<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:28468.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-579
NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN HOUSING PROGRAMS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
OVERSIGHT HEARING TO REVIEW THE NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN HOUSING PROGRAMS
__________
JUNE 28, 2006
WASHINGTON, DC
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
28-468 WASHINGTON : 2006
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512ÿ091800
Fax: (202) 512ÿ092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402ÿ090001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota, Vice Chairman
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming KENT CONRAD, North Dakota
GORDON SMITH, Oregon DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina
TOM COBURN, M.D., Oklahoma
John Tahsuda, III, Majority Staff Director
Sara G. Garland, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements:
Adams, Jason, executive director, Salish and Kootenai Housing
Authority.................................................. 17
Boyd, Rodger, deputy assistant secretary, Native American
Programs, Department of Housing and Urban Development...... 3
Cabrera, Orlando J., assistant secretary, Office of Public
and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban
Development................................................ 3
Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota, vice
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 1
Ellis, A.D., principal chief, Muscogee Creek Nation,
Okmulgee, OK............................................... 16
Green, Pattye, senior business manager for Rural Native
American Initiatives, Fannie Mae, Tishomingo, OK........... 5
McCain, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arizona, chairman,
Committee on Indian Affairs................................ 1
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator from Alaska............... 2
Shuravloff, Marty, chairman, National American Indian Housing
Council, Washington, DC.................................... 13
Steele, James Jr., chairman, Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes of the Flathead Indian Nation....................... 17
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Cabrera, Orlando J........................................... 25
Ellis, A.D................................................... 23
Green, Pattye (with attachment).............................. 43
Shuravloff, Marty............................................ 54
Steele, James Jr. (with attachment).......................... 58
NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING PROGRAMS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room
485, Senate Russell Office Building, Hon. John McCain (chairman
of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators McCain, Dorgan, and Murkowski.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN McCAIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA,
CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
The Chairman. Good morning. The committee will come to
order.
Welcome to the oversight hearing on Indian housing. It has
been nearly 10 years since Congress first passed the Native
American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act. Since
then, we have seen progress in home construction and ownership.
Yet the Committee is troubled to hear that overcrowding and
homelessness still exist in Indian communities. Indeed, the
president of the NCAI reported to this committee at our budget
hearing in February that in some cases, as many as 25 to 30
people were living in homes with no more than 3 bedrooms.
As chairman of this committee, I am concerned that these
conditions may have far-reaching negative impacts on other
important aspects of the lives of Indian people, such as
education, economic development, and health. Adequate housing
is a fundamental need that must be met to support improvements
in these other areas.
I welcome the witnesses and look forward to their
testimony.
Senator Dorgan.
STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH
DAKOTA, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, first of all, thank you for
calling this hearing. I extend a welcome to our witnesses and
appreciate their being with us.
As I have indicated before, I think there is a bona fide
crisis in health care, housing and education. Today we are
talking about housing on Indian reservations. The U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights has indicated that 40 percent of the
on-reservation housing structures are substandard. That
compares with 6 percent nationwide.
One in five reservation homes lacks complete plumbing;
90,000 Indian families are homeless or under-housed. I have
toured some housing developments on some Indian reservations
that are absolutely shocking with respect to their disrepair. I
have told the story about Sarah Swifthawk who died in her house
because she froze to death in a home that didn't have windows.
They had plastic sheeting, for windows at tempertures of 35, 40
below zero, while sleeping on a cot. That is not America. That
is not the best of what we ought to be offering in America, to
all Americans.
So we deal today with housing, housing policy, with respect
to Native Americans. We need to consider reauthorization of the
Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act
of 1996. This hearing will provide some very important
groundwork for those deliberations.
So Mr. Chairman, I look forward to, as always, working with
you on these issues, and thank you for conducting these
hearings.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Our first panel is Orlando J. Cabrera, who is the assistant
secretary of the Office of Public and Indian Housing,
Department of Housing and Urban Development. He is accompanied
by Paula Blunt, general deputy assistant secretary, Office of
Public and Indian Housing, and Rodger Boyd, deputy assistant
secretary of Native American Programs.
If they would like to come to the witness table, you are
welcome to do so. Do you want them there or not, Mr. Cabrera?
Mr. Cabrera. No, Mr. Chairman; Ms. Blunt has a medical
emergency, nothing critical, and my staff is with me.
The Chairman. I am sorry to hear that, and please send our
best and our condolences to Ms. Blunt.
The Chairman. Thank you.
And Pattye Green, who is a senior business manager for
Native American Initiatives of Fannie Mae. Before I ask you to
proceed, I would ask Senator Murkowski if she has any opening
comments she would like to make.
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good
morning. I appreciate your calling the hearing today and
appreciate those who have taken their time this morning to
present to us.
As you know, we have some issues in my State of Alaska that
we care about a great deal. We have issues that relate to the
high cost of housing primarily caused by transportation issues,
as is specific up in Barrow, which is the northernmost
community in the State. You essentially have one barge a year
coming in to bring the supplies. If you miss the barge, the
only way to get it there is to fly it hundreds and hundreds of
miles, adding to the expense. So we have some logistical issues
that cause us concern.
So the NAHASDA funding is very, very critical to my State,
as well as it is to the rest of the Nation. So I am pleased
that we are seeing some increases or some improvements in
there.
I also want to just mention briefly, it is not just the
expenses associated with the construction of the homes, but in
many of our remote Alaska Native communities, we have water and
sewer conditions that often rival third world countries. And we
have great concerns with how we provide potable water, how we
provide sewer facilities for those in the communities. I have
talked in this committee and in others about an unsophisticated
sewage system which consists of a honey bucket, nothing more
than a bucket with a toilet seat on top of it, and the disposal
of the waste is walking it down somewhere outside the
community, usually in a lagoon and dumping it there.
Federal funding for water and sewer projects in rural
Alaska is separate from NAHASDA, but I want to mention these as
challenges that we deal with on a daily basis, to really
underscore the very unique challenges that we face in providing
housing and related service.
I do appreciate the fact that the National American Indian
Housing Council led a delegation of Congressional staffers to
several of these remote communities last year. I think it is
important that we be able to observe first-hand some of the
conditions. I am thankful that they were able to attend, and
would certainly welcome any of you to come up on a similar
field trip.
Mr. Chairman, again, I appreciate your conducting the
hearing, and I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Cabrera, please proceed. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF ORLANDO J. CABRERA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, OFFICE OF
PUBLIC AND INDIAN HOUSING,
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
ACCOMPANIED BY RODGER BOYD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS
Mr. Cabrera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members of the
committee, good morning and thank you for inviting me to
comment on HUD's Indian Housing and Community Development
programs. My name is Orlando Cabrera, and I am HUD's assistant
secretary for Public and Indian Housing. It is a pleasure to
appear before you again, and I wanted to express my
appreciation for your continuing efforts to improve the housing
conditions of American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native
Hawaiian peoples.
From HUD's perspective, much progress is being made.
Momentum needs to be sustained as we continue to work together
toward creating a better living environment throughout Indian
country. At the outset, let me reaffirm HUD's support for the
core principle of government to government relations, with
federally-recognized Indian tribes. HUD is committed to
honoring this fundamental concept in our work with American
Indians and Alaska Natives.
I would like to share with you my perspective on how to
help tribal communities succeed. My background is in housing,
so I would like to focus most of my tools on my profession, I
should say my former profession.
