[National Capital Housing Authority, Annual Report 1971, for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1971] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] university of louisville Capital Housing Authority Annual Report 1971 U. S. GOVERNMENT DEPOSITORY ITEM Public Housing at the Crossroads National Capital Housing Authority Annual Report 1971 m/n For the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1971 Public Housing at the Crossroads NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Washington, D.C. 20430 April 13, 1972 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 ii J f I / < Contents Letter of Transmittal ii Highlights of 1971 iv Public Housing at the Crossroads 1 Organization and Personnel 2 Development Program 3 Modernization 8 Management and Maintenance 12 Community Involvement and Social Services 18 Finance 21 List of Tables Table 1. —National Capital Housing Authority Employment 2 Table 2. —Units Under Development 6 Table 3. —Status of Projects Under Development 6 Table 4. —Applications for Housing 16 Table 5. —Units Occupied 16 Table 6. —Housing Under Management 17 Table 7. —Status of Bonded Indebtedness 22 Table 8. —Statement of Receipts and Expenditures 23 Table 9. —Consolidated Balance Sheet 24 Highlights of the Year 1971 In February, 1971, opened Fort Lincoln, a 120 unit building designed specifically for the elderly on the site of the future Fort Lincoln New Town. In March, 1971, opened Capitol View Plaza, a 320 unit housing development with 228 elderly units and 92 townhouses awaiting approval as the first Turnkey III units in the District of Columbia available for homeownership. In April, 1971, opened Fort Dupont Addition, 87 three bedroom apartments built under the conventional public housing program. Broke ground for a new community, Edgewood Terrace, comprising 334 units, 292 elderly units and 42 three-bedroom family apartments. Housed 1,181 new families and individuals in public housing including 383 families displaced by public action. Officially established the National Capital Housing Authority Advisory Board comprised of 22 elected residents of public housing and 11 community members appointed by the Mayor-Commissioner. Published the first NCHA newsletter for residents, Residences and People. (“RAP") Implemented a new rent schedule in compliance with the Brooke Amendment to the Housing Act of 1969. Halted the year and a half rent strike through voluntary agreements to pay and Court action including a decision by the United States Supreme Court, June 24, 1971. Initiated a new venture into private management of public housing by a community group with the opening of Capitol View Plaza. Testified before the District of Columbia City Council identifying the problems and potentials of the public housing program. iv Public Housing at the Crossroads pOuring the past decade, many major American urban centers have slowly but certainly decayed. As more of the cities’ population and jobs flee to sprawling suburbs, what remains in the central city are deteriorating, abandoned buildings, fewer jobs, and poorer people. Those unable to escape are left with limited opportunities, escalating costs, and increasing need for public services without funds to adequately provide them. Washington, D.C. exemplifies these conditions with a shrinking central city population and decreasing job opportunities. Washington increasingly has become a city of the poor. Nowhere are the problems of the urban environment more sharply reflected than in public housing in the District of Columbia. For several years, Washington’s public housing program has been plagued by fiscal, social and administrative problems typical of those found in other large American cities. While the cost of labor and materials escalated, for some there was no additional income resources to meet the heightened budget requirements. Increases in residents' income were almost negligible. Reserves were quickly exhausted and deficit spending became chronic. Finally, relief came with congressionally authorized operating subsidies administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. However, the operating income crisis has left its mark. Essential maintenance work was deferred. Little attention was given to the appearance of the properties or to the maintenance of lawns and shrubbery. The combination of problems made public housing in Washington, D.C. undesirable for many families including some who were already residents. Although move-outs increased, it became more difficult to find applicants who would accept vacant units. Prior to this period, five applicants were contacted for every unit accepted. Now ten applicants are contacted to fill one vacancy. During this same period, vandalism and crime escalated in the City and in public housing. While improved maintenance remained a high priority among residents, security also has been given high priority. The poor condition of many dwelling units and the disquietude and unhappiness of public housing residents strained managementresident relations almost to a breaking point. Managers were unable to promise or provide relief but were required to assiduously pursue rent collection. As reported in the previous Annual Report, residents rebelled against an increase in rent and called a city wide rent strike with an undetermined number of participants. Some residents simply took the opportunity to withhold their rent in support of those whose dwelling units had serious code violations. When NCHA filed suit against delinquent residents, the Neighborhood Legal Service attorneys requested jury trials for hundreds of cases. The Court Docket was jammed with time consuming jury trial requests and NCHA’s access to the Landlord and Tenant Court as its last resort became ineffective. For nearly two years, rent delinquency cases lingered and no new cases were filed while tenant balances escalated. Finally, the Court heard many of the cases and rendered judgments ranging in amounts from no rent to full rent. Ironically, many of the delinquent residents were Public Assistance clients. Roughly one-third of the NCHA residents are public assistance clients and more than half of these residents were delinquent in rent payments. Many residents had not saved their rent money so that when judgments were rendered, they were unable to pay. Conscious of the fiscal impact on the District of Columbia budget if hundreds of low income families were evicted and of the human hardships, the National Capital Housing Authority has sought to arrange reasonable payment agreements with residents with some success. However, evictions have been necessary. It is within the framework of these many and difficult problems that the NCHA has attempted to administer the public housing program during the past year. Though the future remains cloudy, a gradual improvement in the relationship of residents and the Authority and the development of new Authority philosophies and priorities offer some assurance that a solution to these massive problems is not impossible. 1 Organizatioi and Personnel The Authority Graham W. Watt, Assistant to the Commissioner of the District of Columbia (Deputy Mayor), continued as the “National Capital Housing Authority”, a designated responsibility he has held since January 2, 1970, pursuant to Executive Orders Numbers 11401 and 11571. Major Staff Changes On May 21, 1971, by order of Graham W. Watt as the Authority, James G. Banks was designated the Exective Director of the National Capital Housing Authority. In addition to this responsibility, Mr. Banks will continue to serve as the Assistant to the Mayor for Housing Programs, heading the District of Columbia Office of Housing Programs. Mr. Banks’ dual functions will speed the integration of the District of Columbia public housing program into comprehensive housing planning for the city. When Mr. Banks was designated, Monteria Ivey Sr., who had been serving as Acting Executive Director since July 1, 1970, resumed his position as Deputy Executive Director with expanded responsibility for the staff operations of the Authority. In June, 1971, Edward B. Lamar joined the Housing Authority as the Maintenance Engineering Officer. Before joining the Authority, Mr. Lamar was the Project Manager for all Marine Corps Air and Ground Construction with the Construction Division of the Naval Facilities Engineering Headquarters. Organizational Changes During fiscal year 1971, NCHA continued restructuring its administrative organization to increase the operating efficiency and effectiveness of the agency. These realignments culminated the organizational restructuring initiated during the last fiscal year. In September, 1970, the Budget Office and Operations Review activities were