[National Capital Housing Authority, Annual Report 1969, for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1969] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] ANNUAL REPORT 1969 NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY EXPLORING NEW DIRECTIONS 14 rtf 11 1969: 1969 was a year of frustration for housing authorities across the nation—and for the National Capital Housing Authority in the District of Columbia. But in spite of major difficulties, it was not a year for standing still. In 1969 the National Capital Housing Authority continued to search for new ideas and to explore new directions for the public housing program in fulfilling its responsibility to provide good housing for low income residents of the District of Columbia. gCV. dec Pc 51. | lW/^7 EXPLORING NEW DIRECTIONS ANNUAL REPORT 1969 NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1969 NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Washington, D.C. 20430 January 19, 1970 THE PRESIDENT The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: In accordance with the requirements of Public Law No. 307, Seventy-third Congress, the National Capital Housing Authority submits herewith its report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1969. '''' / National Capital Housing Authority Letter of Transmittal Highlights of the Year . . . 1969 New Directions for the Nation 1 New Directions for the District of Columbia 2 New Directions for Neighborhood Renewal 4. New Directions for Development 7 New Directions for Central Office 9 New Directions for Management 14 New Directions for COSS 1 8 Finance 21 Appendix HIGHLIGHTS OF THE YEAR 1969 The National Capital Housing Authority, in its 35th year: • Increased the number of families eligible for public housing by raising income limits for admission and continued occupancy and by eliminating the 1-year residence requirement for applicants. • Housed 1,025 families and individuals from its waiting list, including 213 applicants displaced from their homes by governmental action. • Began work on a “Modernization Program” of major improvements for several older properties with $3 million in funds. • Included tenants in planning replacement communities for the Parkside and Knox Hill developments and in planning for a new community building at Lincoln Heights. • Received public support in acquiring the first major public housing “west of Rock Creek Park.” • Expanded the scattered site housing program to include 185 leased units and 104 acquired units throughout the District of Columbia. • Broke ground for the first building of the “New Town” Fort Lincoln urban renewal project, an apartment building for low-income elderly tenants. • Continued an experiment in private management at two public housing properties. • Presented testimony at the City Council hearings on the D.C. “Housing Crisis.” • Sold the 18th and 19th issues of New Housing Authority bonds. • Made plans for a new schedule of rents and applied for a $3 million HUD loan, in order to counteract a budget deficiency totaling $910,000 at the close of the fiscal year. NEW DIRECTIONS FOR THE NATION WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC HOUSING? Fifteen major housing authorities in the country experienced serious financial difficulties in 1969 since costs of management, maintenance, and administration of public housing have risen far more rapidly in recent years than the income authorities receive from rents. In Washington, D.C., the operating expenses of the National Capital Housing Authority have increased a total of $ 17.43 per dwelling unit per month (almost 33%) since 1962, although rental income has increased only $6.77 per dwelling unit per month (about 12%). Expenses would have increased even more had the Housing Authority not cut back severely on extraordinary maintenance and capital improvements to balance uncontrollable increases in utilities (up 36%), maintenance and operations (up 108%), and administrative expenses (up 62%). In the past few years reserve funds have been used to balance the budget, but by fiscal year 1969 the reserves were wholly depleted and the Housing Authority ended the year with a deficit of $910,000. To regain solvency, the Housing Authority has made plans for a new scale of higher rents and has applied to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for a substantial loan; but these are only stopgap measures and not long range solutions. Families who live in public housing are also caught in a financial squeeze, with the cost of necessities frequently rising more rapidly than their income ; and they cannot be expected to bear the full financial burden of operating public housing. Substantial operating subsidies must be provided if the program is to continue to provide homes for low-income families. The future of the public housing program is currently a question of serious national concern. It is time to move in new directions at all levels of government. The National Capital Housing Authority is eager to work with others who are interested in developing new approaches and solutions to the complex problems of subsidized housing. 1 NEW DIRECTIONS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA “WEST OF ROCK CREEK PARK” (THE REGENCY HOUSE STORY) The National Capital Housing Authority, in 1969, moved in a new direction geographically in Washington, D.C., to expand the supply of public housing for the low-income elderly. The Regency House, a modern high-rise apartment building in the upper northwest section of the District, west of Rock Creek Park, was offered for sale to the National Capital Housing Authority in the fall of 1968. The Housing Authority was interested in purchasing Regency House because it contained 160 efficiency and one bedroom units which would be ideal for elderly applicants. Moreover, the location of the apartment building in a middleincome neighborhood would help the Housing Authority comply with Federal guidelines requiring that public housing be distributed throughout the city and not concentrated in “ghetto” areas (in order to be in compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964). The cost per unit of the air conditioned building, with rooftop swimming pool and indoor parking area, was comparable to the costs of other high-rise buildings acquired by the Housing Authority for elderly occupants in recent years, and less than the costs of conventionally constructed buildings without these amenities. It was necessary to obtain the Mayor’s approval of this site for public housing. A public hearing on the proposal held late in January was well attended and a wide variety of individuals and civic groups presented their views. The hearing officer reported to the Mayor that it was “a very lively hearing generating as much heat as light.” Of the 58 persons who testified, 34 spoke in favor of the proposal and 24 opposed it. A total of 134 letters were submitted for the record—55 for the proposal and 78 against. The Mayor announced his approval of the project early in March. At that time, despite continued criticism from private citizens, national legislators, and “letters to the editor,” all the pieces seemed to be in place for final approval by HUD of the purchase of the first public housing property in upper Northwest Washington. The Evening Star urged approval in an editorial: “If this metropolitan area has any hope of improving conditions rather than watching them grow steadily worse, a good many of us are going to have to learn a great deal more about living together harmoniously. The Regency House program, in a very small way, is one place to begin.” But complications arose when HUD indicated that it was impossible for it