Today there are more ways to leverage Federal funds than
ever before. Tribes should look beyond HUD's Indian Housing
Block Grant and title VI programs. All these new efforts
involve some risk, but without risk fewer families are
assisted. We have engaged in marketing and outreach activities
designed to make tribes and TDHEs more familiar with our
programs, particularly those with Federal guarantees to lower
the risks that have traditionally made the private sector shy
away from partnering with tribes.
We are also examining a bond financing initiative that has
worked well for public housing authorities, to see if it can do
the same for tribes. Another way we seek to help is by
encouraging TDHEs to leverage private sector capital to create
more housing on reservations.
President Bush and Secretary Jackson have made their
commitment to home ownership clear. Home ownership and the
ability to build equity in one's home is an important component
in the development of strong tribal communities for generations
to come.
Creating home ownership opportunities continues to rank at
the top of the Administration's priorities for the American
people. And nowhere is this more important than in the Native
American community.
HUD section 184, Indian Housing Loan Guarantee program, has
made a significant contribution to the overall success of the
Administration's home ownership initiatives. Section 184
activity for the past fiscal year shows that tribes and TDHEs
are using this program with increasing frequency. In total, HUD
has completed $380 million in loan guarantees through the
inception of the 184 program.
During the first 8 months of fiscal year 2006, HUD approved
804 loans, obligating $123.8 million, representing a 400-
percent increase in volume since 2001. The rate of loan
obligations, which we estimate to reach $180 million to $200
million by the end of the fiscal year, for this fiscal year,
confirms that the section 184 program is bringing home
ownership to more and more tribal members at very little cost
to the Federal taxpayer.
When I think of leveraging, the word collaboration comes to
mind. NAHASDA's Indian Housing Block Grant program continues to
be the largest single source of housing capital in Indian
country. The IHBG program, which came online at the beginning
of the fiscal year 1998, has now distributed over $5.7 billion
in funding to tribes or their TDHEs.
But relying on IHBG funding alone without leveraging those
dollars misses a significant opportunity. We are committed to
exploring new ways to combine HUD resources with those of other
Federal agencies, the States and the private sector.
In a combined effort to increase the home ownership rate in
Indian country, address affordable housing needs and promote
mortgage financing, PIH's former assistant secretary, BIA's
assistant secretary and USDA's rural development acting under
secretary signed a memorandum of understanding to work together
with tribes to provide housing development and related
assistance to all sectors of the Native American community. A
major aim of the memorandum of understanding, which was signed
in September of 2004, was to obtain a commitment from the BIA
to expedite the production of title status reports, or TSRs, a
necessary document for mortgaging of trust or restricted Indian
lands.
Despite these advances, the TSR approval process is not
where we want it to be. In an effort to reach our common goals,
I am meeting tomorrow with Interior Deputy Associate Secretary
Cason to determine if there is more that we can do together.
Land assignment law is a big issue for us. In an effort to
use the government to government relationship collaboratively
and to increase the private sector housing market presence on
reservations, ONAP and the BIA have worked with the
Mashantucket-Pequot Tribe to establish a tribal land assignment
law. Interior's Solicitor's office has approved the process and
issued an opinion that individual assignments governed by
tribal land assignment law do not require BIA approval or
recordation. ONAP will issue program guidance on land
assignments for the section 184 program in the coming months,
and we expect other tribes to take advantage of this process.
This concludes my prepare remarks. Again, thank you for
your time. Thank you for allowing me to testify. Again, I
encourage the active participation of all tribes to share
innovative approaches to housing development in Indian country.
I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Cabrera appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Ms. Green, welcome.
STATEMENT OF PATTYE GREEN, SENIOR BUSINESS MANAGER FOR RURAL
NATIVE AMERICAN INITIATIVES, FANNIE MAE, TISHOMINGO, OK
Ms. Green. Thank you, Chairman McCain, Vice Chairman Dorgan
and members of the committee. My name is Pattye Green, and I am
the senior business manager for Rural Native American
Initiatives with Fannie Mae, and I have over 28 years of
mortgage lending experience. Prior to coming to Fannie Mae, I
was the home finance director of the Housing Authority of the
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and I am a member of the Choctaw
Nation of Oklahoma.
I am pleased to be here today to discuss the barriers to
capital access that we see on tribal lands and to share with
you the steps that Fannie Mae is taking to help overcome those
barriers, expand home ownership and affordable housing for
rental opportunities in tribal communities. Fannie Mae's
Congressionally granted mission, to create affordable housing
opportunities for Native American families living on tribal
lands, is one of the toughest challenges we face. According to
the National American Indian Housing Council, we have seen some
improvement, but we still see homes on tribal lands that are
overcrowded, that are not connected to public sewer systems,
lack indoor plumbing. Almost one-half of Indian households pay
more than 30 percent of their income for housing expenses,
compared to 23 percent of all households in the United States.
The home ownership rate on reservations are 41 percent and
stated by NAIHC, is 33 percent, well below the national average
of approximately 68 percent. An absence of conventional
mortgage lending is a major factor behind the gap. The most
stubborn and overwhelming barrier to capital access in Indian
country is a lack of economic opportunity. Poverty rates are 26
percent for Native Americans, over double the national average
of 12 percent.
In Navajo country, 43 percent of people live below the
poverty level. The average per capita income is $7,300 and the
unemployment rate reaches almost 25 percent.
In light of these severe socio-economic conditions, Fannie
Mae is taking a three-pronged approach to expanding affordable
housing on tribal lands. First, by developing the right
mortgage products that make it easier for our lender partners
to do business on the tribal lands. Second, by working with
developers and tribal housing authorities to address the
critical shortage of affordable housing units that currently
exist. And finally, to develop broad partnership throughout the
housing finance and tribal communities to focus on the long-
term, systematic barriers to housing and community development
that exists in Indian country today.
One of the groups that is important to this effort is the
National American Indian Housing Council. We would like to
encourage you to continue Congressional funding to this group.
Against this backdrop of extreme poverty, it is not surprising
that the Native American home ownership rate lags far behind
the national rate, and that Native Americans are pessimistic
about the lending process.
A 2000 survey by the Treasury Department found that 65
percent of tribal members viewed conventional home mortgages as
difficult or very difficult to obtain. Fannie Mae has
customized its suites of community lending products to respond
to the unique needs of Native American communities. Our
community lending products are designed to help borrowers
overcome the two primary barriers to home ownership: Lack of
down payment funds and qualifying income, through lower cash
requirements for down payment and closing, reduced qualifying
income requirements and higher acceptable debt to income and
loan to value ratios that are required for traditional,
conventional mortgages.
We have worked with tribes to add unique features to this
product, including tribally provided home buyer eduction, down
payment assistance programs and intervention programs for
borrowers who get into trouble. We work with each individual
tribe to understand their culture and to help them to
understand the needs that they have and to customize programs
that are necessary for their tribes.
We currently have relationships with 112 lenders to make
loans to Native Americans on tribal lands. Since 2001, Fannie
Mae has helped our lender partners serve over 8,535 Native
American families by providing more than $839 million in
affordable mortgage financing on tribal lands.
Perhaps the most serious challenge to affordable housing in
the near term is the critical shortage of affordable housing on
tribal lands. According to the National American Indian Housing
Council, there is an immediate shortage of 200,000 units on
tribal lands. The Navajo Housing Authority estimates that it
alone needs 21,000 new housing units to satisfy the unmet needs
of all Navajo families, including 12,000 new homes for
purchase.
Fannie Mae has worked closely with tribes and other housing
partners, such as the Blackfeet Reservation in Montana, the
Standing Rock Reservation in South and North Dakota, both with
the construction of new units and rehabilitation of existing
units through investments in low income housing tax credit
investments, collateralized revenue bonds and HUD-guaranteed
Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Title
VI loans. We have also begun to provide tribal housing
authorities with additional financing via our community lending
business channel to help bridge funding gaps through the
construction phase of their development.
