question of how the decree would be implemented.
  After the judge's ruling in December 1994, the parties involved in 
the lawsuit began making implementation plans, but they did not ask for 
any input from the communities involved. Some time before this past 
December, HUD decided that it would purchase 23 scattered-site single 
family houses in a small number of communities to begin implementing 
the decree. My observation is that there is a right way and a wrong way 
to implement such a consent decree. HUD and the others involved in this 
case have taken the wrong path and should go back and start over.
  On Tuesday, HUD closed purchases on five of six houses, with prices 
of $57,500, $67,000, $73,000, $76,000, and $76,595. The people in these 
communities work hard to have homes and some work two and three jobs to 
pay for them. Most of the people who live in these communities cannot 
afford to buy homes at those prices. What kind of a message is HUD 
sending when they use $2.6 million of the taxpayers' funds to purchase 
23 houses in 7 communities? Is this wise use of Federal funds? I don't 
think so.
  Along with the local elected officials, I recommended that HUD help 
revitalize the housing stock in these communities by purchasing starter 
homes--homes that could be purchased for much less, and upgraded to 
improve the housing stock in those communities. This would be a win-win 
proposal and a commonsense approach to the problem.
  I discussed this entire fiasco with Secretary Henry Cisneros recently 
and I thank him for listening. Now, I want him to act. This week I 
wrote this letter asking him to place the houses that HUD purchased 
this week back on the market. HUD needs to start over. And I am asking 
that he use the guidelines I just explained to implement the consent 
decree. If HUD is willing to purchase less expensive starter houses 
across a larger number of the 100 eligible communities and work with 
the community leaders to identify such properties, then we will solve 
this implementation challenge. We have been ready to offer alternatives 
and act in a cooperative spirit to assist HUD and the local housing 
authority in implementing this consent decree.
  During the recent debate on H.R. 2406, the U.S. Housing Act, I 
discussed this issue with the Appropriations VA/HUD Subcommittee 
Chairman Jerry Lewis, and I have his assurance that he will work with 
me through the appropriations process to develop legislative language 
ensuring that this kind of reckless disregard for the communities and 
extravagant use of taxpayer dollars does not continue. Public policy on 
housing and on other local issues should be developed with public 
participation and by extending a hand of cooperation. We are prepared 
to cooperate and help create a better life for every citizen in western 
Pennsylvania.

                          ____________________