transferred to the Comptroller’s Office and the Comptroller’s Office, formerly in the Division of Administration, was established as a separate entity under the supervision of the Executive Office. In March, 1971, in a pilot program in the Far Northeast, the Housing Authority initiated the reorganization of Management and Maintenance personnel in order to provide more efficient services to the residents. In the reorganization, operations will be decentralized to effect more concentrated supervision of Management and Maintenance personnel. If the pilot program is successful, early in the next fiscal year the reorganization will establish four group management offices, each with approximately 2,700 units, grouped geographically throughout the city. One group office will include the majority of the elderly units. Prior to this reorganization, two Management Supervisors, unsupported by a maintenance and social services staff, had the responsibility for all the public housing units. Under the reorganization, each group office located in the field will be assigned to one Management Supervisor. He will have a supporting staff which includes a Maintenance Supervisor, a central maintenance crew to perform maintenance work beyond the scope of the property staff, and a Community Organization and Social Services staff member. It is anticipated that the reorganization will mean more immediate and personal services to all the residents of public housing. Total employment in the Authority at the close of fiscal year 1971 was 630 persons, as compared to total employment for fiscal year 1970 of 617 persons. Although staffing in the General Schedule positions was restricted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, additional staff for maintenance and modernization activities was authorized. During the fiscal year there were 132 employment accessions and 119 employment separations. Comparative statistics for the last two fiscal years are shown in Table 1. Table 1.—NCHA Employment June 30, 1970 June 30, 1971 Num- Per- Num - Per- Permanent ber cent ber cent Probational 613 99.4 603 95.7 Temporary Limited 4 .6 27 4.3 Total Employment,. 617 100.00 630 100.00 Veterans 238 38.6 240 38.1 2 Development Program The National Capital Housing Authority’s responsibility is to provide low rent housing for low income families in the District of Columbia. Through the turnkey and conventional public housing construction programs, NCHA added 527 new units to the public housing inventory during fiscal year 1971. Two turnkey projects, Fort Lincoln and Capitol View Plaza, were completed and opened for occupancy. Fort Lincoln In February, 1971, Fort Lincoln, a 120 unit building for the elderly, was occupied. Located on the former site of the National Training School and the future site of the Fort Lincoln New Town, Fort Lincoln is the first project to be constructed in the development. Although further development had been held in abeyance, this year the Redevelopment Land Agency, the agency responsible for the planning, has designated a developer for the area and planning for the new town within town has been resumed. When the new town is completed, family units will be made available to the Authority for purchase and/or leasing. The 120 unit building is comprised of 96 efficiencies and 24 one-bedroom apartments designed specifically for the elderly with grab bars in the bathrooms and handrails in the wide hallways. Realizing that Fort Lincoln, the only building on the site, is relatively isolated from services necessary for elderly, the Authority completed special arrangements with agencies and groups throughout the District of Columbia to create a more desirable environment for the new elderly residents. A resident manager and a resident maintenance man are available at all times to respond to resident requests and problems. As an additional security measure, a guard is on duty from early afternoon until 8:00 in the morning. The greatest isolating factors—lack of transportation and lack of commercial facilities—were resolved prior to occupancy. Through the District of Columbia, mini-buses have been provided for transportation to shopping and other activities. In addition, ten out-of-school youths serve as bicycle riding messengers. Space has been designed for health services provided by the District of Columbia Department of Human Resources. Prior to occupancy, the elderly received multi-phase screening examinations to insure that no resident required prolonged medical treatment. The clinic is operated three days a week by a Public Health Nurse and once a week by a physician. Daily recreation programs are organized through the District of Columbia Department of Receation. The facilities and services provided at Fort Lincoln reflect the new emphasis of public housing development—to provide a total living environment. Capitol View Plaza In ceremonies attended by Mrs. George Romney and Mayor-Commissioner Walter E. Washington, Capitol View Plaza was opened for occupancy. Capitol View, located at the District and Maryland line, contains 320 units—228 F WfeSSW r WiSb ~ .' - K- _ ' r ? n r, i. n n ! " ” Iri I MHH I g| V II . 1 > 8 I u »i”! gJLJt-'.. v- b® ~ efficiencies and one-bedroom units for the elderly and 92 three, four and five bedroom townhouses for families. The 228 elderly units are located in a ten story centrally air conditioned building which contains recreation space, meeting rooms, and laundry facilities. The Capitol View Development Corporation, a non-profit corporation comprised of residents of the far northeast and southeast sections of the District of Columbia, initiated planning for Capitol View Plaza and was involved throughout the planning process. To maintain community involvement in the new housing community, the Authority signed an agreement with the Capitol View Development Corporation to manage the new development. NCHA anticipates that community private management will encourage community participation and contribute to the success of Capitol View Plaza. NCHA has proposed to the Department of Housing and Urban Development that the 92 family townhouses be converted to a homeownership program. If this program is approved, the family units will be the first public housing units in the District of Columbia available for ownership by low income families. At the close of the fiscal year, NCHA was awaiting final approval for the homeownership program from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Families for the proposed homeownership program were selected jointly by the Housing Authority and the Capitol View Development Corporation while NCHA selected the elderly residents from its waiting list. The Capitol View Plaza property will be part of a combined low and moderate income development when the proposed 264 units built under FHA 236 program are completed. The additional hi-rise will contain shopping and other supportive services for Capitol View Plaza. Under the conventional program, the buildings in the long overdue Fort Dupont Extension were completed and turned over to management in April, 1971. This project contains 87 three-bedroom apartments. Although new construction added 527 units to the public housing supply, construction of only one new project was started during the fiscal year. In November, 1970, a contract was signed between the Housing Authority and the Fourth and Edgewood Corporation for the Turnkey development of Edgewood Terrace. Part of a mixed income community, Edgewood Terrace will contain 334 units—292 efficiency and one-bedroom units in a hi-rise for the elderly and 42 three-bedroom apartments for large families. Construction began in January, 1971, and the estimated completion date is May, 1972. Even though construction starts were limited, planning continued for projects to increase the public housing inventory. Two projects, located within urban renewal areas, will include provisions for homeownership. In the Northwest No. 1 Urban Renewal Area, Site 5, the Authority plans the construction of 51 large family townhouses. With the Redevelopment Land Agency, in February 1971, the Authority tentatively selected as the developer of the site a corporation that produces stock housing modules which are prefabricated and then shipped to be assembled on the site. As with many stock modules, modifications will be required in the specifications in order to comply with the D. C. Housing Codes. The use 4 of modular housing in the District of Columbia could represent a major breakthrough in the public housing program to provide more housing for low income families more economically, in a shorter development time period. Locating and approving both a new elementary school and public housing within the Northwest Urban Renewal Plan