Nationwide, we have invested over $160 million in low
income housing tax credits. We have helped with over $51
million in title VI loans and $1.5 million in additional
financing to support construction and rehabilitation units in
tribal land since 2001.
Finally, financial experience poses a barrier to capital
access for Native Americans. Many Native Americans do not have
banking relationships, and in many Native American economies,
financial transactions have long been conducted in cash. As a
result, many Native Americans have little regular familiarity
with banking, credit reporting and the loan qualification
process and standards. And unsurprisingly, they have difficulty
obtaining credit through traditional means.
In 2002, the conventional loan denial rate for Native
Americans was 23 percent. The lack of experience and
familiarity with bank practices and products also leaves many
Native American communities vulnerable to unscrupulous
financial practices that undermine communities. In 2003, 53
respondents believed that lenders based on race and identified
predatory lending and that is why they were being denied.
Lastly, Mr. Chairman, I would like to briefly mention our
own efforts to institutionalize our commitment to Native
American housing issues. In January of this year, Fannie Mae
created a new business unit that focuses on addressing the
toughest housing challenges in our distressed urban areas,
rural communities and tribal lands. In addition to supporting
our business units, as they seek to make investments in these
areas, we are also developing targeted, place-based strategies
to create long-term solutions that are both transformative and
scaleable.
Ultimately, our goal is not to just make investments in
short-term, but also to play a meaningful role in transforming
these distressed areas into healthy and vibrant markets where
access to private capital is indistinguishable from other, more
established areas of the United States. I hope that with these
comments, Fannie Mae has begun to make progress in expanding
home ownership for Native Americans. But it is important to
recognize that we have so much more to do, and we will continue
to listen closely to Indian country leaders to build long-term
partnerships and to address the tough housing and economic
challenges facing Native American communities today.
Thank you and I would be happy to answer any questions.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Green appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Secretary Cabrera, I understand you recently notified
tribal leaders that HUD will not process any further fiscal
year 2006 Indian Housing Block Grant awards until a stay is
ordered in the Fort Peck Housing Authority v. HUD case, wherein
the court ordered HUD to take such action necessary to include
certain housing units in determining funding formulas for only
Fort Peck. What is the impact of not processing these awards?
Mr. Cabrera. The impact is that currently there are no
awards, no money going to any of the tribes until one of two
things happen. I think the second is more likely than the
first.
The first is to get a stay from a Federal judge in
Colorado, which we suspect we probably would not get, at least
that is what our legal counsel is telling us. The second is to
come to essentially a stipulation with the plaintiff in this
case, Fort Peck, in which case that would give us the room that
we would need to go ahead and allocate. We believe that is a
more likely outcome. We certainly hope it is a more likely
outcome.
Yesterday afternoon, I received word that they are close
but not perfectly aligned and most of the issue has to do with
a commitment that HUD was asked to make with respect to 2007
appropriation that we cannot, because it would essentially
infringe upon this prerogative, which is the budget. I think
that can be bridged. So my sense of life is we are closer than
not.
The Chairman. Well, I am not sure that if you agree to
request certain funds from the Congress that that would be an
infringement upon our prerogatives. There is no budget that is
submitted that is not subject to the review or modification by
the Congress.
Mr. Cabrera. No; I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I wasn't clear.
This isn't about an amount of money. What they were asking us
to do was essentially commit to an amount of money in the
context of a legal settlement where we can, certainly we can
preface it, and I believe that is what our lawyers are going to
do, they are going to do precisely what you have just
recommended, which is to say, if Congress approves something,
then great. But we can't have a breached settlement by virtue
of it being a predicate to the settlement.
The Chairman. How many tribes or housing entities are being
affected by this?
Mr. Cabrera. As I recall, all 561.
The Chairman. Whew. It seems to me that would lend some
urgency to resolving this situation.
Mr. Cabrera. Very much so. I would love to resolve this
situation.
The Chairman. What kind of help are you getting?
Mr. Cabrera. We have, our legal counsel and the Department
of Justice are working very intently with Fort Peck's counsel
in order to come to some resolution.
The Chairman. How much money are we talking about here in
the Fort Peck situation?
Mr. Cabrera. Mr. Chairman, may I please consult with my
staff?
The Chairman. Yes; sure. Roughly.
If your staff would just like----
Mr. Cabrera. It is okay, I am sorry. It is $400,000. And I
believe there are a few other tribes, one that comes to mind is
Arapaho, that also agrees with Fort Peck's position on this. I
don't recall what that number is.
The Chairman. You are talking about $400,000?
Mr. Cabrera. Yes.
The Chairman. Holding up hundreds of millions of dollars?
Mr. Cabrera. Yes; because the issue is the way that the
formula grant is administered. So by virtue of undertaking the
lawsuit and getting this particular order, that is the
regrettable precise effect.
The Chairman. Senator Dorgan.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, let me also ask the same line
of questions. You would not be required to hold up funding to
other tribes. I am sure because this deals with Fort Peck and a
decision with respect to Fort Peck. I understand that you may
have to recalculate the funds. But you could assume, create
reserves that would allow you to do that at some point, such as
reserve a body of funds and at least distribute some portion of
the housing funds, could you not?
Mr. Cabrera. As I understand it from our legal counsel, the
very incomplete answer to that is no. And the reason is because
of the nature of the formula distribution inside of the
appropriation. I remember actually expressly asking that
question, and the answer was that this particular order throws
the entire formula into question.
Senator Dorgan. Tell me the quantity that is now frozen? Do
you know off-hand?
Mr. Cabrera. Mr. Vice Chairman, may I again consult with my
staff?
Senator Dorgan. Yes; please.
Mr. Cabrera. Thank you.
Approximately $300 million.
Senator Dorgan. You know, I don't understand the answer you
have received from lawyers, nor why you would accept that
answer. A $400,000 discrepancy issue here is holding up in, did
you say in, did you say $300 million?
Mr. Cabrera. Yes.
Senator Dorgan. In a $300-million pool of money, you are
certainly able to reconcile whatever is judged to be done to
recalculate that formula within the context of a portion of
that $300 million. But there is no reason at all to be holding
up all of the housing money in anticipation of having to find
an answer here. You certainly could be moving some of that
housing money out now. Are you saying you are prevented by your
attorneys from doing that?
Mr. Cabrera. No; I am saying that our attorneys are
counseling that based upon this particular Federal judge's
order, that if we did, we would be in contravention of the
order. And more to the point, the issue, and I respect that, I
respect the idea that proportionally, the $400,000 in terms of
the relative amount, the $400,000, no, the $300 million, it
appears very small.
The issue isn't the money. The issue is the formula.
Senator Dorgan. I understand.
Mr. Cabrera. And this particular order basically said, the
entire administrative mechanism that you are using is invalid.
Senator Dorgan. I understand all of that. But do you think
the judge would have anticipated that you should hold up all of
the funding going out for housing in order to reconcile the
$400,000?
Mr. Cabrera. Forgive me, I didn't mean to interrupt.
I think what the judge thought was that this was just a
Fort Peck issue. And so I don't think that, I think that is why
we have some hope on this day, but we are not certain on this
day, and that is because I am not entirely sure the judge was
aware that it would affect basically the other 560 tribes. That
is why we are seeking the stay and that is why we would like to
resolve this.
Senator Dorgan. But do you agree it would minimally affect
most of the other tribes?
