Lyndon B. Johnson photo

Special Message to the Congress on Housing and Community Development.

January 27, 1964

To the Congress of the United States:

Our nation stands today at the threshold of the greatest period of growth in its history.

By 1970, we shall have to build at least two million new homes a year to keep up with the growth of our population. We will need many new classrooms, uncounted miles of new streets and utility lines, and an unprecedented volume of water and sewerage facilities. We will need stores and churches and libraries, distribution systems for goods, transportation systems for people and communication systems for ideas.

Above all, we will need more land, new housing and orderly community development. for most of this population growth will be concentrated in the fringe areas around existing metropolitan communities.

I. HOUSING

Fortunately, the old pressures on our housing supply arising from depression and war-caused shortages have largely been overcome. But new pressures will develop as the number of new families rises rapidly in the late sixties. And great numbers of our families have yet to secure the true goal of every parent: not merely housing but adequate housing.

Now is the time to direct the productive capacity of our home-building industry to the great needs of the neglected segments of our population--this is necessary in its own right and vital to the continued strength of the industry.

Satisfaction with the 1,600,000 new housing starts in 1963 cannot obscure the fact that too many minorities, too many families of low income, too many elderly, too many rural families, and too many military families have not shared in the housing improvement which those units represent.

Unless we act and act now, the promises of the National Housing Policy will remain empty slogans to large numbers in these groups.

A. Housing for minorities

Over a year ago, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order designed to assure opportunities for equal access to federally assisted housing. Already a half million dwelling units are--or soon will be--subject to that order. This Administration will continue and strengthen its efforts to translate the pledge of that order into meaningful practice. The program proposed in this message will broaden the range of housing choices open and realistically available to those whom discrimination has too long restricted.

B. Housing for low-income families

For over a quarter of a century, the low-rent public housing program has been the primary source of additional decent housing for families of low income. Over 1,500 communities--350 of them since 1961--have recognized the need for supplementing private efforts by creating housing authorities to build and operate public housing with federal assistance.

The 100,000 units of federally-aided public housing authorized by the Housing Act of 1961 are now all committed. But still more communities and more families need such housing.

To continue this program for those who have no other effective opportunity for better housing, I recommend the authorization of 50,000 additional public housing units for each of the next four years.

Most of these units should continue to be new construction to provide a net expansion. in the volume of housing available to low-income families. However, we have at this time a real opportunity to make low-rent housing available more quickly and at lower cost in many cities by acquiring units from the existing stock of private housing and rehabilitating them, where necessary, for the use of low-income families. I recommend amendments to the Public Housing Act to facilitate acquisition of existing housing units within the proposed 50,000 units per year.

In other cases, leasing of standard units by local public housing authorities for use in the low-rent program is a feasible and economic approach. I recommend, in addition, that the authority for expanding low-rent housing include authorization for local housing authorities to lease 40,000 housing units over the next four years.

We have much more to learn before the housing needs of our low-income population can be adequately met. The small demonstration program provided for this purpose in the Housing Act of 1961 has permitted a number of promising experiments to get underway. I recommend an additional $5 million be authorized to continue this program for at least one more year. During this period, attention can be given to special housing needs, such as those of our physically handicapped, as well as to means of helping low-income persons obtain adequate housing.

C. Housing for the elderly

I believe it especially unfortunate that many of those who do not have or cannot secure decent housing are elderly. Special attention to the needs of this group at all income levels should continue.

The expansion and improvement of public housing programs that I am recommending will be used extensively for lower-income elderly. federal insurance of loans will continue to encourage the construction of specially designed housing for elderly with adequate incomes. However, the existing authority for funds to finance the program of low-interest direct federal loans which serves the moderate-income elderly will soon be exhausted. I recommend that the low-interest direct federal loan program for the elderly be extended and additional funds appropriated to permit loans of $100 million during the coming fiscal year.

At present, the successful program of moderate-income housing provided through loan insurance at below-market interest rates enacted in 1961 is limited to family tenants. In many cases, admission of single elderly persons to such housing would be highly desirable. I recommend that single elderly persons be made eligible for housing financed by federally insured below-market interest loans.