to help finance the purchase at the owner’s asking price, which was $125,000 higher than the appraised value of the property. Since both the Housing Authority and the District Government were convinced that the future of the District’s public housing program hung in the balance, they sought a way to cover the $125,000 difference. Discussions were held with the owners who agreed to lower their price by $50,000. Six charitable foundations 1 made contributions totaling $35,000 toward the purchase of Regency House; and the Washington Lay Association’s Project SHARE contributed $40,000 through the Housing Development Corporation. With private funds committed to cover the difference in price, HUD finally approved the purchase on May 2, 1969. The Regency House story does not end with the purchase of the building. The “Friends of Regency House,” formed by civic and religious groups in the Northwest area, have continued their active interest in the project. They recognize that the move to upper Northwest will require a substantial adjustment from many elderly citizens who have never been in that part of the District before and are planning to help their new neighbors feel at home. The Housing Authority will provide two apartments to community groups who will welcome new tenants as they arrive and acquaint them with facilities of the neighborhood. The Regency House story highlights some of the obstacles the Housing Authority faces as it seeks to move in new directions. But it also illustrates how, with persistence and community support, many of these obstacles can be overcome. 1 Stern Family Fund, New World Foundation, Taconic Foundation, Inc., Hattie M. Strong Foundation, Public Welfare Foundation, Inc. and Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation. 2 Knox Hill—1972 NEW DIRECTIONS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD RENEWAL TENANTS PARTICIPATE IN PLANNING FOR NEW AND RENEWED HOUSING The National Capital Housing Authority was created by Congress 35 years ago. Some of the housing which was built during the early years of the Authority’s program is in need of extensive rehabilitation and remodeling to conform to modern housing standards. The involvement of tenants living in these communities is an important element in the planning process. In 1969, tenants at two properties worked with architects whom they had selected to plan new replacement communities, and at several other older properties tenants helped the Housing Authority plan for modernization. 1942 TWO NEW COMMUNITIES The Knox Hill dwellings and the Parkside dwellings were constructed under wartime controls and material shortages in the early 1940’s. Several years ago the Housing Authority staff began to study ways to halt the physical deterioration of the housing at these properties and to make better use of the extensive land resources by increasing the number of large-family units. In each case, the first plans called for a mixture of rehabilitation and new construction, but professional surveys indicated that rehabilitation to code standards would be economically unfeasible and recommended that the best use of the land would be achieved through demolition of existing structures and development of a totally new community. The Knox Hill Tenants Council and the Parkside Opportunity Council & Parents Club participated in the decisions for demolition and worked with management in planning for relocating families to other units of public housing until their new communities were completed. The Housing Authority promised tenant families that they would have first 1969 4 priority on moving into the new housing, provided they still qualified for public housing and a unit of the proper size for their family was available. The Housing Authority asked the tenants at each property to select a registered D.C. architect, who had established competence in his field, to design their new community. The tenants at Knox Hill selected the firm of Sulton & Campbell and worked closely with them in numerous sessions, drawing on their own experiences in public housing to suggest what would make their new community most livable. The architects incorporated many of the tenants’ ideas in their design. After the first plans were drafted and submitted to the Housing Authority, the architects consulted with the tenants on which items to modify or eliminate in order to meet Federal statutory limits on room costs. At the end of the year the project was being studied for further cost saving reductions and it is hoped that final plans can soon be approved and construction begun. In April 1969, the tenants at Parkside chose the firm of Gray, West & Wilson, who have worked with them on a tentative site plan and housing designs. The tenant committee conducted a survey among the residents to obtain statistics on unit size requirements and suggestions to guide the architects in planning for their new community. Both groups of tenants planned with an eye to the needs of their neighborhoods. The Knox Hill tenants actively sought the aid of private and public agencies which they felt could provide the- kinds of social services, including health care and recreational programs, that would benefit both the residents of their low-income community and those of the surrounding neighborhood. A multipurpose community building is being planned to house these programs. The tenants have also requested that space for commercial facilities be provided on the property, if possible, since there are few stores nearby and families must travel a sizable distance to do shopping. At Parkside, too, public and private agencies have been asked to help plan a balanced program of services to meet the needs of this upper Anacostia neighborhood. The involvement of low-income citizens in developing a community they can be proud of is a new step forward for the public housing program in the District. And the imagination, dedication, and civic concern of the tenants who have participated in this experiment confirm the importance of this new direction in development. <373-955 0—70------2 5 Tenants have begun to work with the architect and Housing Authority staff to plan the type of community center they want. This year the Housing Authority submitted its application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for an additional $4 million to begin the second phase of its Modernization Program. “Mod II” would continue the rehabilitation of Fort Dupont, Frederick Douglass, and Carrolls-burg, with new exterior walls, canopies, security locks, floor covering, heating plants, ranges and refrigerators, and site improvements, including new landscaping, playgrounds, benches, and clothesline posts. Interior and exterior rehabilitation work would begin at Lincoln Heights. In addition, new storm windows and doors would be installed at James Creek; work on the heating lines would continue at East Capitol; and the day care center at Valley Green would be completed. The Modernization Program also includes funds for updating and expanding the Authority’s program of community services. Frederick Douglass MODERNIZATION The Housing Authority has other housing properties besides Parkside and Knox Hill which are in need of extensive renewal. In 1969, the Department of Housing and Urban Development approved an increase in Federal contributions of $3,316,000 to permit the Housing Authority to begin the first phase of its planned “Modernization Program.” Rehabilitation of three properties developed in the early 1940’s—Fort Dupont, Frederick Douglass, and Carrollsburg Dwellings-—will absorb the bulk of these funds. Tenants at these properties have worked with the Housing Authority to plan a schedule for the