Mr. Cabrera. No; in some cases it is a significant effect.
As I recall, there is a significant effect to both the Cherokee
and the Navajo Tribe.
Senator Dorgan. How many tribes do we have in this country
that are eligible for housing funds?
Mr. Cabrera. 561.
Senator Dorgan. So you are saying that three of them would
be affected?
Mr. Cabrera. No; those are the only ones that I remember.
Senator Dorgan. Oh, all of them because of the formula
distribution?
Mr. Cabrera. Yes; it would basically redistribute the way
the formula is undertaken.
Senator Dorgan. What if you don't get this resolved in the
coming days or weeks? You just hold up all the housing funds
for Native Americans for the rest of the year?
Mr. Cabrera. No; I think what I would ask, or I have asked
our lawyers to do is visit the idea of asking the judge for
greater clarity with respect to how it is he would have us
proceed.
Senator Dorgan. Why hasn't that been done already?
Mr. Cabrera. I believe it has. I believe that effort has
begun.
Senator Dorgan. How has the judge responded?
Mr. Cabrera. I don't know. That I don't know as of today. I
believe the other major effort really has been to have the
parties deal with it and then go to the judge and say, look, we
agree, we can proceed.
Senator Dorgan. You know, I bet these lawyers that are
giving you this advice are pretty well housed. So the issue
here is the urgency to get housing money to Native Americans.
And we have authorized and appropriated funding for housing. I
am not trying to badger you here. I think you have gotten some
bad advice from some place. And I think there must be room
administratively to continue a program, especially a program
that responds to an urgent need, even if you probably hold a
reserve back to recalculate this formula at some point.
I can't believe the judge would render a decision that
says, okay, in order to resolve this, you need to hold up all
the housing funds nationally. I can't believe that would be the
intent of the Federal court.
Mr. Cabrera. No; and that is what I was trying to say
earlier, maybe I didn't say it as perfectly as I should have.
We believe that the judge's order focused on these two
particular parties, and that is why we want to revisit the
issue of the order with the judge.
We are working on a separate and equivalent track to deal
with it within the parties themselves. We are hopeful that that
would happen. But certainly we are trying to resolve this
issue. Once we get clarity, as I noted earlier, we would very
much like to proceed. Our issue is not feeling comfortable with
what or how the order approaches the entire formula issue. It
only deals really with Fort Peck.
And at the same time, maybe, hopefully, probably, Fort Peck
and HUD would come to some agreement on how to proceed in the
interim, so that we can go ahead and move. In either case, we
are moving quickly.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Cabrera, I confess I don't understand
the formula or perhaps the nuances of the judge's order. But I
do know that the housing funds that we have provided have now
been shut off for a month. Indian leaders are very concerned
about that, and should be, because they are, in their
Government, trying to develop housing programs to deal with a
very serious problem. One only needs to look at some of the
housing stock that exists to see how much disrepair there is,
and then understand how many people need housing and don't have
access to it.
So I hope you will understand the urgency of this and I
hope that the agency will go back to those lawyers who have
told you that you have to hold it all up. I can't conceive that
would be the case. I hope you will report back on a weekly
basis to this committee. My hope is the first weekly report
will be to say that we have resolved this and we have gotten
the money out there and are starting to build housing stock.
Mr. Cabrera. Mr. Vice Chairman, if that report would come
this afternoon, nobody would be happier than me. I would like
to resolve this. I have an enormous amount of empathy for the
situation. But at the end of the day, we are moving steadfastly
to resolve this. And I will be happy to report weekly on this.
I deal with Fort Peck or the Fort Peck situation if not every
day, then very nearly every other day. So we are moving
diligently to resolve this in the best legal way possible.
Senator Dorgan. Ms. Green, just briefly, Mr. Chairman, Ms.
Green, thank you for your testimony. I know that you have a
program you have been doing with respect to North and South
Dakota at the Standing Rock Reservation.
Ms. Green. Yes.
Senator Dorgan. Could you just give us a very brief
description of that program and your results?
Ms. Green. Yes; at the Standing Rock Reservation is one of
what we are calling our deep dives, where we are going into the
reservations and bringing in all of our parts of Fannie Mae,
where we do single family projects. We are doing low income
housing, bringing in multi-family, bringing in bridge loans,
whatever we can do to help the reservations to bring in
whatever they need to transform their reservations, any type of
housing needs.
Standing Rock is a great example of what we are doing
there. For example, we have done low income housing tax
credits, we have done a single family project there. For
instance, we have done 248 units on Standing Rock Reservation,
affordable rental housing in the past 5 years. That has been a
great, great project that we are doing there. We are there for
a long term, we are not just going in and doing a one time
project. We are there for 10 years, 20 years, whatever they
need us for. So we go back every year and do an update.
Our CBC there is working on an ongoing basis with Standing
Rock. We have done grants, we give them grants for revolving
loan projects, whatever it is that they need to do. But as of
date, we have helped them, investing with the 248 rental
projects that they have got going there.
Senator Dorgan. Thank you very much, Ms. Green.
Mr. Cabrera, thank you for being with us today as well.
Mr. Cabrera. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to follow up very briefly on the comments made
by my colleagues about the litigation and the status of it. I
think it has been made clear the urgency to this. I guess I am
somewhat surprised that perhaps the judge is not aware of the
ramifications, potentially, to all of these tribes, 500 some
odd tribes out there. I would certainly hope that that
clarification is made very, very quickly.
Just one quick question for you, Mr. Cabrera. I wanted to
ask you about the Indian housing, the cost study, which is
already underway, a study that is certainly going to have a
long-term effect on the allocation of Indian housing
nationwide. We are a little bit concerned, from Alaska's
perspective. Because if the housing study goes in a way that
unfortunately we feel it might, it could have a very negative
impact to the housing authorities in the State of Alaska. As I
mentioned in my opening statement, we have some unique
challenges that we face when it comes to construction of
housing in the State. And so it is very important for HUD to be
taking a look at this very wide cross-section of data from the
various housing authorities in the State.
We also recognize that it is very important from the
national perspective to be getting a wide cross-section of
data. Recognizing that compilation of all this can take some
time, has there been any thought given to allocating additional
time to complete the study, to ensure that the study is going
to be very complete, accurate and fair?
Mr. Cabrera. Yes; as I recall, it was already extended by
another 6 months. Further, Senator, I think that we have had
the University of Illinois Urban Center working very closely
with Blake Azama, as I recall, and other corporations or
corporation representatives in Alaska on this issue. So I
believe that there has been progress. I understand precisely
how seriously you take the issue.
Senator Murkowski. Well, we understand that you are looking
to come up to the State some time in August, so hopefully we
would have an opportunity to talk with you a little bit more
about the issue and to give you the first-hand tour of some of
the issues. We appreciate your willingness to come up.
Mr. Cabrera. I look forward to it, thank you.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Cabrera, we will be trying to get involved in this,
because we think that it needs to be resolved quickly. We are
going to begin by, Senator Dorgan and I, and other members of
the committee, sending a letter to the Secretary saying we want
his personal involvement in this. We can't hold up housing for
500 tribes because of a $400,000-dispute.
And I understand it is more complicated than that. I fully
understand that. It is a policy problem. But we just can't do
that. We owe more than that to Native Americans.
So we are going to start out with a letter, and then we are
going to have to maybe look at something legislatively or
something, I don't know exactly what, but we need to explore
all the options to get this issue resolved quickly. I hope you
will join us in that effort.