created problems which delayed project planning and required revisions to the plan. By the end of the fiscal year, the problems were resolved and the revision to the Urban Renewal Plan awaited District of Columbia City Council approval. In another Urban Renewal Area, the Shaw Area, the Housing Authority is planning to build 54 townhouses for large families on four scattered sites. D. C. Frontiers, Incorporated, a local chapter of Frontiers International, initiated the proposal in October, 1969. This project has experienced long delays because the developer’s price has been beyond the approvable limits established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In October, 1970, the developers selected a new builder in another attempt to reduce the developer’s cost. Concurrent with the submission of the new developer’s cost, the Department of Housing and Urban Development established prototype unit costs for the construction of new dwelling units. Once again, the developer's price was too high. The Authority indicated to HUD that the prototype costs were too low and unworkable for the Washington area. As a result of NCHA and other housing authority protests, HUD indicated that early in fiscal 1972, the prototype costs would be adjusted upward to more accurately reflect construction costs in the Washington area. The replacement of two properties, Knox Hill and Parkside, was still in planning. Because both projects are affected by overall planning in the City, progress was slow. The plans have received close scrutiny from residents assisting in planning and District agencies responsible for planning in Southeast Washington. The Knox Hill site will contain 254 dwelling units including townhouses for large families and walk-up apartments. To obviate the problems inherent in large complexes of rental public housing, the homeownership program is being carefully considered for the future Knox Hill. Planning for the Parkside replacement was suspended while the D. C. Office of Housing Programs completed a comprehensive analysis and plan of the area. Once the plan is complete, the NCHA plan may be extensively modified or entirely eliminated in order to develop the area in accordance with the identified needs and plans of the City. Planning of an additional conventional project, Hopkins Place, SE., continued during the fiscal year. The Authority continued to consult community organizations and potential residents in the area to determine the appropriate development plans for the new project. A number of new turnkey proposals for family units and elderly units were offered to the Authority during the year, but as a result of a lack of program reservations from HUD and its reluctance to grant program approvals, only one of the proposals has progressed. Shortly before the close of the fiscal year, the City granted location and boundary approval for the purchase of The James Apartments, a 151 unit building for elderly occupancy. In addition to planning for the construction of new dwelling units, NCHA’s development program included planning for the construction of community facilities. Construction was initiated on the Valley Green Day Care Center. 5 Funded under the Modernization Program, the Center will be located in six units taken out of occupancy and rehabilitated in accordance with specifications provided by the National Capital Area Child Day Care Association. The Day Care Association will operate the Center once the rehabilitation is complete. Planning continued for the Lincoln Heights Community Center during the fiscal year with the community and the user agencies, D. C. Health and Recreation Departments and Day Care Association, participating in the planning process. The D. C. Department of Health Table 2.—Units Under Development Under Construction______________________ 334 In Planning___________________________ 1020 Sub Total___________________________ 1354 Projects Under Study____________________ 887 Total_________________________________ 2241 agreed to lease 6000 square feet of space in the Community Center to operate a health clinic for the community. The recreation and day care space is planned for the second floor. At the end of the fiscal year, 2241 units were in various stages of development as shown in Table 2 and 3 below. However, the need for low rent housing for low income residents has not abated. Although an exact figure for the actual need of low income housing in the District of Columbia cannot be determined, recent statistics from a variety of sources suggest a continuing need for additional units. The number of substandard housing units is one measure of the need. While the First Count Summary Tape of the 1970 Census identified 8,039 substandard units in the District of Columbia, the D. C. Redevelopment Land Agency estimated that the Neighborhood Development Program Urban Renewal Areas alone contain 7,700 substandard units. Estimates cited in published studies of the housing conditions in the District of Table 3.—Status of Projects Under Development PROJECT NUMBER NAME NUMBER OF UNITS CONVENTIONAL PROJECTS: DC-1-49 HOPKINS PLACE 118 DC-1-54 HIGHLAND EXTENSION DC-1-56 STODDERT MODERNIZATION 42 DC-1-61 KNOX HILL (REPLACEMENT) 254 DC-1-72 PARKSIDE (REPLACEMENT) 350 TURNKEY & ACQUISITION PROJECTS: DC-1-46 EDGEWOOD TERRACE 334 DC-1-70 THE JAMES 151 DC-1-73 SHAW SITES 1, 2, 3 & 4 54 DC-1-74 NOT SELECTED N.W. URA SITE 5 51 l,3b4 SUB-TOTAL PROJECTS UNDER STUDY BOUNDARY APPROVAL DEVELOP- oriN| MENT PLANNING ^CON- PROGRAM STRUCTION INITIAL OPERATING PERIOD ST. MARY’S REPLACEMENT______ 4TH & MASS. AVE., N.W_______ EDGEWOOD TERRACE (SECTION II) 18TH & Q-STS________________ SUB-TOTAL GRAND TOTAL PROJECT ABANDONED 887 2,241 120 288 334 145 6 Columbia range from 25,000 to 100,000 substandard units. A second factor which measures the need is the number of over crowded units in Washington. According to the Census, the number of overcrowded units is 32,160. Of these units, 12,501 were classified as severely overcrowded. Both these figures reflect increases from 1960 Census figures. A third factor which measures the need for low income housing is the amount of rent paid in the District of Columbia. The number of units available at rents which low income families can afford to pay has decreased significantly. Units available for less than $80 monthly rent were reduced by two-thirds between 1960 and 1970 and those available for less than $100 in monthly rent were reduced by one-half during the same time period. These factors indicate that the need for public housing is a continuing one. In addition, increased relocation demands for families displaced by government action and the steadily increasing waiting list for public housing emphasize the need for further development of public housing. The National Capital Housing Authority’s development program intends to respond to the housing conditions and needs which prevail in the District of Columbia. However, reflecting on experience with concentrated public housing complexes, the Authority will place future emphasis on scattered site acquisition and leasing, on elderly units, and on small developments with townhouses which may be available for homeownership. Modernization During the fiscal year, NCHA continued the rehabilitation of older properties in the Authority through the HUD financed modernization program. Phases I and II In Phases I and II Modernization, funds were allocated for the rehabilitation of the interiors and exteriors of Frederick Douglass Dwellings, built in 1941. All the electrical wiring has been replaced; kitchens have been completely renovated and refurbished; the gas distribution system has been replaced; and plumbing and heating replacements have been completed. Frederick Douglass modernization also includes brick veneering of the old frame structures and replacement of all the windows and doors. However, bids received to perform this work far exceeded budgeted funds and at the end of the fiscal year plans were being revised and additional funds requested so that new bids could be submitted. Although repairs and replacement were not as extensive as at Frederick Douglass, Modernization Phases I and II continued at Fort Dupont, Carrollsburg, Richardson, Lincoln Heights, East Capitol, and James Creek. Heating systems were replaced at East Capitol and Richardson during the fiscal year and replacements initiated at Carrollsburg and Fort Dupont. At Carrollsburg and Fort Dupont, kitchen and plumbing modernizations began and are nearly completed. Replacement of doors and windows was initiated at Fort Dupont, Carrollsburg, Richardson, and Lincoln Heights. Included in Modernization Phase I were funds for the construction of a day care center at Valley Green and a community center at Lincoln