exterior and interior improvements which will be accomplished without displacing any families. These improvements will include new roofs, windows, doors, weatherstripping, plaster repairs, interior painting, kitchen cabinets, closet doors, new plumbing fixtures in bathrooms and kitchens, rewiring to increase the capacity of electrical circuits, and installation of ceiling lighting fixtures and exterior lights. Four other properties will also benefit from “Mod I.” Richardson’s central heating plant will be rebuilt to insure adequate heat and domestic hot water for the property. At East Capitol faulty underground heating lines will be replaced. At Valley Green six terrace apartments will be converted into a child day care center. The National Capital Area Child Day Care Association plans to operate a program there which will permit more mothers to seek jobs and increase their family income. Funds have also been provided for a new community building at Lincoln Heights to house a health clinic, recreation programs, and other community services. Fort Dupont Extension NEW DIRECTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT In 1969 the National Capital Housing Authority continued to pioneer in new directions in its efforts to increase the supply of decent housing available to low income citizens. Since the majority of Washington’s public housing applicants require housing of two types—specially equipped units for the elderly, and large family units with three or more bedrooms—development programs focused primarily on these needs. Fort Lincoln EXPLORING NEW SYSTEMS OF HOUSING PRODUCTION Spiraling costs of labor and materials have considerably slowed the progress of projected new low-rent housing projects, developed by both turnkey and conventional construction methods. Each time bids and cost estimates are higher than the statutory limits on room costs, a project must be returned to the drawing boards. To combat this slowdown in housing production, the Housing Authority has continued to investigate new methods of housing construction for potential cost-saving features. Ground was broken in 1969 for one turnkey project which will experiment with a new construction system. This five-story, high-rise apartment build ing for the elderly will be the first completed structure of the Fort Lincoln New Town, an urban renewal project to be developed on the former site of the National Training School for Boys in Northeast Washington. Construction will utilize the Firnkas building system, in which concrete panels are cast in an off-site plant and then delivered to the site for erection, reducing both the time and cost of construction. The groundbreaking ceremony on January 15 was a blue ribbon occasion. Featured guests were HUD Secretary Robert Wood, Mayor-Commissioner Walter E. Washington, Executive Director Edward Aronov, and Bishop George W. Baber of the Second Episcopal District of the A.M.E. Church, which is sponsoring the project. STATUS OF PROJECTS UNDER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NUMBER NAME NUMBER OF UNITS BOUNDARY APPROVAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PLANNING CONSTRUCTION INITIAL OPERATING PERIOD DC-1 -45 DC-1 -48 DC-I-49 *00-1-50 DC-1 - 54 DC-I-56 DC-1- 57 DC-I-58 DC-I-61 DC-1- 72 DC-I-46 *DC-I- 50 DC-1- 62 DC- 1- 64 DC-I-66 DC-I-67 DC-I-69 DC-1-70 DC-1- 71 CONVENTIONAL PROJECTS: CARROLLTON NOT SELECTED HOPKINS PLACE NOT SELECTED HIGHLAND EXTENSION STODDERT MODERNIZAT'N FT DUPONT ADDITION REHABILITATION PROGRAM KNOX HILL (REPL'M'T) PARKSIDE (REPL'M'T.) TURNKEY a ACQUISITION PROJECTS: EDGEWOOD TERRACE SURSUM CORDA HORIZON HOUSE (CENTRAL OFFICE ONLY) NOT SELECTED NOT SELECTED CAPITOL VIEW PLAZA REGENCY HOUSE THE JAMES APARTMENTS N.E. SCATTERED SITES TOTAL 80 1 1 8 7 1 320 42 87 146 254 350 35 2 28 0 120 48 320 160 15 1 50 2,697 PRO N J E C T 0 T PR A B A N OGEE DONE! DING DING DING N N 0 T PR 0 T PR 0 C E E 0 C E E 3 iiHiiififfliiMiimrm >i □ — _ * PART OF REMAINING UNITS OF DC-I-50 (99 UNITS) 7 INCREASING THE HOUSING SUPPLY In spite of the handicap of inflation, the development program did progress in fiscal year 1969, and new units were added to house additional low-income residents of the District of Columbia. The acquisition process was the most productive this year, adding a total of 387 units to the Authority’s housing supply. Of these, 353 were units for the elderly in two modern high-rise apartment buildings in Northwest Washington—Regency House and Harvard Towers. The other 34 units were individual buildings, scattered throughout the city, acquired under the Authority’s “Used House Program” at an average cost of $17,500, including rehabilitation. The number of units in the leasing program was increased to 185 this year, providing more “non-identifiable” public housing for large families in neighborhoods throughout the District. The turnkey method is still being utilized but has not been quite as effective as anticipated. Three turnkey projects are still in the preconstruction phases of development. Edgewood Terrace and Capitol View Plaza have been slowed down because of coordination problems with the companion 221 (d)(3) moderate-income housing projects; but most of these problems have been resolved and both should move ahead in the near future. The Georgia Avenue project has been slowed down due to prob lems with increasing construction costs and may not proceed at all. Plans were completed and a contract awarded for construction of 87 three-bedroom units on land owned by the Housing Authority on two steep wooded sites adjacent to the Fort Dupont Dwellings in Southeast Washington. The Fort Dupont Extension, which may include some commercial space with small convenience stores, should be completed in 1970. The Authority has continued to inspect acquisition offers and turnkey proposals as they are made, and at the end of the year had received tentative site approval on a 151-unit apartment building and on 50 scattered site units to be developed under the Turnkey III Program, a program by which low-income residents eventually become homeowners. At the end of the fiscal year, 2,697 units were in various stages of development as follows: UNITS UNDER DEVELOPMENT, PROCEEDING. . . 2,226 Under construction..................... 395 In planning.......................... 1,685 Special programs....................... 146 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS NOT PROCEEDING.............................. 471 TOTAL UNDER DEVELOPMENT................. 2,697 Harvard Towers 8 NEW DIRECTIONS FOR CENTRAL OFFICE A NEW HOME The National Capital Housing Authority celebrated its 35th anniversary by moving its central office staff into new headquarters at 1170 12th Street NW., on the edge of the District’s Model Cities neighborhood. The move in May made it possible, for the first time in many years, to gather the staff of all six divisions under one roof, providing opportunities for better coordination and greater efficiency in planning and operations. About half of the apartments on six floors of Horizon House were converted into office space for Housing Authority staff. The rest of the efficiency and one-bedroom apartments house low-income elderly tenants. One innovative feature being planned for the new central office is a cafeteria which will be equipped by the Housing Authority and operated by a small food service organized by public housing tenants with financial assistance from the Small Business Administration. THE AUTHORITY Thomas W. Fletcher, assistant to the Commissioner of the District of Columbia, continued to serve as the “National Capital Housing Authority,” in accordance with Executive Order No. 11401, and NCHA Order No. 1. MAJOR STAFF CHANGES