Mr. Cabrera. Mr. Chairman, absolutely. I would say this is
not relating to the letter, but with respect to the
legislation. I think that by the time this gets resolved,
either in the context of getting a clarified order or getting
an arrangement with Fort Peck, whatever that might be, that
will probably preempt any need for legislation. This is not an
unreasonable judge, this is someone whom most practicing
lawyers respect greatly, including me.
So I think at the end of the day this will probably work
out. I know in the interim it is painful, not the least of
which for me. I just wanted to make sure you were aware, I will
report weekly going forward.
Senator Dorgan. Could I, Mr. Chairman, say, and I can't
speak for the Chairman, I don't believe there ought to be an
interim. In the interim, there should not be a shut-off of
funds. These are critically needed funds for housing and we can
recalculate or you can recalculate some sort of reserve to deal
with this formula issue. But the funding should not have been
shut off to hundreds of tribes.
Mr. Cabrera. I understand.
The Chairman. And unfortunately, probably is not good
enough. So we urge you to act as quickly as possible, and we
will be paying close attention. I thank you very much. Thank
the witnesses.
Our next panel is Marty Shuravloff, who is the chairman of
the National American Indian Housing Council; A.D. Ellis,
principal chief of the Muscogee Creek Nation; and James Steele,
who is the chairman of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, and Mr. Steele is
accompanied by Jason Adams, who is the executive director of
the Housing Authority.
Mr. Shuravloff, am I pronouncing your name correctly?
Mr. Shuravloff. You are, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF MARTY SHURAVLOFF, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL AMERICAN
INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Shuravloff. Good morning, Chairman McCain, Vice
Chairman Dorgan, Senator Murkowski and distinguished members of
the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.
My name is Marty Shuravloff, and I am honored to appear
before you today as the recently elected chair of the National
American Indian Housing Council, the oldest and largest Indian
housing organization in the Nation, representing the housing
interests of more than 460 tribes. I am an enrolled member of
the Village of Leisnol and also serve as the executive director
of the Kodiak Island Housing Authority.
Now in its 32d year, the NAIHC is the major capacity
building organization providing guidance, technical assistance,
training and other services. NAIHC trains thousands of Indian
housing and other staff per year, offering most of its training
for free. NAIHC also uses state of the art technology to save
tribes time and travel costs, by offering training by webcast
and video. In addition, NAIHC provides scholarships that help
offset travel costs, ensuring that the poorest tribes receive
training. In 2005, 200 different tribes and TDHEs benefitted
from 751 scholarships granted by NAIHC.
For 32 years, NAIHC has provided invaluable assistance to
Indian tribes and TDHEs, and in no small way has made the
difficult implementation phase of NAHASDA a success. Along the
way, NAIHC has endured many difficulties, including a Federal
housing agency that may, due to paternalistic tendencies,
create the opposite of self-determination. Additionally, NAIHC
has dealt with Congressional appropriators who are unaware of,
or worse, unmoved by, the dire economic conditions that
characterize Native communities.
The impact of Federal funding for the Native American block
grant has been steadily eroded by inflation. It has gone from
$600 million in 1998 to $624 million this fiscal year, an
actual decline when adjusted for inflation. During the same
time, Federal funding made available to the NAIHC for technical
assistance and training to Indian tribes and their TDHEs has
also declined, threatening its very existence.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development maintains
that NAIHC has undisbursed funds left over from fiscal year
2004 and 2005, and unobligated funds left over from fiscal year
2006 that somehow NAIHC is unable or unwilling to spend. The
truth of the matter is that NAIHC expends funds on a
reimbursement schedule and what HUD says is in the pipeline has
been expended but not yet billed to HUD as of March 2006.
If NAIHC continues to expend funds at the same rate as in
2005, the pipeline funds will be completely gone by February
2007. The erroneous perceptions have been caused by the many
administrative delays in NAIHC's work contract with HUD. NAIHC
receives its funds on a reimbursement basis, after incurring
costs for HUD-approved activities. NAIHC's current contract
with HUD took months to complete. While HUD shows these funds
as unused, NAIHC can show that the funds will be exhausted by
the work of the NAIHC throughout the year.
If House-passed levels of technical assistance funding
prevail, NAIHC shuts down. It is that simple. For fiscal year
2007, the House has proposed $990,000 for technical assistance
and training services for NAIHC. And it is no exaggeration to
say that with this or a similar level of funding in the next
fiscal year, NAIHC will close its doors in or around January
2007. We hope this committee will not let this happen.
Under the leadership of Senator McCain, NAHASDA was created
and rests on a firm foundation of Indian self-determination,
reflecting the time tested principles of local tribal decision
making and tribal economic self-sufficiency. That means that
Indian tribes themselves, not HUD, design, implement and
conduct housing and related programs for their members.
In passing NAHASDA, Congress intended HUD's role to be
minimally intrusive. NAIHC, tribes and TDHEs have established a
legislative working group to identify and address legislative
and regulatory issues of tribal concern with the statute as it
now stands. Their issues include the impediments of the program
assessment rating tool process and how to improve the data
collection and reporting elements.
The severe problem with methamphetamine in Indian
communities, the insufficient or non-existent infrastructure in
Indian communities, addressing the problem of mold in
federally-assisted tribal homes, the establishing of
development reserve accounts as an eligible activity under
NAHASDA, replacing the 30 percent income rule with fair market
rents, Federal procurement issues related to housing materials,
the elimination of Secretarial approval for long-term leases,
and overdue and necessary reforms to the Bureau of Indian
Affairs tribal status report process.
NAIHC is committed to finding resolutions to these
problems. To address the infrastructure deficiencies in Indian
country, NAIHC is collaborating with Federal agencies in the
development of an infrastructure memorandum of understanding
that will encourage agencies to assist tribes with
infrastructure development. Additionally, NAIHC has established
two internal working groups to deal with issues related to
NAHASDA reauthorization and the formula allocation.
The Native American Block Grant program is the main program
for funding tribal housing under NAHASDA. Historically,
decennial census numbers have been one element in the
calculation of distribution of Native American housing block
grant funds. A change in the census collection technique in the
2000 census led to a change in distribution patterns, causing a
question to be raised regarding the use of a specific set of
census data.
A failure of the negotiated rulemaking committee to arrive
at a consensus on which census data to use caused HUD to use a
data set that has led to a disagreement among tribes concerning
the formula. To help resolve this issue, NAIHC has established
a task force with the goal of arriving at a position that is
agreeable to all tribes regarding the accounting of American
Indian and Alaska Natives in the formula.
And finally, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, NAIHC
also is gravely concerned about HUD's recent decision to
potentially withhold allocation of the remaining fiscal year
2006 funds if the Department is unable to obtain a stay pending
appeal of the court's decision in the Fort Peck Housing
Authority v. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
While we understand the difficulties presented by the Fort Peck
decision, this decision could cause severe hardships on
recipients whose funding may be inappropriately withheld.
As you are aware, most tribal and TDHE recipients are
dependent on such funding to continue operating and providing
services to their low income members. Such disruption in
funding could lead to some completely shutting down.
Additionally, many tribes have pledged their Native
American Housing Block Grant funds as security for title VI or
section 184 loans, and HUD's proposed course of action could
result in default on these loans, requiring the United States
to assume the payment of these loans. NAIHC urges this
committee to persuade HUD to reconsider its decision and seek
an alternative solution, if at all possible.
In conclusion, I would like to thank you for giving us this
opportunity to speak. We look forward to working with the
committee on all issues affecting Indian housing programs.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Shuravloff appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you.
Chief Ellis.
STATEMENT OF A.D. ELLIS, PRINCIPAL CHIEF, MUSCOGEE CREEK
NATION, OKMULGEE, OK
Mr. Ellis. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, distinguished
committee. It is a great honor to be invited here this morning
to represent my nation.