Heights. Work has begun at Valley Green while the community, user agencies, and the architects continued planning the community center. Phases I and II Modernization were plagued by inflationary costs of labor, materials and vandalism. While $6,588,522 was originally allocated for Phases I and II, the funds were insufficient to cover the actual cost of the work required. Cost estimates were outdated before HUD approved the programs. Thus, attempts to locate contractors to complete the work within the budgetary constraints have delayed completion of Phases I and II and delayed commitment of funds for Modernization. Phase III While NCHA continued Phases I and II, the Authority applied for additional funds under Phase III Modernization to provide compactors at 11 properties as replacements for environmentally undesirable incinerators. Installation of the compactors will enable NCHA to comply with the District of Columbia Pollution Control Regulations and to improve solid waste collection. The $801,800 program was approved by HUD in September, 1970; however, the funds were not received by NCHA by the end of the fiscal year. Phase IV In August, 1970, NCHA also submitted a $1.1 million request for Phase IV Modernization funds to rehabilitate approximately 600 vacant and vandalized units scattered throughout NCHA properties. Approval was granted in January, 1971. Although NCHA requested new funds for this phase of Modernization, HUD agreed to finance Phase IV with the uncommitted funds from Phases I and II and to provide additional funds when required at a later date to complete Phases I and II. The funds will be used to repair or replace electrical wiring; to repair roofs and plumbing; to paint and plaster; to replace ranges, refrig- erators, and kitchen cabinets; and to replace screens, windows, and doors. A major portion of the work is being completed by small independent minority contractors who specialize in home repair and remodelling work. In a unique program, NCHA also contracted with the District of Columbia Department of Corrections to employ work release prisoners and parolees to rehabilitate dwelling units. As skilled and semi-skilled craftsmen and laborers, the men are paid prevailing wage rates and utilize materials and equipment supplied by NCHA. At Lincoln Heights, where the special program was initiated, the work release prisoners and parolees first converted one building into a Halfway House in which some of the workers reside under the supervision of social workers employed by the Department of Corrections. Their continuous presence on the property acts as a deterrent to vandalism. This experimental program has benefited NCHA, the community, and the Department of Corrections. NCHA secured competent construction work at a lower cost, avoiding the private contractor’s built-in increases for vandalism; the community has found a new source of needed security for their area; and, the Corrections Department has developed an innovative rehabilitation program for prisoners and parolees. At the end of the fiscal year, the Corrections work force had completed most of the rehabilitation in the Lincoln Heights Area. Upon completion of the work, the Authority entered into a new contract with the Corrections Department to complete rehabilitation in the Barry Farm area. Work was scheduled to begin early in the next fiscal year. Phase V The Authority also requested additional modernization funds to purchase and install locks, peepholes, window guards, and additional ranges and refrigerators for many of the properties. Advised by HUD that new funding for the modernization program would not be authorized, NCHA planned, in lieu of Phase V Modernization, to incorporate the improvement program in an increased operating budget for fiscal year 1972. 463-571 0-72-2 9 II I URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AREAS A SOUTHWEST 0 NORTHEAST C NORTHWEST D COLUMBIA PLAZA E PROPOSED ANACOSTIA BOLLING F PROPOSED SHAW G FORT LINCOLN Gl FORT LINCOLN-PROJECT NO.I © 0 STUS 0 ©7 ©F © © 0= © Rffl © 0 A NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC HOUSING^ NATIONAL CAPITAL HOUSING AUTHORITY NO. NAME DWELLING UNITS S ST. MARY’S APARTMENTS 24 .] J V V STREET HOUSES 18 "/ W WILLISTON APARTMENTS 31 II I FORT DUPONT DWELLINGS 322 2 ELLEN WILSON DWELLINGS 134 3 JAMES CREEK DWELLINGS 267 * 4 FREDRICK 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 15 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 29 SIBLEY PLAZA 246 30 HOPKINS APARTMENTS 158 31 SHERIDAN TERRACE 183 34 PARK MORTON APARTMENTS 174 35 GREENLEAF ADDITION 32 36-A WOODLAND TERRACE 234 36B KENTUCKY COURTS 163 36C CARROLL APARTMENTS 60 37 GARFIELD TERRACE 279 38 EASTGATE GARDENS 230 39 A LE DROIT APARTMENTS 124 39B GREENLEAF EXTENSION 4 40 LANGSTON ADDITION 34 42 DEANWOOD GARDENS 56 43 POTOMAC GARDENS 352 44 MONTANA TERRACE 155 46 EDGEWOOD TERRACE * 334 48 6TH AND H STREET LOCATION 49 HOPKINS PLACE ** 118 50 SURSUM CORDA 28 51 VALLEY GREEN 350 53 HIGHLAND MODERNIZATION 196 54 HIGHLAND EXTENSION ** 56 STODDERT MODERNIZATION ** 42 57 FORT DUPONT ADDITION 87 60 CLARIDGE TOWERS 343 61 KNOX HILL REPLACEMENT#* 254 62 HORIZON HOUSE 105 64 FT. LINCOLN URA-PROJ. NO.I 120 65 JUDICIARY HOUSE 270 67 CAPITOL VIEW PLAZA-ELDERLY 228 68 HARVARD TOWERS 193 69 REGENCY HOUSE 160 70 THE JAMES APARTMENTS ** 151 72 PARKSIDE REPLACEMENT** 350 73 SHAW URA-SITES 1,2.3 S4-* 54 74 NORTHWEST ONE URA-SITE** 51 7 5 CAPITOL VIEW PLAZA-HOPLIF 92 PROJECTS UNjLR CONSTRUCTION *■ PROJECTS UNDER PLANNING Management and Maintenance Sound and responsive management and maintenance is the primary and continuing function of the public housing program. Without efficient and effective management, the public housing program cannot serve its residents. Lack of operating revenue clearly affects the quality of the management and maintenance of public housing. During fiscal year 1970, the Authority announced a new rent scale which was designed to increase operating revenues by $924,000 or an average of $11.00 per unit per month for all units excluding those subject to a flat rent or welfare rent. However, a rent strike and court orders delayed implementation of the new rent scale. With the start of fiscal 1971, the Housing Authority instituted a new graded rent scale, the first change in the NCHA rent scale since 1962. Implemented in two stages, July 1970 and January 1971, the rent scale is graded to resident income with minimum and maximum rents related to unit size. While specific properties retained flat rent schedules, the separate schedule of welfare rents was abolished. The Authority also had implemented changes in compliance with the Brooke Amendment part of the Housing Act of 1969 which limits rent charged to public housing residents to 25% of a family’s income as defined by HUD. When determining each resident’s rent, the graded or flat rent scale is used, unless the 25% limitation applies. The effect of the new rent schedule was to increase the number of residents paying rents at both ends of the scale, without providing needed additional revenue. Although the new rent scale was implemented at the start of the fiscal year, the rent strike cases were not settled until June, 1971, a year and a half after the start of the strike. The NCHA Legal Office was embroiled in court action throughout the fiscal year in attempts to halt the rent strike and obtain some of the delinquent rent owed the Authority. Originally, NCHA initiated nearly 800 suits against rent strikers for non-payment of rent. While more than half of the residents sued made agreements to settle their overdue accounts without jury trials, nearly 300 cases remained on the court docket. To expedite disposition of the cases, the court consolidated cases into three groups for trial. In each grouping, the Landlord and Tenant Branch of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia gave NCHA legal possession of the dwelling units of the residents on rent strike and found that the residents owed back rent in proportion to the conditions of their dwelling units at the start of the rent strike. On the average, the residents were found to owe 88% of their back rent claimed by the Authority. As a result of the judgments in favor of NCHA, the Authority was forced to request writs of eviction for non-payment of rent and for non-compliance with court judgments. One group of residents, represented by Neighborhood Legal Services, filed appeals to stay the eviction. On June 24, 1971, their final appeal was denied by the United States Supreme Court. The year and a half rent strike was virtually ended. The rent strike and the resultant court cases raised an important question for NCHA regarding its management and maintenance responsibilities to its residents. As a Federal agency, NCHA has been exempt from compliance with the local housing codes. However, during the previous fiscal year the Authority entered into a voluntary agreement with the D. C. Department of Licenses and Inspections that each newly occupied unit would be inspected for compliance with the D. C. Housing Code. The Court, in effect, has confirmed this posture in charging back rent in proportion to the condition of the dwelling unit. Some of the agreements stemming from court judgments require that the Housing Authority complete certain repairs as a condition of payment. Maintenance Effective maintenance of the public housing dwelling units is an essential element of good management. However, over the past years the cost of the effective maintenance has. soared, reflecting a 66% increase during a five year period. 