Monteria Ivey, Sr. became Deputy Executive Director in March 1969. Mr. Ivey was previously the Authority’s economist-statistician. Mrs. Barbara Hill joined the Housing Authority staff in November 1968, as Deputy Director of the Division of Community Organization and Social Services. She has formerly worked with the New York City Housing Authority and with VISTA. George W. Miner, former manager and management supervisor, became Deputy Director of the Division of Management. Horizon House PERSONNEL In July 1968, the Authority signed its first collective bargaining agreement with Lodge 1649 of the American Federation of Government Employees, after several months of negotiations with union representatives. The agreement, which heralds a new era in employee-management relations, recognizes the lodge as the exclusive representative of the Authority’s wage board employees and will be in effect for 2 years, with the option of annual renewal thereafter. Budget limitations forced the Housing Authority to curtail its participation as a direct employer in youth opportunity programs this year, but plans were made for Housing Authority properties to serve as host work and training sites for youth opportunity employment programs sponsored and funded by outside agencies. At the close of fiscal year 1969 the Housing Authority employed 653 persons. Of these, approximately 11 percent were residents of public housing. Although there was a slight decrease in total employment from 1968, the number of permanent and probational employees increased, reflecting requirements for additional staff to handle management activities at newly acquired properties, an increased 9 PUBLIC HOUSING // II URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AREAS A SOUTHWEST B NORTHEAST C NORTHWEST D COLUMBIA PLAZA E PROPOSED ANACOSTIA BOLLING F PROPOSED 8HAW • FORT LINCOLN 61 FORT LINCOLN-PROJECT NO.I NO. NAME DWELLING UNITS 56 STODDERT MODERNIZATION ** 42 / 57 FT. DUPONT ADDITION * 87 xf 59 6TH 8 0 STS. SITE ** ...J 60 CLARIDGE TOWERS 343. / 61 KNOX HILL REPLACEMENT** 254 "J 62 HORIZON HOUSE 105 / 63 /.. 64 FT LINCOLN URA-PROJ. NO. I * 120, 65 JUDICIARY HOUSE 270^ 66 GEORGIA AVENUE TURNKEY*« 48 ] 67 CAPITOL VIEW PLAZA** 320 A-A 68 HARVARD TOWERS* 193 // 69 REGENCY HOUSE • 160 //'.... 70 THE JAMES APARTMENTS * * 152 'A 71 N-E. SCATTERED SITE TK.** 50 72 PARKSIDE REPLACEMENT ** 350 7 PUBLIC HOUSING NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY JNO. NAME DWELLING UNITS S ST. MARY'S APARTMENTS 24 V V STREET HOUSES 18 W WILLISTON APARTMENTS 31 I FORT DUPONT DWELLINGS 322 2 ELLEN WILSON DWELLINGS 134 3 JAMES CREEK DWELLINGS 267 4 FRDRCK. DOUGLASS DWELLINGS 303 7 CARROLLSBURG DWELLINGS 314 8 KELLY MILLER DWELLINGS 169 9 BARRY FARM DWELLINGS 432 13 LINCOLN HEIGHTS DWELLINGS 440 14 STANTON DWELLINGS 348 IS PARKSIDE ADDITION 42 16 HIGHLAND ADDITION 246 17 RICHARDSON DWELLINGS 190 18 EAST CAPITOL DWELLINGS 577 19 KENILWORTH COURTS 422 20 ARTHUR CAPPER DWELLINGS 612 21 GREENLEAF GARDENS 456 22 BENNING TERRACE 274 23 STODDERT TERRACE 200 24 SYPHAX GARDENS 174 25 LANGSTON DWELLINGS 274 b n 29 SIBLEY PLAZA 246 30 HOPKINS APARTMENTS 158 5 31 SHERIDAN TERRACE 183 5 5! 34 PARK MORTON APARTMENTS 174 6< 35 GREENLEAF ADDITION 32 6 36A WOODLAND TERRACE 234 6i 36-B KENTUCKY COURTS 163 6: 36-C CARROLL APARTMENT 60 6' 37 GARFIELD TERRACE 279 6! 38 EASTGATE GARDENS 230 6 39 A LE DROIT APARTMENTS 124 6 39-8 GREENLEAF EXTENSION 4 6 40 LANGSTON ADDITION 34 6 42 OEANWOOO GARDENS 56 7< 43 POTOMAC GARDENS 352 7 44 MONTANA TERRACE 155 7; 46 EDGEWOOD TERRACE ** 352 48 6 TH AND H STREET LOCATION ** 49 HOPKINS PLACE ** 118 50 N.W. URBAN RENEWAL AREA ** 99 51 VALLEY GREEN * 350 53 HIGHLAND MODERNIZATION 19 6 54 HIGHLAND EXTENSION *« PROJECTS UNOER CONSTRUCTION * PROJECTS UNDER DEVELOPMENT * * NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Housing Under NCHA Management, June 30, 1969 Area No Housing Year Dwelling Dwelling units by number of bedrooms Program property name and location Act built units on site 1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR 6-BR 1 GREENLEAF GARDENS, 1, N, Canal and 3d SW 1949 1959 456 16 294 86 40 20 GREENLEAF ADDITION, NW corner of Delaware Ave. & M St. SW 1954 1960 32 ... 24 4 4 .. JAMES CREEK DWELLINGS, M. 0. Half and 1st SW_. 1949 1942 267 44 196 8 9 .. — SYPHAX GARDENS, 0, P, 2d & Half SW 1954 1960 174 ... 126 48 .. GREENLEAF EXTENSION, 3d and M Sts.SW 1954 1965 4 ... 4 .. — Total 933 60 640 146 57 20 II ARTHUR CAPPER DWELLINGS, 2d, 7th, M & Virginia Ave.SE 1949 1958 612 80 419 88 25 .. CARROLLSBURG DWELLINGS, 1, M, 3d and 5th SE.. 1937 1941 314 96 194 24 .. ELLEN WILSON DWELLINGS, 1,6th and 7th SE 1937 1941 134 72 34 28 .. — CARROLL APARTMENTS, 416 M St. SE 1954 1964 60 160 .. Total 1,120 308 647 140 25 .. — III BARRY FARM DWELLINGS, Sumner & Wade Roads & Firth Sterling Ave. SE.. 1949 1943 432 ... 194 190 38 .. i SHERIDAN TERRACE, Sheridan Road between Howard & Pomeroy Roads SE.. 1954 1960 183 ... — 100 45 29 9 Total 615 ... 294 235 67 9 IV FREDERICK DOUGLASS DWELLINGS, Alabama Ave. and 21st SE .. 1937 1941 303 ... 289 . 4 .. — STANTON DWELLINGS, Alabama and Stanton Road SE 1949 1952 348 20 96 136 56 40 Total 651 20 385 136 60 40 V LANGSTON, Benning Road & 21st NE PWA 1937 274 180 88 6 .. LANGSTON ADDITION, 21st & H NE 1954 1965 34 ... — 26 8 .. — Total 308 180 88 32 8 .. — V! KELLY MILLER DWELLINGS, W, 5th and Oakdale Place NW 1937 1941 169 54 87 28 .. — PARK-MORTON APARTMENTS, Park Road and Morton St. NW 1954 1961 174 174 .. ST. MARY’S,24th between G & H NW 1934 1938 24 16 8 . V STREET, V between 4th & 5th NW. 1934 1938 18 ... 18 . WILLISTON, W between 2nd & 4th NW... 1934 1937 31 25 6 . GARFIELD TERRACE, 11th & Florida Ave. NW.... 1954 1965 279 >228 . 42 9 .. — LeDROIT, 4th & W Sts. NW 1954 1965 124 1106 . — 18 .. — Total 819 429 293 88 9 — VII EAST CAPITOL DWELLINGS, E. Capitol at DC Line NE and SE Vll-A EASTGATE GARDENS, 50th St., 51st St., E, F & G Sts., Drake Place and 50th Place SE 1949 1955 577 36 204 157 147 33 1957 1966 230 .... — 124 57 22 27 VIII LINCOLN HEIGHTS, 50th and Washington Place NE.... . . 1949 1945 440 66 225 107 42 . RICHARDSON DWELLINGS, 53d & Clay Sts. NE . 1949 1953 190 .... 67 80 19 24 DEANWOOD GARDENS, 54th, 55th & Clay Sts. NE 1957 1965 56 56 Total . . 686 66 292 187 61 80 IX HIGHLAND DWELLINGS, Condon Terrace & AtlanticSt.SE Lanham 1942 208 28 99 53 3 9 16 HIGHLAND ADDITION. 8th, 9th, Valley Ave., & Wheeler Road SE 1949 1954 246 . 72 124 36 14 VALLEY GREEN, Wheeler Road, Varney PL, Valley Ave. SE 1957 1964 320 37 60 74 74 75 Total 774 65 231 251 113 98 16 X BENNING TERRACE, G between 47th & Alabama Ave. SE 1954 1960 274 . 110 48 176 25 25 .. FORT DUPONT DWELLINGS, Ridge & Anacostia Roads SE 1937 1940 322 157 55 _ STODDERT DWELLINGS, Ridge & Anacostia Roads SE Lanham 1942 46 .... 44 . 88 2 STODDERT TERRACE, Ridge Road between Anacostia Ave. & D SE 1954 1960 200 ... — 8 72 32 Total 842 110 257 319 97 57 2 XI KENILWORTH COURTS, Kenilworth Ave. between Douglass & Eastern Ave. NE PARKSIDE ADDITION, Anacostia Ave. between Grant & Hayes NE PARKSIDE DWELLINGS, Kenilworth Ave. & Barnes Lane NE Total 1954 1949 1949 1959 1957 1943 422 . 42 . 351 815 12 12 36 42 . 142 220 207 134 341 119 41 .. 160 60 60 22 22 XII HOPKINS APARTMENTS, K, L, 12th, 14th Streets SE 1954 1960 158 . i(76) 118 108 50 . KENTUCKY COURTS, 13th, 14th, C & D Streets, Kentucky Ave. SE 1954 1964 163 45 . 144 . POTOMAC GARDENS, 1, G, 12th and 13th Streets SE 1961 1968 352 >144 64 XIII Total WOODLAND TERRACE, Langston Place, Bruce Place, Raynolds Place and 673 262 217 194 . — Ainger Place SE 1954 1964 234 36 42 78 39 26 13 XIV CLARIDGE TOWERS, 12th & M Streets NW 1965 1967 343 1 343 . HORIZON HOUSE, 1150 12th Street NW 1965 19672 105 1105 . Total 448 448 . — XV JUDICIARY HOUSE, 461 H Street NW 1965 19682 270 1267 i 3 . — XVI HARVARD TOWERS, 1845 Harvard Street NW. . 