My name is A.D. Ellis, I am presently principal chief of
the Muscogee Creek Nation, the fourth largest tribe in America,
with over 62,000 members. Our housing program has basically
been a successful program. We now have over 100 employees in
our housing division. Since 1970, we have built 2,900 homes,
240 low rent apartments and the biggest thing that has helped
the tribe was the initiation of NAHASDA.
Before that, I heard the Vice Chairman mention
reservations. The misconception is all Federal funding goes to
reservation tribes. The distinction of the Oklahoma tribes is
different. Out of the 39 tribes in Oklahoma, 38 of them do not
have reservations.
All the housing authorities in Oklahoma fall under State of
Oklahoma law. All the Housing Authority employees, the board of
directors and funds, up until NAHASDA, was submitted to the
Housing Authority. In the last 3 years I came into office, I
petitioned the State of Oklahoma to exercise the sovereignty of
the Muscogee Nation. We got the Senate and House of
Representative to agree. In March of this year, the Governor
signed a bill relinquishing all State housing laws and assets
to the Muscogee Nation. We received $43 million in assets and
cash and the State of Oklahoma no longer exists in the Creek
Housing Authority.
Now, the Housing Authority is run by tribal government,
totally tribal government, no interference. We know what our
people need. We live among them. I received a HUD home in 1988.
I waited 6 years to get the house. I ran into all the
roadblocks. I know what the people need, I know what they go
through in trying to get these.
Since the NAHASDA program was initiated, in the last two
years we have gone from tribal boundaries to statewide mortgage
assistance program. At the present time, we purchase modular
homes from an Oklahoma prison system at a great reduction in
price.
In Oklahoma, most of our people are under one-quarter
blood. Out of our 62,000 people, about 42,000 are less than
one-quarter. So what we call the full-blood people are very
reluctant to ask for anything. We put them first choice,
referencing the elderly. We use proceeds of sale that the State
turned over to us for emergency next-day assistance.
We now build homes on restricted lands. We are purchasing a
building company to build our own modular homes. And I didn't
bring my housing director with me today due to budget sessions,
but I assure you, I am not an expert in housing, I only control
the housing.
But he did say that we oppose the voting that the housing
council took in Hawaii previously on the using the census of
the count of tribal members. I think if it passes, I think the
Navajo Nation will probably accumulate another 7 million. The
tribes in Oklahoma will probably lose about 15 million. So we
are going to address that a little later.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate being here on behalf of
the Oklahoma tribes. Thank you, sir.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Ellis appears in appendix.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Chief.
Chairman Steele, welcome.
STATEMENT OF JAMES STEELE, Jr., CHAIRMAN, CONFEDERATED SALISH
AND KOOTENAI TRIBES OF THE FLATHEAD INDIAN NATION, ACCOMPANIED
BY JASON ADAMS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HOUSING AUTHORITY
Mr. Steele. Good morning. I would like to greet you in the
language of the Salish and Kootenai Tribes. [Greeting in native
tongue.]
Good morning, Chairman McCain, Vice Chairman Dorgan,
Senator Murkowski, and members of the committee. My name is
James Steele. I am the chairman of the Confederated Salish and
Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Indian Nation in present day
western Montana. I appreciate the opportunity to speak before
you today. With me here today is Jason Adams, executive
director of the Salish and Kootenai Housing Authority.
I have submitted a detailed written statement and will now
summarize my remarks.
The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes are one of the
original 10 self-governance tribes in the United States, and we
are the only tribes in the country to operate both our IAM
program and our title plant. We were the first tribe in the
country to organize under the Indian Reorganization Act.
My testimony discusses two interesting things we are doing
on the reservation involving the issuance of private mortgages
by utilizing the HUD 184 program. Our housing authority has
partnered with several of the local lenders on the Flathead
Reservation to provide this home ownership program to our
membership. We have over 80 mortgages that have been completed,
with the majority of those loans being on trust land.
In all of the transactions, the tribal council placed our
housing authority in a position of essentially an additional
guarantor over and above HUD's guarantee. We are also quite
proud of our home buyer education program. In the last year, we
have had over 80 families graduate from the classes with 56 of
those families going on to obtain a mortgage through either the
HUD 184 program or our own tribal credit program.
The housing issues that I would like to touch on today are
the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination
Act reauthorization, the NAHASDA funding formula and funding
levels for fiscal year 2007, the funding level for the National
American Indian Housing Council and the issue of HUD freezing
NAHASDA funds to recipients that have not received their fiscal
year 2006 funds.
When you reauthorize NAHASDA, it is important that you
address the 30 percent rule. The 30 percent rule is a mandate
in the act that requires all tenants in units supported by
NAHASDA funds to have to pay no more than 30 percent of their
adjusted income in rent. The intent behind this rule may have
been admirable, but as cited in my testimony, is simply not
working, in great part because it is too rigid. Our position is
that our tribes could benefit from discretion in this regard,
and that we could design and implement a rental fee schedule
that provides an incentive to those who have lived in poverty
historically and who then go on to work.
From a tribal leader's perspective, the problem is that the
rule doesn't allow us to self-determine the structure of the
housing program that we provide. We think that the assistant
secretary of HUD erred in 2003 when he arbitrarily changed the
use of census data from the single race data set to the multi-
race data set. As I understand, this decision was made without
consulting with tribes and without giving tribes the
opportunity to provide input back to HUD on the effects that
such a decision would have to the recipients of NAHASDA.
I am encouraged by the work that has begun at NAIHC to work
within its membership to convene a task force to study this
issue and work toward common ground with its membership to find
an answer to this issue. I believe that when tribes come to the
table with the expectation for solving an issue themselves, it
will happen.
I would ask this committee to assist the NAIHC with the
proposal that comes forth from the task force. The funding
level for NAHASDA is totally inadequate. I would ask that this
committee support a substantial increase in the fiscal year
2007 appropriation far above what the President's budget
proposal contains.
If funding levels from fiscal year 2002 had been maintained
with modest inflation, the fiscal year 2007 appropriation for
NAHASDA should be approximately $748 million, not $625 million
as contained in the President's budget. Without some increase
in funding, housing authorities and many others are forced to
make tough decisions on cutting programs, decreasing the level
of maintenance of existing units and not being able to leverage
funding to create new, affordable housing opportunities.
I support funding for the National American Indian Housing
Council. It is very discouraging to see that the President's
budget proposal does not contain any funding for the council. I
would ask that this committee fully support funding for the
council and its membership of 265 tribes, including funds
needed to keep up with the cost of providing the services.
The final issue I would like to discuss today is the recent
decision from HUD to freeze all allocation of the NAHASDA block
grant funds to those tribes that have not yet received their
fiscal year 2006 funding. HUD is apparently reacting to a court
decision stemming from a lawsuit filed by the Fort Peck Housing
Authority. The court ruling declared a NAHASDA regulation
invalid, which therefore changed the NAHASDA funding formula. I
understand HUD is appealing the decision and has decided to
freeze funding until the outcome of their appeal.
While we understand HUD's need to protect itself, should
they lose this lawsuit, freezing all unobligated NAHASDA
funding to 141 tribes is not the answer. It is not clear how
these tribal housing authorities are going to operate without
this funding. We ask this committee to promptly consult with
the Appropriations Subcommittee on HUD, the Banking, Housing
and Urban Affairs Committee, about a possibility of a joint
communication to HUD to obligate these funds. If HUD loses this
lawsuit, they should be required to submit a supplemental
appropriations request or to access the DOJ judgment fund, the
same way any other agency would if they lost a lawsuit
It has been an honor to be invited to testify before this
committee. Thank you for having this hearing and for providing
an opportunity for a panel of tribal representatives to come
and give our perspective on some of the important issues facing
Indian Country in the area of housing. Thank you.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Steele appears in appendix.]