12 With the increased cost of effective maintenance, the number of vacant units has climbed at an alarming rate. Certainly age and obsolescence of many properties contributed to the rapid increase. But a lack of funds and personnel to adequately maintain the properties significantly influenced the rise. Increased costs and inadequate staffing forced the Authority to abandon its preventive maintenance program. The Authority found that resident requests for repairs outstripped the Authority’s ability to complete the requested routine work in addition to routine maintenance of public spaces. If the Authority was unable to adequately maintain occupied units, it clearly lacked the money and personnel to repair vacant units. The combination of poorly maintained units and long standing vacancies helped create an undesirable living environment which further contributed to increased vacancies. Compounding the problem was the increased vandalism of vacant units, occupied units and the Authority maintenance shops. The threat of vandals and the lack of security amid vacant units used for drugs and other illicit activities added to increased vacancies. Two year costs of vandalism in equipment and manpower totalled more than $2.5 million. Conditions in vacant units were exacerbated and the limited money and staff available to rehabilitate the units were insufficient to complete the repairs necessary for reoccupancy. Thus, while demands on maintenance operations and operating expenses increased, rental income decreased and Authority maintenance staffs were forced to defer maintenance work. As a result of these conditions, HUD agreed to provide increased subsidies for an improved maintenance program and additional maintenance staffing starting in the next fiscal year. HUD task forces reviewing NCHA operations in February estimated that in order to bring all dwelling units up to the D. C. Housing Code standards, NCHA would need to expend more than $11 million in maintenance work. The increased subsidy evidences HUD’s new willingness to assist NCHA in its efforts to improve services to its residents and a recognition of the serious problems facing NCHA. Efficiency Through Automation During this fiscal year, NCHA sought to update its accounting operations through the installation of automatic data processing. In December, 1970, the Authority initiated central rent collection procedures, removing rent collection from the Management Offices. Residents receive monthly statements which reflect all charges owed to the Authority and are required to mail their payment in a check or money order to a central location. Not only does the central rent collection procedure improve the operating efficiency of the Authority, but it increases the security of the Management Offices and personnel as they are no longer required to handle large sums of money. When fully implemented, the ADP system, designed by the Management Data Systems Corporation of Madison, Wisconsin, is expected to handle central and all tenant accounting and related operations. In addition, the data processing system will provide quick access to updated tenant population profiles which are necessary for informed management policy decisions. 13 Private Management During the fiscal year, NCHA continued to experiment with private management of public housing. For the third year, Shannon and Luchs, a private real estate management firm in Washington, D. C., was under contract with NCHA for the management of Sibley Plaza and Montana Terrace. According to the contract, Shannon and Luchs, for a management fee, assumed substantially all management and maintenance responsibilities and NCHA assumed some extra ordinary maintenance responsibilities for the 401 units. To further emphasize the experimental nature of private management, Shannon and Luchs entered into a separate $30,000 contract with HUD to conduct a demonstration of resident involvement in the operations of the properties. With the opening of Capitol View Plaza, NCHA entered into its second Turnkey II contract with the Capitol View Development Corporation, a group of concerned residents of Far east Washington who initiated the original plans for the housing community. As with Shannon and Luchs, Capitol View Development Corporation, for a management fee based on rental collections, assumed responsibility for designated management and maintenance operations. Unlike the Shannon and Luchs arrangement, rental collection for Capitol View residents is included in the NCHA central rent collection system. During NCHA’s experience with private management, NCHA continues to realize both its advantages and disadvantages. Private management has successfully developed strong resident-management relations that may sometimes elude conventional management, and a strong sense of community pride. It also provides a greater degree of flexibility in obtaining services and supplies that NCHA, as a Federal agency, constrained by Federal law and regulation, lacks. Although not necessarily outweighing the advantages, there are observable disadvantages to private management, namely difficulty in achieving proper uniformity in operations. Effective monitoring and evaluation should correct these'disadvantages. It also has been determined that private management costs do exceed slightly NCHA operating costs. 14 Because of the advantages and despite the disadvantages of private management, NCHA is considering additional private management contracts to permit definitive evaluation of the private management experience. It remains a question whether private management of public housing with increased community participation does, in fact, reduce operating costs and improve the living environment of public housing. Housing Low Income Families In fiscal 1971 the NCHA provided housing for 1,181 new families including 383 families displaced by governmental action. While the demand for large family units (4-, 5-, 6-bed-rooms) increased throughout the city during the past fiscal year, displaced families continued to occupy the majority of the large family units. Of the 103 large units newly occupied, 95 were occupied by displaced families. A total of 5,013 applications were on hand at the end of the fiscal year. Of those applications, 1,707 required efficiency and one-bedroom units. For this category, 224 units (8%) became available for new occupants in NCHA managed housing. For the 4, 5, and 6 bedroom units, applications on hand at the end of the fiscal year totalled 1,694 while only 103 large units (7%) became available on turnover. The non-transfer turnover rate for the whole Authority was 8.7%, a total of 913 units. Of those units vacated, 27.8% were abandoned without notice. Only 7.2% were vacated because the occupants were over income and 7.7% were vacated for the occupants’ failure to pay rent. During the fiscal year, the Authority completed 441 intra-agency resident transfers. Although the public housing inventory rose to 10,572, exclusive of those units under private management, only 9,553 dwelling units were occupied at the end of the fiscal year. A total of 694 units were vacant and vandalized, requiring in many cases extensive rehabilitation to return them to occupancy. Another 125 units were utilized for purposes other than dwelling space including community centers, health facilities, day care centers, and storage. Tables 4 and 5, following, summarize the applications and occupancy statistics for fiscal 1971. 15 Table 4.