D. Rural Housing

The living conditions of our rural families-including the nearly one-third of our elderly who live on farms or in small towns--likewise deserve and need special consideration.

--more than a million rural families still live in homes of such poor condition that they actually endanger the health and safety of the occupants.

--three million rural families live in homes that need major repairs.

--a third of our rural homes do not have complete sanitary facilities.

--nearly two-thirds of rural homes are without adequate heating.

The rural housing programs of the Department of Agriculture, initiated in 1949 and strengthened in 1961 and 1962, have made a good start on meeting the problems represented by these statistics, but the 20,000 rural families helped last year represent only a small fraction of the job to be done. Primary reliance on direct federal loans for this purpose is, however, neither necessary nor-in the volume required--realistic.

I recommend extension of the expiring authorization in Title V of the Housing Act of 1949 to insure loans on rental housing for the rural elderly. further, in order to accelerate the basic rural housing loan program, I urge that the Congress enact an insured rural housing loan program along the lines of that proposed by the Administration in the first session of this Congress.

I further recommend early action on legislation along the lines of S. 981 to assist with the housing problems of domestic farm laborers--problems which are particularly acute for our 350,000 migrant farm workers.

E. Military family Housing

The military man, in keeping with his profession, expects to endure--and frequently does endure--personal hardships during his career. We do not have the right to expect the same from his family. While the Defense Department properly relies primarily upon the private community to supply the major portion of its needs for decent and economical housing, an annual construction program to house the families of military personnel is required in those communities where the severest chronic shortages exist. Accordingly, I have recommended in the Military Construction program authorizations and appropriations for 12,500 additional units for fiscal 1965 to meet the most critical needs.

F. Improvements in other housing programs

Apart from the housing needs of the special groups already discussed, the partnership between private industry and Government--exemplified by federal guarantees and insurance of private housing credit--has made possible good housing and widespread home ownership for millions of our citizens.

I intend to encourage--through legislative proposals, where necessary--even more effective cooperation between government and industry for the joint benefit of homeowners, tenants and the industry itself. To this end, I am proposing a number of modifications in the statutes governing our self-supporting mortgage insurance and marketing programs which will improve their efficiency and usefulness. Among these will be the following proposals:

(1)--To provide relief in those isolated cases in which, despite the care exercised by builders and the federal Housing Administration and the Veterans Administration, substantial defects develop in new construction they have approved, I recommend that authority be provided for the FHA and the VA to finance the correction of substantial deficiencies.

(2)--To make certain that no legislative barriers exist to discourage or prevent mortgage lenders and the federal Housing Administration from cooperating to help delinquent mortgagers in deserving cases, I recommend that FHA's claim and forbearance authorities be amended to encourage the temporary withholding of foreclosures against homeowners who default on their mortgages due to circumstances beyond their control.

(3)--To expand our concerted effort to substitute private credit for federal loans, I recommend provision of legislative authority for the pooling of mortgages held by the federal National Mortgage Association and the Administrator of Veterans Affairs, and the sale of participations in such pools.

II. URBAN RENEWAL

The federal program of urban renewal is today our principal instrument for restoring the hope and renewing the vitality of older cities and worn-out neighborhoods.

The federal assistance which provides local leaders and governments with incentives and the tools for revitalizing their communities has proven its worth-in eliminating housing blight;

--in contributing to restoration of the economic base of our communities; and

--in helping reshape our central areas into effective nerve centers for our cities.

The Housing Act of 1961 doubled the previous urban renewal authorization to a total of $4 billion. By the middle of this year, all of that increase will have been committed. I recommend that an additional $1.4 billion of urban renewal funds be approved for a two-year period.

Despite existing programs assisting families and persons displaced by urban renewal projects, the human cost of relocation remains a serious and difficult problem.

The vast majority of those displaced by urban renewal and public housing have relocated in better and standard housing, but some have not. for most, the cost of improved housing has been an unsought burden. for some, the inconvenience of displacement has meant only another slum dwelling and the likelihood of repeating this experience.