Senator Murkowski [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Steele, and
thank you to all of you who have joined us here this morning.
The chairman had to excuse himself, he had another
committee that began at 10:30, and he had to make an
introduction of another individual. So he apologizes that he
had to leave before the hearing was able to conclude.
But I do appreciate the perspective that the three of you
have been able to give us, and to hear the concerns raised by
the panel as to the effect that tying up these funds through
the Fort Peck situation can have. We recognize that, and the
Chairman and Vice Chairman clearly stated the need to act in
this area and to do so very quickly.
Mr. Shuravloff, you had mentioned the working groups or the
task force that has been pulled together in anticipation of the
NAHASDA reauthorization coming up. I understand that you have
been working, or NAIHC has been working with the Native housing
authorities nationwide to gather some suggested changes to this
act. I do understand that you have not yet formalized the
report. Can you give us any preliminary insight as to the
findings that you can disclose at this point in time?
Mr. Shuravloff. Senator Murkowski, at this point we are in
the process of gathering both regulatory and statutory issues
that we may want to look at during the reauthorization of the
act. We hope to have that concluded here in the very near
future.
Senator Murkowski. What does that mean, in the very near
future? When do you anticipate you will be done with this?
Mr. Shuravloff. Well, what the work product, the product
that is coming out is, we hope to have done it within the next
couple of months. Then in our December meeting, we hope to have
a business meeting to ratify any amendments that the membership
would like to move forward with the reauthorization process.
Senator Murkowski. So at this point, it is too early, too
premature to indicate what some of the preliminary findings
might be?
Mr. Shuravloff. Yes; it is.
Senator Murkowski. All right. You mentioned in your
comments the issue of mold. We are finding that, particularly
in many of our villages in western Alaska, mold is a tough
issue for us, it is a significant issue. Can you give me some
indication the extent of the problem, beyond what I am aware
of, in Alaska? How big of an issue is this as it relates to our
housing for Native Americans and Alaska Natives?
Mr. Shuravloff. It has become a large issue nationwide. I
think we see it a lot in Alaska, especially because of our
housing building techniques. I think most people realize that
mold is a product of not enough air movement through the house,
and the moisture that gathers, of course, creates the mold.
I know in Alaska there is a study that has been going on
and I think is being concluded on developing some different
building techniques. But I have been hearing of problems all
across the Country on mold issues. It is definitely a big
issue.
In terms of numbers, I don't have that available. But I
know across the country everybody seems to be dealing with it
in just about every State.
Senator Murkowski. Certainly from the health perspective,
it is something that should cause us concern. We don't want to
be building housing that is going to cause health problems for
those that are living in them. We know that when you have any
significant degree of mold in a home, it can.
We had a hearing about 1\1/2\years ago on teacher housing
out in rural Alaska, and heard testimony from a young woman
that became very ill and learned that it was not necessarily
the housing techniques that had failed, they had installed the
vapor barrier inside out or on the wrong side. So what had
happened was a level of mold buildup in the house, the house
looked pretty good from the outside. But it was not a liveable
structure, because of some of the construction issues.
So yes, we need to work to make sure that we have got good
construction techniques. But we also need to remember that we
can't move forward with just shoddy workmanship, either. I
think in that situation, that was exactly what was happening.
Mr. Shuravloff. Yes, Senator; if I might add, I think a lot
of the problem is education on the homeowner's part.
Ventilation is one of the main issues when you deal with mold.
One of the things we have found is that our own residents
continually have to be educated on the requirements of leaving
windows open or turning fans on to keep some ventilation within
the unit.
That seems to be one of the big problems we are dealing
with, is education. It may not necessarily be the building
itself, but just the education of the residents within the
unit.
Senator Murkowski. Well, the education is certainly
important. When Ms. Green was testifying, speaking to the fact
that there are so many of our Alaska Natives, Native Americans,
who have not had certain background in financing, understanding
the financing, having built a credit record. Because they
basically operate using cash, having no bank account.
There is an educational process that comes with home
ownership that does not just relate to the management and
operation of the home itself, but also even prior to getting
into the home. I think we recognize that we have many issues
that we need to deal with. And we are not going to be able to
resolve them all overnight. But working together, with
committed individuals, we will make some progress.
I appreciate the time that you have taken, and the time
that you have taken to travel here to Washington to give us
your perspectives. With that, we will adjourn the Committee.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 10:40 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of A.D. Ellis, Principal Chief, Muscogee Nation,
Oklahoma
My name is A. D. Ellis and I am presently Principal Chief of the
Muscogee [Creek] Nation of Oklahoma. I have 15 years in elected office
which included 8 years on the National Council and 4 years as second
chief.
Housing and Health issues in the Muscogee Nation are a top priority
as it probably is for every tribal nation. With the increased funding
in the last 15 years, we have been able to keep up with the yearly
demand but it seems to always have a waiting list of 500 to 700 people.
The Muscogee [Creek] Nation is situated in the most depressed area in
Oklahoma and has had this distinction for many years.
In 1997 with the introduction of the NAHASDA Program and the
funding sent directly to the tribe instead of the Housing Authority, we
were able to serve our peoples needs more efficiently. Unknown to most
everyone in Oklahoma and especially State leaders such as Senators,
Representatives and even the Governor, all Tribal Housing Authorities
were controlled by State laws. This was a great opportunity for tribal
citizens to balk against elected tribal leaders as they served on
housing boards under State law and not tribal law. These housing boards
were formed in the late 1960's before tribal government and
constitutions were formed. Great amounts of money and other assets were
controlled by housing authority boards that would not cooperate with
tribal leaders. Even under these unfavorable circumstances, we have
built approximately 50 new homes per year and probably another 50 homes
purchased, called `acquisition homes'.
Another program that came with NAHASDA is the 184 Program and
Mortgage Assistance. Mortgage Assistance provides up to $25,000 for
down payment and closing costs for those that qualify for a loan from a
lender that participates in the program. This is a no payback benefit
if the homebuyer stays in the home for a period of years.
We have about 100 employees in our new housing division which is a
new arm of my administration. My first year in office I terminated the
entire board of directors and top management and formed the new housing
division controlled by the tribal government. This is the third year of
trying to exercise our tribal sovereignty and was successful.
A friendly State Senator carried a specially crafted piece of
legislation to the Oklahoma Senate and House to unanimously pass the
legislation to allow the Muscogee Nation to assume all programs and
assets of the Creek Nation Housing Authority of Oklahoma. The State of
Oklahoma ceased to exist with the Creek Nation Housing Authority.
Since assuming complete control we have made many policy changes to
better serve our citizens. One is to lower the income requirements to
own a HUD of NAHASDA home.
<bullet> \\\\\\Previously a person had to earn over $15,000 to
qualify. This left out the very people that needed help the
most. By lowering the earning requirements to $5,000 annually
the most needy and lower income people could qualify.
<bullet> \\\\\\A policy giving the full blood citizen priority along
with tribal elders has been implemented.
<bullet> \\\\\\Mortgage assistance was restricted to tribal
boundaries and has been changed to state boundaries. Now any
Creek citizen living in the State of Oklahoma can receive
assistance.
Progress is moving slowly forward and if we continue to receive
funds at this level we plan to serve our present housing needs within 7
years.