1965 19682 193 1193 . H . — REGENCY HOUSE, 5201 Connecticut Ave. NW. 1965 19692 160 1159 Total 353 352 1 — — — Grand total (projects) SPECIAL PROGRAMS: — 10, 348 2,651 3,814 2,428 900 445 no Leased Housing—DC 1-55. ..... _______ . 180 2 13 20 92 33 20 Rehabilitation—DC 1-41 _ ... _ _ _ .... . _. 10 3 6 1 . — Acquisition—DC 1-58 87 1 15 46 12 3 10 Total HOUSING UNDER PRIVATE MANAGEMENT: — 277 3 28 69 110 37 30 XVII SIBLEY PLAZA, North Capitol and M Streets NW 1961 1968 246 1144 80 22 __ — XVIII MONTANA TERRACE, Montana Avenue, 15th & Bryant Streets NE 1961 1968 155 — — 89 36 14 16 Total 401 144 80 89 58 14 16 GRAND TOTAL (all housing) 11,026 2,798 3,922 2, 568 1,068 496 156 at Harvard Towers; 123 0-bedrooms at Regency House. 2 Year Acquired for Public Housing. i Units for the Elderly—1,829. Includes: 285 0-bedrooms at Claridge Towers; 78 0-bedrooms at Horizon House; 155 0-bedrooms at Judiciary House; 175 0-bedrooms 12 maintenance workload, and increased community and social services functions. During the year there were 143 employment accessions, and 160 employment separations, including a number of temporary appointments. Comparative statistics for the last 2 fiscal years are shown below: June 30, 1968 June 30, 1969 Number Percent Number Percent Permanent and probational. 594 91.0 614 96.5 Indefinite 4 .6 1 .2 Temporary limited 55 8.4 21 3.3 Total employment.... 653 100.0 636 100.0 (Veterans 257 39.3 243 38.2) TRAINING In 1969 the Housing Authority made plans to institute a series of training programs for Authority employees. A training officer will have responsibility for developing and administering training sessions covering various types of maintenance, management, and administrative skills. These courses will enable employees to gain a better understanding of their jobs and improve their performance, so they can help the Authority better serve its tenants. Occupancy Interview 13 NEW DIRECTIONS FOR MANAGEMENT This was a difficult year for management, especially because only limited funds were available for property care and because destructive vandalism increased throughout the District of Columbia. But the Authority continued to explore new directions for its housing program, in order to better serve the needs of Washington’s low-income citizens. A BROADER BASE In 1969, the Housing Authority eliminated the 1-year residence requirement for applicants and raised the maximum income limits for admission and for continued occupancy, increasing the number of families who could qualify for public housing. Now any low-income citizen can apply for public housing if he is presently living in the District of Columbia. The definition of “low income” has been revised to reflect improvement in the local economy over the last 6 years, including increases in Government salaries and in hourly earnings in private industry. For large families, income limits were raised nearly $2,000. These changes will make it possible for the Housing Authority to continue to serve a true crosssection of the low-income population of the Nation’s Capital. MAINTAINING DECENT HOUSING Renovating vacated units for new tenants became a major problem for the Authority this year. Valuable labor and materials had to be devoted to boarding units as soon as tenants moved out to minimize property damage and theft, and Authority personnel were frequently harassed in their efforts to complete painting and repairs. Limited funds and widespread vandalism have made it difficult for the maintenance staffs to keep abreast even of routine maintenance demands. And while hundreds of man-hours were devoted to correcting cited violations of the housing code, some of the work was undone shortly after completion. The property maintenance crews were transferred this year to the supervision of the property managers to enable the Division of Engineering and Maintenance to concentrate on major items of repair, construction, and modernization. NEW DEMONSTRATIONS In June 1969, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced that it would help finance a demonstration project in the District of Columbia for training young male residents of public housing in maintenance and management skills related to housing. This project will be administered jointly by the Housing Authority and the District Government, which is contributing $13,898 of the total project cost of $119,873. For 8 weeks in the summer, 25 young men, ages 16-22, will receive specialized training and practical work experience in such skills as window glazing, carpentry, painting and grounds work, as well as instruction in management techniques and in related educational subjects. During the school year they will spend up to 20 hours a week on training and work assignments. At the end of a year, these young men will be prepared to accept jobs both in public and private housing. In 1969 the demonstration in private management at Sibley Plaza and Montana Terrace continued. Under a contract with the Housing Authority, Shannon & Luchs, a private real estate firm, assumed full responsibility for providing management and maintenance services to the 401 tenants at these two properties. At the close of the fiscal year, the Housing Authority and the Department of Housing and Urban Development were planning an evaluation of the effectiveness of this arrangement, after which a decision will be made on whether to continue the contract. Montana Terrace 14 SECURITY EXPERIMENT At Greenleaf Gardens in Southwest Washington tenants helped plan and implement a pilot project of citizen patrols for tenant protection. Residents who expressed to management their concern about the number of crimes occurring in the two high-rise apartment buildings agreed to experiment with a security system of tenant guards, assisted by volunteer floor captains. The Housing Authority hired two tenants from a list of persons suggested by the resident councils and planned with the councils what the duties and responsibilities of these “monitors' ’ would be. The monitors were to be neither guards nor police, but rather observers, patrolling the halls, stairways, and lobbies of the buildings on evenings and weekends and attempting to handle any problems they found. In emergency situations they would call the police, who had agreed to respond immediately when contacted. The pilot program, which began in October, appears to have been moderately successful. A third monitor was chosen by the tenants and hired in February. Crime and vandalism in the two buildings has been reduced and tenants are less fearful. ALTERNATIVE RENT SCHEDULES During 1969 the Housing Authority experienced serious financial difficulties. Plans were made for a rent increase to counterbalance large increases in operating expenses since the last change in the graded rent schedule in 1962. 