—Applications for Housing Fiscal Year 1971 Total 0-1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR 6-BR Beginning of Year 4640 2012 461 849 929 334 55 Received during Year 4531 2075 1399 681 270 83 23 Displaced 431 166 105 80 44 24 12 Non-Displaced 4100 1909 1294 601 226 59 11 Total Applications for Year 9171 4087 1860 1530 1199 417 78 Housed During Year 1181 590 284 204 61 40 2 Displaced 383 100 68 120 57 36 2 Non-Displaced 798 490 216 84 4 4 _ Applications Withdrawn (Net) -2977 -1790 -685 -418 -51 -17 -16 Displaced +39 -63 -19 +46 +49 +29 -3 Non-Displaced -3016 -1727 -666 -464 -100 -46 -13 Applications on Hand End of Year 5013 1707 891 908 1087 360 60 Displaced 242 24 365 40 91 35 17 Non-Displaced 4771 1683 856 868 996 325 43 Veterans Servicemen 259 53 _ 23 141 42 _ Other 4512 1630 856 845 855 283 43 Bedroom Size as Percentage of Appli- cations on Hand at End of Year 100.0 34.0 17.8 18.1 21.7 7.2 1.2 Table 5.— Units Occupied Fiscal Year 1971 Total 0-BR 1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR 6-BR Total ____ 1605 380 346 388 317 117 50 7 Nontransfer ____ 1181 339 251 284 204 61 40 2 Percent of Total ____ 73.6 89.2 72.5 73.2 64.4 52.1 80.0 28.6 Displaced 383 56 44 68 120 57 36 2 Percent of Total ____ 23.9 14.7 12.7 17.5 37.9 48.7 72.0 28.6 Non-Displaced 798 283 207 216 84 4 4 . Percent of Total ____ 49.7 74.5 59.8 55.7 26.5 3.4 8.0 . Transfers 424 41 95 104 113 56 10 5 Percent of Total ____ 26.4 10.8 27.5 26.8 35.6 47.9 20.0 71.4 16 Table 6.—Housing Under NCHA Management June 30, 1971 Area No. Program property name and location Housing Year Dwelling Dwelling units by number of bedrooms Act built units ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on site 1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR 6-BR 1 GREENLEAF GARDENS, 1, N, Canal and 3rd SW GREENLEAF ADDITION, NW corner of Delaware Ave. & M 1949 1959 456 16 294 86 40 20 .... St. SW 1954 1960 32 .. 24 4 4 ... JAMES CREEK DWELLINGS, M, O, Half and 1st SW 1949 1942 267 44 196 8 9 ... 10 SYPHAX GARDENS, 0, P, 2nd & Half SW 1954 1960 174 .. 126 48 ... GREENLEAF EXTENSION, 3rd and M Sts., SW 1954 1965 4 .. — 4 ... Total 933 60 640 146 57 20 10 II ARTHUR CAPPER DWELLINGS, 2nd, 7th M & Virginia Ave., SE. 1949 1958 612 80 419 88 25 ... CARROLLSBURG DWELLINGS, 1, M, 3rd 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 **60 ... Total______________________.______________________________________________________ 1120 308 647 140 25 BARRY FARM DWELLINGS, Summer & Wade Roads & Firth Sterling Ave. SE__________________________________ 1949 1943 SHERIDAN TERRACE, Sheridan Road between Howard & Pomercy Roads SE_._________________________________ 1954 1960 Total.......................................................... FREDERICK DOUGLASS DWELLINGS, Alabama Ave. & 21st St SE________________________________________________ 1937 1941 STANTON DWELLINGS, Alabama & Stanton Road SE_______ 1949 1952 WOODLAND TERRACE, Langston Place, Bruce Place, Reynolds Place and Ainger Place SE___________________________ 1954 1964 Total..._______________________________________________________ LANGSTON, Benning Road & 21st NE_____________________ PWA 1937 LANGSTON ADDITION, 21st & H NE______________________ 1954 1965 FORT LINCOLN, 2855 Bladensburg Road NE______________ 1965 1971 Total__________________________________________________________ 432 ___________ 194 190 38 ................. 10 183___________ 100 45 29 9 ........... 615 ................ 294 235 67 9 10 303 __________ 289 ....................... 4 ......... 10 348 2Q 96 136 56 40 ___________ 234 36 42 78 39 26 13 885_________56 427 214_________99________66__________23 ”274 180 88 6 ............................. — 34______________________ 26 8 _____________________ 120 **120 _____________________________________________________ 428 300 88 32 8 .................... KELLY MILLER DWELLINGS, W, 5th and Oakdale Place, NW__ 1937 1941 PARK-MORTON APARTMENTS, Park Road and Morton St. NW. 1954 1961 ST. MARY'S, 24th between G & H NW___________ 1934 1938 V STREET, V between 4th & 5th NW____________ 1934 1938 WILLISTON, W between 2nd & 4th NW___________ 1934 1937 GARFIELD TERRACE, 11th & Florida Ave. NW____ 1954 1965 LEDROIT, 4th 8. W Sts., NW__________________ 1954 1965 169 54 87 174 .. 174 24 16 8 18 .. 18 31 25 6 179 **228 ... 124 **106 ... - - 42 9 ______________________ 18__________________________________ Total. EAST CAPITOL DWELLINGS, E. Capitol at DC Line NE and SE.. 1949 1955 EASTGATE GARDENS, 50th St., 51st St., E, F & G Sts., Drake Place & 50th Place SE______________________________ 1957 1966 LINCOLN HEIGHTS, 50th and Washington Place NE________ 1949 1945 RICHARDSON DWELLINGS, 53rd & Clay Sts., NE___________ 1949 1953 DEANWOOD GARDENS, 54th, 55th & Clay Sts., NE_________ 1957 1965 Total._________________________________________________________ HIGHLAND DWELLINGS, Condon Terrace & Atlantic St., SE.... Lanham 1942 HIGHLAND DWELLINGS ADDITION, 8th, 9th, Valley Ave., & Wheeler Road SE____________ ________ _______ . 1949 1954 VALLEY GREEN, Wheele’r Road’Varney’Pl’ Valley Ave.’, SE"" .1957 1964 Total.......................................................... BENNING TERRACE, G between 47th & Alabama Ave., SE_ 1954 1960 FORT DUPONT DWELLINGS, Ridge & Anacostia Roads, SE.... 1937 1940 STODDERT DWELLINGS, Ridge & Anacostia Roads, SE____ Lanham 1942 STODDERT TERRACE, Ridge Road between Anacostia Ave., & DSE________________________________________________ 1954 1960 FORT DUPONT EXTENSION, Corner of Ridge Road and D Street SE_________________________________________ 1965 1971 819 429 293 88__________9.................. „ "ST? 36 204 157 147 33 .........~ 230 .................... 124 57 22 27 440 66 225 107 42 .................... 190___________ 67 80 19 24 __________ 56___________________________________________ 56_________________ 686 66 292 187 61 80 208 28 99 53 3 9 16 246 ................ 72 124 36 14 ........... 320 37 60 74 74 75 __________ 774 65 231 251 113 98 16 274 __________ 48 176 25 25 __________ 322 110 157 55 _______________________________ 46 ................ 44 _______________________________ 2 200 .................. 8 88 72 32 .......... 87 ......................... 87............................. Total....................................................... KENILWORTH COURTS, Kenilworth Ave. between Douglass & Eastern Ave. NE_________________________________ 1954 1959 PARKSIDE ADDITION, Anacostia Ave. between Grant & Hayes, NE_________________________________________ 1949 1957 Total....................................................... HOPKINS APARTMENTS, K, L, 12th, 14th Streets, SE_ 1954 1960 KENTUCKY COURTS, 13th, 14th,C&D Sts., Kentucky Ave.,SE. 1954 1964 POTOMAC GARDENS, I, G, 12th and 13th Streets SE__ 1961 1968 842 110 257 319 97 57 2 422 ................. 36 207 119 60 .......... 42 ................. 42 ........................................ 464 ................ 78 207 119 60 .......... 158 ................ 108 50 ............................... 163 76**118 45 _________________________________________ 352 **144 64 144 _______________________________ Total....................................................................... 673 262 217 194 Total. 448 448 Total 353 352 1965 1965 1965 1965 1965 1967 1967 1968 1964 1964 CLARIDGE TOWERS, 12th & M Streets NW. HORIZON HOUSE, 1150-12th Street NW... JUDICIARY HOUSE, 461 H St., NW________ HARVARD TOWERS, 1845 Harvard Street NW. REGENCY HOUSE, 5201 Connecticut Ave. NW. 343 **343 105 **105 271 •‘269 2 . 193 **193 .... 160 **159 1 . Grand Total (Projects)............................................... 10,118 2,761 3,671 2,294 859 445 88 Housing Under Private Management: CAPITOL VIEW PLAZA, 5901 East Capitol Street.......... 1965 1971 320 **228 __________ 37 37 18 __________ SIBLEY PLAZA, North Capitol and M Streets NW______________ 1961 1968 246 **144 80 ................ 22 _____________________ MONTANA TERRACE, Montana Ave., 15th & Bryant Sts. NE. . 1961 1968 155 ____________________ 89 36 14 16 Total............................................................................... 721 372 80 126 95 32 16 Special Programs: Rehabilitation—DC 1-41.................................................. 10 ................... 4 5 1 ......... Sursum Corda—DC 1-50.________________________________________________,.. 28 ...................... 10 10 4 4 Leased Housing—DC 1-55__________________________________________________ 220 16 13 33 102 33 23 Acquisition—DC 1-58....................................................... 109 1 16 61 17 3 11 Total.................................................................... 367 17 29 108 134 41 38 Grand Total (All Housing)............................................. 