To assist further those families and persons least able to bear the burden of displacement, I recommend

A. That an additional annual subsidy of up to $120 per unit be available for local public housing authorities, where needed to provide access to such housing for displacees with extremely low incomes.

B. That low- and moderate-income families displaced by urban renewal receive two-year supplemental relocation payments equal to the difference between rentals on standard housing in their communities and 20 percent of their gross incomes.

C. That low-income single persons displaced by urban renewal or other public action be made eligible for public housing.

Similarly, small businessmen--especially those in leased premises--often incur economic loss and hardship as a result of displacement by urban renewal or public housing which is not offset by current compensation practices and moving expense reimbursements. To provide more adequately for these firms, I recommend authority for a separation payment of up to $2,500 for small establishments.

At the time of the 1960 census, 7 million nonfarm dwellings were found to be deteriorating, including 2½ million occupied by their owners. Rehabilitation and preservation of existing housing wherever possible is a key element in the urban renewal process today. Elderly homeowners in urban renewal areas with low, fixed incomes are at a particular disadvantage in trying to meet the increased housing payments required by rehabilitation. To assist them, I recommend a program of federal insurance and purchase of low-interest loans, with a deferral of amortization of principal, for home rehabilitation by elderly homeowners in urban renewal programs.

III. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

The great expansion of our urban areas over the last two decades has too frequently been carried out in a sprawling, space-consuming, unplanned and uneconomic way. All levels of government are spending vast sums to accommodate this tremendous urban growth with highways, sewer and water facilities, schools, hospitals and other community facilities. Rural communities and small towns face similar pressures. If the taxpayer's dollar is to be wisely used and our communities are to be desirable places in which to live, we must assure ourselves that future growth takes place in a more orderly fashion.

I recommend that the urban planning assistance program and the open space program administered by the Housing and Home finance Agency be extended.

Although the planning requirements of these and various other federal programs-such as the federal--aid highway program-also emphasize orderly growth and development, much more can and should be done.

The pioneering efforts of progressive and imaginative private developers in planning totally new and complete communities indicate some of the exciting possibilities for orderly growth. In the tradition of the long-established partnership between private industry and Government in housing and community development, the federal Government should encourage and facilitate these new and desirable approaches.

Such a partnership can help achieve the orderly accommodation of a significant part of our forthcoming urban growth by means of entirely new communities, complete with all public services, all the industry and commerce needed to provide jobs, and sufficient housing and cultural and recreational facilities for moderate- and low-income families as well as for the well-to-do. To realize such new community development, and to encourage the participation of private initiative on the greatest possible scale, I propose a program of grants and loans to States and local governments for the planning and provision of necessary public facilities and of loan insurance for private developers constructing such facilities.

Many existing communities face problems of expansion as well. Even though they may foresee enormous development ahead, they often lack the resources to build sewer and water systems and other facilities with adequate growth capacity. Building in such capacity in advance could result in tremendous savings and prevent costly duplication or premature replacement of inadequate facilities. I, therefore, recommend a program of public facility loans with deferred amortization to enable communities to plan and build ahead of growth.

Early acquisition of land for right-of-way and other public improvements is frequently sound public business. Many communities which are prepared to exercise foresight in acquiring land--and to save private owners from uncertainty and hardship-lack the financial capacity to do so. Such advance acquisition--which would assure location of such facilities in accordance with planned development--could also result in substantial savings, inasmuch as the increases in land prices that occur as development proceeds would be avoided. I, therefore, recommend that public facility loans, with deferral of amortization as required, be made available for advance land purchase or option by States and local governmental jurisdictions.

To encourage better-planned new development on a neighborhood scale, and to preserve and increase the supply of improved land for homebuilding, I recommend federal insurance of loans to private developers for acquisition and improvement of land for planned subdivisions.

It is essential that all of these programs be based on the existence of effective planning arrangements in the community or region. for planned subdivisions, there should be, in addition, assurance that the neighborhood itself is carefully conceived to maintain its residential integrity and will result in efficient land use.