15 To implement this increase the Housing Authority discussed with its tenants the possibility of adopting a “flat rent” schedule to replace the current graded rent scale. In meetings at the properties, management staff explained to tenants that under a flat rent system rents would be based on unit size rather than being tied to family income, as they are for most tenants now. For example, most tenants living in three-bedroom units would pay one rent, $75 a month, rather than 41 different rents, ranging from $36 to $106 a month, as they do under the present rent schedule. Tenants would no longer be required to report each change in income, or to pay a higher rent with every salary increase. Family budgeting would be simplified and part-time employment of family members would not affect rent. There would be less of a strain on tenant-management relations and staff would have more time to devote to tenant concerns. Such a schedule has been used successfully on an experimental basis at Carroll Apartments and Woodland Terrace since they opened 5 years ago, and has also been applied to leased housing and recently acquired apartments for the elderly. Tenants in general indicated their support for the flat rent system, which would be similar to the rent structure for private housing. But Federal officials disapproved the proposal on the grounds that it would not produce enough additional revenue. At the end of the year a new graded rent schedule was being prepared to submit for approval. The staff of the Housing Authority remains convinced, however, that a flat rent system offers many advantages to both tenants and management and feels this alternative rent structure should be considered further, especially if some way can be found to decrease the burden such a system would impose on families with extremely low incomes. HOUSING LOW INCOME FAMILIES In fiscal year 1969 the National Capital Housing Authority housed 1,025 low-income families and elderly individuals from its list of qualified applicants, including 213 applicants displaced from their homes by Government action. The number of transfers housed this year (636) was unusually high because families were relocated from Knox Hill and Parkside in preparation for demolition of these units. Between July 1968, and January 1969, 210 tenants were transferred from Knox Hill to other properties, including leased housing and developments under private management, and by June 30, 1969, 98 families had been transferred from Parkside. The units newly occupied by these families account for 45% of all transfers housed, and 17% of the total units filled in 1969. Applicants displaced by governmental action and transfers accounted for almost all of the four-, five-, and six-bedroom houses occupied this year, and three-fourths of the three-bedroom units. Non-dis-placed applicants received only one-sixth of these large-size units, and 1,913 applications from large families remained on hand at the end of fiscal year 1969. The Housing Authority has long been aware of this need and continues to seek to expand its supply of housing for these families. At the close of the year, 10,004 tenant families were living in public housing. Of these: • 2,112 (or 21%) were elderly or disabled; • 3,299 (or 32%) received some type of welfare payments; • 5,553 (or 56%) fit one or more of the classifications of displaced, exceptionally low income, large family, or elderly. The following charts summarize data on applications and occupancy for fiscal year 1969; 16 APPLICATIONS FOR HOUSING [Fiscal year 1969] Total 0-1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR 6-BR Beginning of year 3,405 1,677 341 480 631 232 44 Received during year 4,226 2,031 1,234 538 268 128 27 Displaced 255 107 41 44 39 19 5 Nondisplaced 3,971 1,924 1,193 494 229 109 22 Total applications for year 7,631 3,708 1,575 1,018 899 360 71 Housed during year 1,025 552 291 108 41 30 3 Displaced 213 73 30 39 40 28 3 Nondisplaced 812 479 261 69 1 2 Applications withdrawn (net) 2,691 1,625 813 168 46 23 16 Applications on hand end of year 3,915 1,531 471 742 812 307 52 Displaced 191 11 24 34 81 33 8 Nondisplaced ■ 3,724 1,520 447 708 731 274 44 Veterans/servicemen 177 50 10 5 54 54 4 Other 3,547 1,470 437 703 677 220 40 Bedroom size as percentage of applications on hand end of year (100.0) (43.5) (11.2) (17.6) (19.2) (7.3) (1.2) UNITS OCCUPIED [Fiscal year 1969] Total 0-BR 1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR 6-BR Total 1,661 337 357 539 265 101 53 9 Nontransfer 1,025 302 250 291 108 41 30 3 Percent of total (61.7) (89.6) (70.0) (54.0) (40.8) (40.6) (56.6) (33.3) Displaced 1 (102) 213 46 27 30 39 40 28 3 Percent of total (12.8) (13.6) (7.5) (5.6) (14.7) (39.6) (52.8) (33.3) Nondisplaced 812 256 223 261 69 1 2 Percent of total (48.9) (76.0) (62.5) (48.4) (26.1) (1-0) (3.8) Veterans-servicemen 147 65 35 18 26 1 2 Other 665 191 188 243 43 6 Transfers 636 35 107 248 157 60 23 Percent of total (38.3) (10.4) (30.0) (46.0) (59.2) (59.4) (43.4) (66.7) From Knox Hill 199 1 28 82 58 24 5 1 From Parkside 90 3 4 45 21 13 4 Other 347 31 75 121 78 23 14 5 Bedroom size as percentage of total units occupied: (100.0) (20.3) (21.5) (32.4) (16.0) (6.1) (3.2) (0.5) 1 (102) Indicates displaced families assigned to DC 1-29 and 1-44. Otherwise figures do not include these properties which are under private management. 17 NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TENANT SERVICES 1969 was a year for interpretation and exploration in the area of social services as the Housing Authority moved in new directions to respond more adequately to the needs of its tenants. INTERPRETING COSS’ ROLE The role of the Division of Community Organization and Social Services (COSS) was redefined this year to give the Division greater opportunities for coordination and evaluation of the Authority’s efforts to achieve the social goals of the public housing program. Since previously its efforts had been concentrated in the community of Valley Green, this was the first year the Division functioned on a Authority-wide basis. Primary goals for the Division in this transitional period were to define the responsibilities and activities of the Division within the context of the Authority’s whole program, to identify program areas of special concern, and to develop awareness among tenants of the types of services and assistance the staff could offer them. COSS planned ways to work with management staff on their common tasks of securing social services relevant to tenant needs and of helping tenants to join together and work themselves to improve their communities. COSS staff will focus its efforts on the areas of identifying and securing program resources, training tenants and staff, developing special programs, providing informational and organizational assistance to tenants, and evaluating the effectiveness of social services for management. 18 A GOOD START Exploratory efforts towards improving the Housing Authority’s social program involved the staff in many kinds and styles of services and activities, each an adventure with people. CONSULTATION Tenants and management staff from many Housing Authority areas consulted COSS staff for information and advice on ways to deal with specific community needs, such as day care facilities, food shopping resources, and educational programs. A few tenant groups began to identify areas of concern and to plan action programs for bringing about desired changes and improvements. RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT Locating resources—persons, programs, materials, and money—of potential benefit to low-income families and communities was an important activity of the staff this year. They found volunteers to help with summer activities, including urban studies aides from the Board of Education’s summer program for high school students, Government interns from Cornell University, and local volunteers from Unity House. Private social agencies such as the Red Cross and the Visiting Nurses Association were contacted to see what types of services they could provide to tenant families. Meetings were held with the staff of the Federal City College to discuss possible educational activities involving tenants and potential field work and work-study opportunities for FCC students in public housing communities. SPECIAL PROGRAMS Several projects planned by COSS staff, with tenant involvement, were in progress at the end of June. One was an 8-week summer program to involve approximately 20 children, ages 10-12, at each of six Housing Authority properties in sports, creative activities, and trips. Arrangements were made for the children to use swimming pools, gyms, and fields for team sports at military installations in the Washington area. At some other properties tenants planned their own summer youth programs. Slots were reserved for over 100 children from public housing communities in the Federal Youth Day Camps at Howard University and Catholic University. Another special project was a series of local art shows organized by tenants at 10 public housing communities. Judges chose winners in four age group categories from among the many talented participants. A central art show was being planned to exhibit the award-winning art; and the tenants hope to make this an annual event. A study of the social needs of elderly applicants for public housing was funded by the Administration on the Aged in the D.C. Department of Public Welfare. From the results of this survey, the Authority will be better able to plan programs and services to meet the special needs of this group of tenants. 