11,293 3,150 3,780 2,615 1,088 518 142 Units for the elderly—2178. Ill IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII XIV XV XVI XIII XVII XVIII XIX Community Involvement and Social Services The National Capital Housing Authority recognizes that to provide housing units cannot be the single goal of the public housing program. Rather, because the public housing program involves people, not only structures, the Authority strives to attain a second goal— to build viable communities. Through resident involvement in housing authority affairs and the provision of social services, NCHA made significant progress toward that goal during fiscal year 1971. Communication and Involvement The National Capital Housing Authority Advisory Board began its first year as official participants in Authority affairs on September 25, 1970. Sworn in by Mayor-Commissioner Walter E. Washington, the thirty-three member Board, with twenty-two elected residents and eleven appointed members, was charged with the responsibility of advising NCHA in its policies and procedures which affect the residents of public housing in the District of Columbia. The Board met monthly to discuss the problems facing the Authority and its residents. After identifying many of the problems, the Board established committees on maintenance, modernization, and resident-management relations to investigate the problems and make recommendations to NCHA for specific actions. An Executive Committee met more frequently to discuss immediate problems and to establish agendas for Board meetings. Any decision reached by the Executive Committee was brought to the full Board for discussion at their regular meetings. Although the Board’s first months were difficult with low attendance and disorganization, by the end of the fiscal year active Board members were involved in important policy questions of NCHA. A committee of Board members advised the Deputy Mayor in the selection of a new Executive Director. Near the end of the fiscal year, the Board played an integral role in drafting the NCHA Grievance Procedure which will be implemented in fiscal 1972. The Grievance Procedure will afford residents and applicants a fair hearing before an impartial hearing officer. During the first six months the Grievance Procedure is implemented, the Advisory Board will consider revising the Procedure to provide a hearing panel of residents and NCHA staff to consider all grievances. While the Board dealt with single Authoritywide issues, the members also represented the ideas and problems of the residents of their specific management areas to the Authority. The Board served as the voice of the many residents in improving the living conditions of all NCHA properties. It provided a link between the communities and NCHA. For the next fiscal year and subsequent years, the Advisory Board will operate within an approved budget which will allocate funds for a full time staff secretary or staff assistance. The success of the Advisory Board marks the beginning of new avenues of resident participation in Authority affairs and of increased communication between the Authority and its residents. 18 Communication between the Authority and its residents was developed further through the publication of the first Authority-wide resident newsletter, Residences and People. First published in August 1970, the “RAP” is published monthly and reports the activities in the various management areas, new policies and actions of the Authority, and information on community programs of interest to public housing residents. Social Services The Management Division’s Office of Community Organization and Social Services continued to assist residents in securing needed social services. To combat the serious drug problems which exist in several areas, the Authority developed close ties with the Metropolitan Police Department. As an additional aid, Youth Courtesy Patrols, comprised of teenagers in the neighborhood, were established at Eastgate, Lincoln Heights, and Kenilworth. Authority properties were also served by drug rehabilitation progams in conjunction with increased patrolling. The Narcotics Treatment Administration funded a major treatment program in Far East Washington, affecting Kenilworth Courts, East Capitol, Lincoln Heights, and Stoddert Terrace. Discussions have been held in other management areas in attempts to establish additional drug rehabilitation programs. Locating Resources Resident Councils at many properties were actively involved in locating social service resources for residents of their properties. Through the Authority, Resident Councils at Kelly Miller, Highland Dwellings, Frederick Douglass Dwellings, and Valley Green opened Sesame Street Viewing Centers for the children on the properties. Some of the mothers attended training sessions so that viewing centers could also be opened in individual homes to accommodate more children. At Kelly Miller and Barry Farm, after initial contact by NCHA, the Resident Council secured the services of the Neighborhood Consumer Information Center for the residents. By the same mechanism, the Widening Horizons Program and National Park Service serve many properties. To provide services for public housing residents, the Authority continued to receive assistance from a variety of public and private groups and agencies. Students from local universities and colleges, including Federal City College, Howard University, and the University of Maryland, and Cornell University have volunteered throughout the year. The District of Columbia Department of Recreation and departments from local colleges have organized recreation and craft progams for youth and adults. Health and medical care is available at many properties through the District of Columbia Department of Human Resources. Although most of the local groups acted in concert with the Authority, some groups acted as advocates for the residents and occasional adversaries of the Authority, including the City Wide Tenants Union and the Neighborhood Legal Services. All of the groups have provided valuable services for the residents of public housing. 19 Community Development Programs Throughout the year, the Social Services program focused on community development. COSS staff and the managers worked closely with residents and Resident Councils to develop leadership and community organization skills designed to determine the needs of the community. They also assisted in forming viable community organizations which could participate in community affairs and improve resident-management relations. Through the COSS Tenant Advisory Council, a group of residents has organized a fund raising group which will raise and distribute money for special projects of the residents. Community development meant both community organization and economic development. Several properties established Skills Training Centers with funds from Neighborhood Planning Councils and the District of Columbia Youth Opportunity Services. At Eastgate, one of the locations, skills training included wood working classes, sewing classes, hairdressing classes, and typing. The Lincoln Heights Skills Center sponsored a 22 week photography class for youths between the ages of 12-18. While the Center supplied the cameras and film, the Department of Housing and Urban Development photographers volunteered their time and the HUD photo laboratory to teach the youths photography as both an art form and as a possible career. Through the Lincoln Heights Skills Center, the youths also assisted the Volunteers in International Technical Assistance (VITA) in the construction of an imaginative modular playground to serve the community. To assist NCHA residents secure employment, COSS continued to operate a Tenant Employment Assistance Program, locating jobs through the Job Bank of the District of Columbia Manpower Administration. Nearly 100 residents found employment through the Job Bank Referral Service. Organized elderly residents focused attention on providing easy access to groceries for the elderly of NCHA. Two new cooperative food markets operated by residents opened during the fiscal year. In October 1970, the Claridge Towers Cooperative opened and in May 1971, the Garfield Terrace Sunflower Market opened. The Buyers Club of Claridge Towers operates the Claridge Co-op which is jointly funded by the United.Planning Organization (UPO) and Model Cities. After three years of planning and community organization, the Garfield Terrace Sunflower Community Market received an economic development grant from the area Neighborhood Planning Council, another UPO funded program. Both cooperatives provide the elderly with necessary commodities frequently at lower prices and in buildings where they reside. 