In our great metropolitan areas, and in our rural communities as well, the difficult problems of growth and development require understanding and cooperation at all governmental levels. The federal Government can assist and encourage, but, in the last analysis, the success or failure of programs of community development depends on those most directly involved.

IV. URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION

Efficient transportation systems are essential to our urban communities. Each local system should be tailored to its particular needs--existing and prospective--and the proper mixture of good highways and mass transit facilities should be developed to permit safe, efficient movement of people and goods in our metropolitan centers.

A matching grant mass transit program along the lines proposed by the Administration was approved by the Senate last year (S. 6) and reported favorably to the House by its Committee on Banking and Currency (H.R. 3881). I urge early enactment of the Mass Transit program as basic to the development and redevelopment of our Nation's cities.

V. TRAINING NEEDS

The sound administration of local governments and the success of our federally supported programs of community development depend heavily on the competence of State and local public service staffs--on their ability, their imagination, and, especially, their training. Throughout the range of local functions--from traffic control to tax administration, from recreation to renewal-their efforts will influence greatly the quality of community living.

The substantial federal investment in local community efforts justifies a deep federal interest in the quality of local government employees and the expenditure of funds to help attract able people to local public service and help them develop the skills and perspective they need.

To this end, I recommend a program of up to $25 million a year in matching grants to States for the establishment of urban public service training and research programs.

VI. DEPARTMENT Of HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

If we are to deal successfully with the complex problems of our urban and suburban communities, we need governmental machinery designed for the 1960's, not the 1940's. The Housing and Home finance Agency, established seventeen years ago primarily to administer housing programs, has seen its responsibilities enlarged progressively by the Congress during the intervening years to include the broader aspects of community development as well. The Agency now administers such major community development programs as urban renewal, urban planning, public facilities planning and loans, open space, and mass transit. These basic changes in the Agency's role and mission are not adequately reflected in the Agency's current organization and status which remain much the same as they were in 1947- Action to convert the Housing and Home finance Agency into an executive department is long overdue.

The size and breadth of the federal programs now administered by the Housing and Home finance Agency and the significance of those programs clearly merit departmental status. A new Secretary of Housing and Community Development would be in a position both to present effectively the Nation's housing and community development needs in the highest councils of government and to direct, organize, and manage more efficiently the important and closely interrelated housing and community development programs now administered or proposed for the Housing and Home finance Agency.

I recommend that the Congress establish a Department of Housing and Community Development.

CONCLUSION

The dramatic increase in our Nation's population projected for the coming decades--over 300 million by the year 2000-- and the increasing concentration of our population around urban centers will create increased housing needs and intensified problems of community development which must be anticipated and acted upon immediately.

How we respond to these challenges will have a lasting impact on the character of our cities and rural communities. Whether we achieve our goal of a decent home in a decent neighborhood for every American family rests, in large measure, on the actions we take now.

The substantive programs I have proposed in this Special Message will speed our solutions to today's problems and the predictable needs of tomorrow. I earnestly urge the Congress to give the attached draft bills the attention they merit.

LYNDON B. JOHNSON

Note: Released with the President's message were drafts of: (1) a bill to establish a Department of Housing and Community Development; (2) a bill to authorize the Veterans Administration "to extend aid on account of defects in properties purchased with financing assistance under chapter 37, title 38, U.S. Code"; (3) a bill "relating to sale of participations in pool of federal National Mortgage Association and Veterans Administration mortgages"; and (4) a bill to help provide adequate housing for low-income families, the elderly, and those subjected to special problems of displacement from their homes by Government action; to promote orderly community development and growth; and to extend and amend laws relating to housing, urban renewal, and community facilities (Housing and Community Development Act of 1964). Each bill was accompanied by a section-by-section analysis.

The message and related documents are published as House Document 206 (88th Cong., 2d sess.).

Lyndon B. Johnson, Special Message to the Congress on Housing and Community Development. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/240111

Filed Under

Categories

Attributes

Simple Search of Our Archives