19 EVALUATION MODERNIZATION Many public and private agencies operate programs at public housing properties, some in space provided to them free of charge by the Housing Authority. They include the D.C. Recreation Department, the D.C. Department of Public Health, the D.C. Department of Public Welfare, the YWCA, the Salvation Army, settlement houses, neighborhood churches, family and child services, and policecommunity relations units. It will be the responsibility of COSS to help management evaluate the effectiveness of the social services these groups are providing for tenants. One tool developed by the Division was a “Use and Occupancy Agreement” to be signed by both the housing manager and a representative of any agency which is receiving rent-free space for its activities. The agreement, which has to be renewed regularly, provides for regular reports on programs and participants to the housing manager, for recommendations and referrals to the program by the manager as tenant needs arise, and for maximum tenant involvement in the program. It is hoped that through implementation of such agreements and through tenant comment and criticism, programs in operation at the properties can become more responsive to community needs. The goals of the modernization program include upgrading tenant services and tenant-management relations. In the first phase, $32,600 was allocated in the budget for equipment for community programs. Part of this money was used for two station wagons which will provide transportation for various tenant activities. Supplies for the summer program were also purchased from this fund. In its application for “Mod II” the Housing Authority requested $55,000 to help provide increased facilities for communication with tenants, to develop special program demonstration units, to locate further potential sources of aid and services for tenants, such as Government grants, and to develop a tenant leadership training institute. FUTURE PLANS There has been a growing feeling on the part of many tenants and community agencies that the Housing Authority is making meaningful progress in the area of tenant services and has demonstrated a strong desire to reach a better level of service. For next year the Housing Authority has defined several major goals in its program of tenant activities and services. These include: (1) Maintaining the relationship developed in the past year and building hope. Since people are generally only willing to invest time and effort in the planning process when they feel there is a reasonable probability of success, the staff hopes to increase the frequency of such successes. (2) Increasing the direct involvement of tenants in planning the affairs of their properties and the policies of the Authority. Discussions with regard to the formation of a Public Housing Advisory Board were begun this year and the Authority hopes one will be established soon. (3) Beginning to develop an income maintenance program through more effective use of employment and training resources in the community. 20 FINANCE The short term notes sold on the private market to provide temporary financing for low-cost housing projects were renamed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development during 1969, the subsequent issues to be known as “Project Notes.” The National Capital Housing Authority sold its first series of project notes on June 10, 1969. This issue, totaling $681,000 in principal, made available funds necessary to begin work on the Authority’s modernization program. At the end of the fiscal year, the Authority had the following short term notes outstanding: Temporary notes, 128th series__________ $4, 190, 000 Temporary notes, 129th series__________ 5, 865, 000 Temporary notes, 130th series__________ 417, 000 Project notes, 1st series _____________ 681, 000 Total outstanding____ $11, 153, 000 Because of increasing operating costs it became jiecessary to borrow operational funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Housing Assistance Administration. This was accomplished with an administrative note, executed on the premise that the principal and interest would be repaid to the Department when the Housing Authority received the special subsidies contribution earned during fiscal year 1969, and payable early in fiscal year 1970. Outstanding borrowings from the Department of Housing and Urban Development at the close of the fiscal year were as follows: Advance notes . _____. .. $2,419,420 Administrative notes ... .... ________ 500, 000 Preliminary notes _______ _________ . 208, 959 Permanent notes . ..... . 570 Total outstanding . $3, 128, 949 The Authority sold its 18th and 19th issues of New Housing Authority Bonds, increasing the net bonded indebtedness to $111,254,000. A schedule of the status of bonded indebtedness at the end of the fiscal period follows: STATUS OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS [June 30, 1969] New Housing Authority Bonds Final maturity date Total issue Retired Outstanding First issue May 1, 1994 $11,420,000 $4,657,000 $6,763,000 Second issue May 1, 1994 7,020,000 1,844,000 5,176,000 Third issue May 1, 1994 6,010,000 69,000 5,941,000 Fourth issue May 1, 1994 10,505,000 2,160,000 8,345,000 Fifth issue May 1, 1994 7,505,000 1,349,000 6,156,000 Sixth issue May 1, 1994 5,670,000 605,000 5,065,000 Seventh issue May 1, 2000 15,650,000 1,720,000 13,930,000 Eighth issue May 1, 2001 2,765,000 317,000 2,448,000 Ninth issue May 1, 2004 7,990,000 650,000 7,340,000 Tenth issue May 1, 2005 4,790,000 240,000 4,550,000 Eleventh issue May 1, 2005 7,740,000 545,000 7,195,000 Twelfth issue May 1, 2007 5,015,000 75,000 4,940,000 Thirteenth issue May 1, 2007 5,250,000 130,000 5,120,000 Fourteenth issue May 1, 2007 10,075,000 275,000 9,800,000 Fifteenth issue May 1, 2008 2,265,000 15,000 2,250,000 Sixteenth issue May 1, 2008 6,690,000 110,000 6,580,000 Seventeenth issue May 1, 1994 1,400,000 25,000 1,375,000 Eighteenth issue May 1, 2008 4,000,000 40,000 3,960,000 Nineteenth issue May 1, 2009 2,485,000 0 2,485,000 Total........................................................$124,245,000 $14,826,000 $109,419,000 Total........................................................$124,245,000 $14,826,000 $109,419,000 Series “A” bonds.................................... Sept 1, 2000 $3,744,000 $1,909,000 $1,835,000 Series “B” bonds.................................... Sept 1, 2000 3,263,000 1 3,263,000 0 Total all issues.............................................$131,252,000 $19,998,000 $111,254,000 1 Refinanced in 1964 by temporary notes; currently part of 128th series. 