20 Finances During the 1971 fiscal year the National Capital Housing Authority experienced a steadily worsening financial situation. Like many housing authorities across the country, operating expenses far exceeded the Authority’s income. Rental income has been unable to keep pace with increased administrative costs, increased maintenance costs, increased utility costs, and increased material and labor costs. While the per unit monthly rental income for all Title II properties, exclusive of those under private management, decreased from $58.02 to $51.66 between the fiscal years 1966 and 1971, routine operating expenditures per unit month increased from $51.75 to $79.10 during the same period of time. Administrative costs rose from $9.59 per unit month in 1966 to $14.11 per unit month in 1971. Although all federal employees received pay raises, the cost did decrease between 1970 and 1971 because HUD required the Authority to reduce the size of the administrative staff despite intensified demands. In the same five year time span, utility costs have soared from $16.66 per unit month to $24.70 per unit month. Maintenance costs reflected the greatest increase. In fiscal 1966, $18.13 per unit month was expended for routine maintenance; in fiscal 1971, the per unit month expenditures soared to $34.38. Although during the last five years nearly 2500 units were added to the public housing stock and the whole economy was spinning in an inflationary cycle, NCHA’s cost increased disproportionately to the rental income. Total operating expenditures including routine and non routine expenditures increased from $57.14 per unit month to $105.25. The 1966 operating reserve of $38.81 per unit was depleted and in fiscal year 1971, the operating deficit was $1.62 per unit month. Increased federal subsidy ($50.66 per unit month) provided the revenue to meet expenses. Even with increased federal subsidies and special funding transactions, NCHA has been unable to meet the spiralling expenses. Compounding the financial problems are the $1,247,000 tenant accounts receivable (partly caused by tenant strike) recorded at the end of the fiscal year and the 694 vacant units not earning any rental income. NCHA’s financial condition reflected the conditions which prevailed in many urban housing authorities. As a result of the HUD comprehensive survey, completed in February 1971, HUD recognized that without its assistance NCHA’s program would decline further. Therefore, HUD recommended a five year financial plan to be implemented in fiscal year 1972 which was designed to restore solvency to the Authority. At the close of the fiscal year the Authority had outstanding the following Project Notes sold on the private market to finance the development and construction of low cost housing and the rehabilitation of properties under the Modernization Programs: Project Notes 4th Series 1970 .....................$ 9,223,000 Project Notes 1st Series 1971 ........................$14,088,WO Project Notes 2nd Series 1971 . ...................$ 2,535,000 Total Outstanding.......$25,846,000 The Authority also had outstanding Preliminary Notes in the total amount of $208,959.13 due to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for Projects in preliminary planning. No new Housing Authority Bonds were sold in the fiscal year 1971; Table 7 indicates the status of bonded indebtedness as of June 30, 1971. Investment of Funds The Annual Contributions Contract requires that excess monies on deposit in the General Fund be invested in securities approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Earnings from investments in U.S. Government Securities for fiscal year 1971 totaled $222,840. Of this amount $96,824 applied to development funds invested, and $125,016 applied to management and modernization funds invested. This revenue, as applicable, is used to help defray development and operating costs. At the end of the fiscal year, $704,922 or 66 percent of the Authority’s available monies on deposit in the General Fund were invested. Additional investments made from debt service funds on deposit with fiscal agents earned $15,773. 21 Accrued Payment in Lieu of Taxes Each year the National Capital Housing Authority is obligated under contract to make a payment in lieu of taxes to the District of Columbia, This payment equals ten percent of the net shelter rent charged for public housing in the District. The payment due is appreciably higher than the taxes which the District previously collected from owners of slum sites and vacant areas on which the majority of the properties are constructed. The difference between the taxes which would be paid previously by a private owner of improved property and the Authority’s payments in lieu of taxes represents the local subsidy. The District of Columbia gives no cash subsidy to the Authority. During the fiscal year the amount accrued to be paid in lieu of taxes approximated $335,225. However, because of the financial position of NCHA, the Department of Housing and Urban Development recommended that the Authority request a waiver of payment from the District government. Table 7.—Status of Bonded Indebtedness New Housing Authority Bonds Final Total Maturity Date Issue Retired Outstanding First Issue May 1, 1994 $ 11,420,000 $ 5,427,000 $ 5,993,000 Second Issue May 1, 1994 7,020,000 2,154,000 4,866,000 Third Issue May 1, 1994 6,010,000 69,000 5,941,000 Fourth Issue May 1, 1994 10,505,000 2,635,000 7,870,000 Fifth Issue May 1, 1994 7,505,000 1,679,000 5,826,000 Sixth Issue May 1, 1994 5,670,000 785,000 4,885,000 Seventh Issue May 1, 2000 15,650,000 2,220,000 13,430,000 Eighth Issue May 1, 2001 2,765,000 407,000 2,358,000 Ninth Issue May 1, 2004 7,990,000 880,000 7,110,000 Tenth Issue May 1, 2005 4,790,000 380,000 4,410,000 Eleventh Issue May 1, 2005 7,740,000 770,000 6,970,000 Twelfth Issue May 1, 2007 5,015,000 200,000 4,815,000 Thirteenth Issue May 1, 2007 5,250,000 265,000 4,985,000 Fourteenth Issue May 1, 2007 10,075,000 525,000 9,550,000 Fifteenth Issue May 1, 2008 2,265,000 60,000 2,205,000 Sixteenth Issue May 1, 2008 6,690,000 240,000 6,450,000 Seventeenth Issue May 1, 1994 1,400,000 90,000 1,310,000 Eighteenth Issue May 1, 2008 4,000,000 125,000 3,875,000 Nineteenth Issue May 1, 2009 2,485,000 25,000 2,460,000 Total — $124,245,000 $18,936,000 $105,309,000 Series “A" Bonds Sept. 1, 2000 3,744,000 2,095,000 1,649,000 Series “B” Bonds Sept. 1, 2000 *3,263,000 *3,263,000 0 Total All Issues • $131,252,000 $24,294,000 $106,958,000 * Refinanced in 1964 by Temporary Notes; currently part of Project Notes, Fourth Series, 1970. 22 Table 8.—National Capital Housing Authority Statement of Receipts and Expenditures Rents $6,650,978 Maintenance $4,412,476 Miscellaneous Rents, Charges, & Other Income $35,733 Utilities $3,136,475 Interest on Funds Invested $126,016 Administration $1,809,998 Federal Contributions: Debt Service $6,693,481 Improvements and Additions $60,075 Operations $6,300,075 Tenant Services $86,070 Leased Dwellings $353,253 Employee Benefits & Terminal Leave $423,490 Total Receipts $20,159,536 Insurance & Other $30,996 Collection Losses $162,493 Amortization and Interest $6,711,919 Rent for Leased Dwellings $395,419 To Defray Existing Cumulative Deficit $2,930,125 Total Expenditures $20,159,536 23 Table 9.—Consolidated Balance Sheet June 30, 1971 U.S. Housing Acts Demonstration Program Alley Con- Dwelling solidated Act ASSETS Cash: With Treasury On Hand and in Transit Accounts Receivable1 Accrued Receivables Investments Debt Amortization Funds Deferred Charges , Land, Structures & Equipment2 $ 344,087 _ 28,218 _ 2,341,047 _ 15,000 _ 704,922 _ 7,853,002 _ 420,428 _ 162,646,579 $178,400 $ 4,088 385,487 $ 344,087 28,218 2,345,135 15,000 704,922 7,853,002 420,428 163,210,466 Total Assets $174,353,283 $178,400 $389,575 $174,921,258 LIABILITIES AND SURPLUS Liabilities: Accounts Payable Notes Payable(HUD& Non-HUD) 3__ Accrued Liabilities Deferred Credits Fixed Liabilities-Bonds Payable-non-HUD 2,216,179 _ 26,054,959 2,920,363 _ 57,412 _ ____ 106,958,000 _ 1,725 558 2,217,904 26,054,959 2,920,363 57,970 106,958,000 Total Liabilities ____ $138,206,913 _ $ 2,283 $138,209,196 SURPLUS Government Investment 35,985,147 164,750 387,292 36,537,189 Non-Federal Contributions 161,223 13,650 _ 174,873 Total Surplus ____ $ 36,146,370 $178,400 $387,292 $ 36,712,062 Total Liabilities and Surplus ____ $174,353,283 $178,400 $389,575 $174,921,258 Inter-Project receivables of $416,762 and a like amount of payables were eliminated from this consolidation: 1 Estimated uncollectible: U.S. Housing Act $203,000+1,000 Alley Dwelling Act =$204,000. 2 Excludes uncompleted portions of contracts in process: U.S. Housing Act, $6,609,883. 3 Non-HUD Notes are secured by requisition agreement whereby HUD guarantees payment at maturity: U.S. Housing Act, $25,846,000. U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1972 O - 463-571 24 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. Assessed Purchase Address Lot Square Value Price DC 1-64 Fort Lincoln 2855 Bladensburg Road NE_______________ 20 4325 $1,547,435 $1,686,485.77 DC 1-67 Capitol View Plaza 5901 East Capitol Street_______________ 53, 54, 55 5279 $2,520,379 $6,314,770.25 IINIVFRSITY nF I nillSVIl I F I IRRARIFS U005 25075 393 0 HD 7288.78 .U52 W374 1971