21 PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES The Authority paid the District of Columbia Government $489,524 in lieu of property taxes for the fiscal year. This represents 10 percent of shelter rent charged for public housing in the District of Colum bia, excluding Harvard Towers and Regency House, two high-rise apartment buildings acquired during the current year. The sellers of these properties are responsible for the full taxes through June 1969. Following is a summary of data relating to the amount paid: Assessed valuation Full taxes Payments in lieu of taxes Noncash local subsidy Federally aided low-rent housing $72,690,928 $2,180,728 $489,524 $1,691,204 Alley reclamation program 683,199 20,496 0 20,496 Total low-rent properties $73,374,127 $2,201,224 $489,524 $1,711,700 The payments are considerably in excess of the taxes which the District previously collected from owners of slum sites and vacant areas on which the majority of the properties are built. The District of Columbia does not give the Authority a cash subsidy. The difference between the amount which would have been paid in taxes by a private entrepreneur and the amount of the Authority’s payments in lieu of taxes represents the local subsidy required by law. INVESTMENTS In accordance with Authority policy all moneys in the general fund not immediately required for current expenses are invested in U.S. Government securities. Earnings from such investments amounted to $65,367 this fiscal year. Of this amount $32,458 applied to development funds invested, and $32,909 to management funds invested. This revenue, as applicable, is used to help defray development and operating costs. At the end of the fiscal year $1,204,766, or 93 percent, of the Authority’s available funds were invested. Additional investments made from debt service funds on deposit with fiscal agents resulted in added earnings of $76,098. 22 NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Statement of Receipts and Expenditures Rents $7,202,972 Modernization funds $426,079 Miscellaneous rents, charges, and other income $43,979 Interest on excess $46,565 Maintenance $3,370,942 Utilities $2,573,025 Administration $1,678,531 Improvements and additions $105,789 Federal contributions: Debt Service $5,608,430 Elderly $190,070 Leased dwellings $258,825 Premiums and discounts on notes and bonds $3,638 Total receipts $13,780,558 Employee benefits and terminal leave $295,511 Insurance (Fire, Boiler and OL&T) $98,064 Payments in lieu of taxes $489,524 Collection losses $59,219 Amortization and interest $5,619,382 Casualty losses $30,699 Rent for leased dwellings $310,499 Other $58,848 Total expenditure $14,690,033* * Deficit operation of $909,475 financed by funds borrowed from HUD 23 CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET [June 30, 1969] U.S. housing Demonstra- Alley Dwell- Consolidated acts tion program ing Act ASSETS Cash: With Treasury......................................... On hand and in transit................................ Accounts receivable 1..................................... Accrued receivables....................................... Advances.................................................. Investments............................................... Debt amortization funds................................... Deferred charges.......................................... Land, structures and equipment2........................... $84,147 ............................... $84,147 20,753 ................................. 20,753 393,027 ................... $1,767 394,794 13,156 ................................. 13,156 20,000 ................................. 20,000 1,204,766 .............................. 1,204,766 8,977,238 .............................. 8,977,238 414,039 ............................... 414,039 146,838,023 $178,400 385,833 147,402,256 Total assets $157,965,149 $178,400 $387,600 $158,531,149 LIABILITIES AND SURPLUS Liabilities Accounts payable Notes payable (HUD and non-HUD) 3 Accrued liabilities Deferred credits Fixed liabilities: Bonds payable—non-Hud $888,054 14,281,949 2,014,095 19,497 111,254,000 $1,775 140 $889,829 14,281,949 2,014,095 19,637 111,254,000 Total liabilities $128,457,595 .. $1,915 $128,459,510 Surplus Government investment $29,346,331 $164,750 $385,685 $29,896,766 Non-Federal contributions 161,223 13,650 .. 174,873 Total surplus $29,507,554 $178,400 $385,685 $30,071,639 Total liabilities and surplus $157,965,149 $178,400 $387,600 $158,531,149 1 Estimated uncollectible: U.S. Housing Act $60,000 + $300 Alley Dwelling Act = $60,300. 2 Excludes uncompleted portions of contracts in process: U.S. Housing Act, $2,160,740. 3 Non-HUD notes are secured by requisition agreement whereby HUD guarantees payment at maturity: U.S. Housing Act, $11,153,000. Photo Credits: Washington Post, Page 3 U.S. Army, Page 19 24 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1970 O—373-955 APPENDIX Public Law 86-400, 86th Congress, S. 1159, approved April 4, 1960, provides in part that the Authority shall give “a full and detailed account of all operations under the provision of the Act for the preceding fiscal year, including an itemization of all properties purchased during such fiscal year setting forth the assessed value of such properties, together with the purchase price.” To fulfill the requirements of Public Law 86-400 for this fiscal year, the following list is presented: HARVARD TOWERS—PROJECT NO. DC 1-68 Address 1845 Harvard Street NW. Lot Num- Square ber Number 222 2588 829 Assessed value $1,189,670 Purchase price $2,320,000 REGENCY HOUSE-PROJECT NO. Address 5201-13 Connecticut Ave- Lot Num- Square ber Number 61 1874 Assessed value $1,279,963 DC 1-69 Purchase price $2,425,000 nue NW. ACQUISITION AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM—PROJECT NO. DC 1-58 Address 406 Burbank St. SE......... 4702 Ninth St. NW.......... 1426 Varnum St. NW......... 1628 Massachusetts Ave. SE 1727 Massachusetts Ave. SE 29 Bryant Street, NW....... 650 Franklin St. NE........ 218 17th Place NE.......... 325 Channing Street NE..... 740 Princeton PI. NW....... 5301 8th St. NW............ 1757 Hobart PI. NW......... 1412 18th PI. SE........... 1613 19th St. SE........... 511 Columbia Road, NW...... 3009 13th Street NW......... 7130 Ninth Street NW........ 7131 Ninth Street NW........ 1223 Savannah Street SE..... 1508 Webster Street NW...... 1941 First Street NW........ 6515 North Capitol Street.... 2127 Third Street NE........ 2123 Third Street NE........ 55 Bryant Street NW......... 3429 Oakwood Terrace NW... 4703 Fourth Street NW....... 2022 Klingle Road NW........ 1800 Irving Street NW...... 1802 Irving Street NW...... 1804 Irving Street NW...... 1810 Irving Street NW...... 2114 Minnesota Ave. SE...... 18 Adams Street NW......... Lot Number Square Number Assessed value Purchase price 28 5398 $7,630 $15,100 73 3012 7,353 16,250 32 2697 10,851 17,500 73 1087 8,735 14,500 115 1100 9,450 14,500 93 3127 8,242 15,250 89 3641 7 730 15,000 72 1093 9,195 15,000 87 3555 6,322 12,750 42 3032 9,814 18,750 806 3151 12,076 17,000 81 2588 9,962 16,650 67 5567 7,063 15,250 18 5594 8,272 16,400 132 3051 6,523 13,375 166 2850 7,852 12,250 41 2965 10,387 17,500 29 2966 11,472 17,500 41 5937 8,998 16,700 17 2698 12,093 17,750 69 3112 6,428 16,250 6 3728 9,218 16,250 64 3562 7,900 12,000 62 2562 7,900 13,000 106 3127 8,342 13,750 672 2621 10,241 16,000 19 3305 8,000 13,300 27 2605 9,315 19,900 46 2588 10,510 19,000 45 2588 9,859 17,750 44 2588 10,159 17,750 41 2588 9,054 18,000 55 5573 9,299 14,450 114 3123 7,642 14,500 UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE LIBRARIES U005 25075 370 2 HD 7288.78 .U52 W374 1969