Our present funding needs are now being challenged by reservation
tribes from other States. The funding is based on the 2000 census count
which was based on Indian and Multi-race Indians as listed on the
census card.
A change in the numbers by a different census count, ``Indian
Only'', could reduce the funding for all Indians in Oklahoma and
increase it for all Reservation Tribes. The Indian population in
Oklahoma is near 600,000 with most belonging to the Five Tribes of
Eastern Oklahoma being the Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, and
Creek. If this formula has to be changed we hope it could wait until
the 2010 census count.
Over all the NAHASDA program is working and the Native American
population is being served by a professional and capable housing
division dedicated to serve the Muscogee [Creek] people. Any support
from the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Senate is always appreciated and we
need the funding levels to remain as they are or more.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.029
Prepared Statement of Marty Shuravloff, Chairman, National American
Indian Housing Council
Good morning Chairman McCain, Vice Chairman Dorgan, Senator
Murkowski, and distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Indian
Affairs. My name is Marty Shuravloff and I am honored to appear before
you today to discuss matters related to the delivery of safe, decent,
and affordable homes to Native people from across our great Nation.
I am also honored to have been elected last month to serve as
chairman of the National American Indian Housing Council [NAIHC] the
oldest and largest Indian housing organization in the Nation,
representing the housing interests of more than 460 tribes. I am an
enrolled member of the Leisnol Village, serve my people as executive
director of the Kodiak Island Housing Authority, and serve all Alaskans
by holding a variety of appointed posts such as with the Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation.
Begun in 1974, 4 years after President Nixon issued his now-famous
Special Message to Congress on Indian Affairs, the NAIHC is the major
capacity building organization for Indian tribes and tribally
designated housing entities [TDHEs] by providing guidance, technical
assistance, training and related capacity-building services. The NAIHC
trains thousands of Indian housing and other staff per year, offering
most of its training without charging a fee. The NAIHC provides a full
range of programs and services such as technical assistance to TDHEs
and Indian tribes that include onsite visits, telephone and e-mail
assistance, structured training classes for regional associations and
housing Boards of Commissioners, and topic-specific training courses at
both its Annual Convention and Legal Symposium. These tailored training
courses include a new crime prevention and safety initiative launched
in April 2005.
NAIHC also uses modem technology to save tribes time and travel
costs by offering training by both web cast and video. For training
courses and services that require travel, NAIHC offers a scholarship
program that helps tribes and TDHEs offset the cost of sending
individuals to much-needed and beneficial training that they may not
otherwise be able to afford. In 2005, 200 different tribes and TDHEs
benefited by the granting of 751 scholarships by the NAIHC. In addition
to offering onsite training, NAIHC maintains a comprehensive, highly
visited website and is developing a premier state-of-the-art website to
help Native people educate themselves about the benefits and mechanics
of homeownership. The ``Native American Homebuyer'' website and a
technical Indian housing library are both scheduled to go online this
summer.
Beginning in the early 1990's, Indian tribes, housing authorities
and others came together to share their vision of how housing and
related community development ought to be carried out in Native
communities in the era of Indian Self Determination. The NAIHC was
instrumental in shaping these discussions and helping to draft, in both
spirit and letter, what would ultimately become the Native American
Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act [NAHASDA] 25 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 4101 et seq.
In 1996, this committee--under the leadership of Chairman McCain--
approved legislation that revolutionized the way Federal housing
programs and services are designed and implemented in Native
communities. A Republican Congress approved and President Clinton
signed the NAHASDA. The NAHASDA rests on a firm foundation of Indian
Self Determination and reflects the time-tested principles of local
tribal decisionmaking and tribal economic self-sufficiency.
Unlike previous Federal housing approaches, the NAHASDA is distinct
in four ways: It stresses the trust responsibility of the U.S.
Government to house Native Americans; it replaces categorical grant
programs with a block grant that affords tribes more flexibility to
design housing to meet each community's unique needs; it encourages
tribes to develop a long-term comprehensive housing strategy through
the preparation of housing plans; and it enables tribes unprecedented
opportunities to use different sources of financing to meet housing
needs in their community.
NAHASDA is scheduled for reauthorization in 2007. Although we have
made some great strides since the inception of the act, further
refinements are necessary to make it an even more powerful tool for
Native communities. The NAIHC has taken a proactive role in gathering
input from tribes across the Nation on the effectiveness of the act in
meeting its intended purpose of providing quality, affordable housing
to Native people. We respectfully request congressional support for
reauthorization of the act and this committee's active and vigorous
assistance in eliminating unnecessary and overly burdensome obstacles
that frustrate the intent of Congress and detrimentally impact Indian
housing programs.
For nearly 32 years the NAIHC has provided invaluable assistance to
Indian tribes and TDHEs and in no small measure has made the often-
difficult implementation phase of the NAHASDA a success. Along the way,
the NAIHC has endured many difficulties including a Federal housing
bureaucracy more concerned with its own preservation and well-being
than in meeting its obligation to Native people; and Congressional
appropriators who are unaware of--or worse, unmoved by--the dire
economic conditions that characterize Native communities.
The potency of Federal funding for the Native American Block Grant
[NAHBG] has been steadily eroded by inflation. Funding for the NAHBG in
the past 9 fiscal years is as follows:
Fiscal Year 1998 $600 million.
Fiscal Year 1999 $620 million.
Fiscal Year 2000 $620 million.
Fiscal Year 2001 $650 million.
Fiscal Year 2002 $648.2 million.
Fiscal Year 2003 $644.8 million.
Fiscal Year 2004 $650.3 million.
Fiscal Year 2005 $622.0 million.
Fiscal Year 2006 $623.7 million.
During the same time, Federal funding made available to the NAIHC
for technical assistance and training to Indian tribes and their TDHEs
has also steadily eroded.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] maintains
that the NAIHC has at its disposal $3,921,282.32 in ``undisbursed
funds'' left over from fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2005, and $1,
980.000.00 in ``unobligated funds'' left over from fiscal year 2006,
adding up to a total of $5,901,282.32 that in the minds of HUD we are
unable or unwilling to spend. The truth of the matter, as you know
Chairman McCain, is often not as simple as the Department would have
you believe.
Funds appropriated to the National American Indian Housing Council
[NAIHC] are being used to provide critical housing related services to
Indian tribes, TDHEs and their staff and, just as important, the funds
are being expended in a timely manner. For the most recent fiscal year,
the NAIHC expended $5,369,365 on HUD-approved, federally funded
programs and services. According to HUD, $5,965,637.28 in prior
appropriated funds were ``in the pipeline'' as of March 2006. At that
time, however, no invoices had been submitted to HUD for 2006
expenditures. If the NA1HC were to continue to expend funds at the same
rate as in 2005, the ``pipeline'' funds would be fully exhausted by
January 2007, and any suggestions that there is sufficient funding ``in
the pipeline'' to last through the end of fiscal year 2007 are simply
inaccurate.
The main factors contributing to the ``in the pipeline'' perception
are the many administrative delays which accompany the Cooperative
Agreement entered into by HUD and the NAIHC. The NAIHC receives its
funds on a reimbursement basis after incurring costs for HUD-approved
activities. The NAIHC's current Cooperative Agreement with HUD took 6
months to complete from March 4, 2005, when NAIHC submitted a Statement
of Work to HUD to September 14, 2005, when it was executed. This
process includes eight different steps within HUD before approval to
the NAIHC is granted. While HUD shows these funds as unused, NAIHC can
show that the funds will be exhausted by the activities of the NAIHC
throughout the year.
If House passed levels of technical assistance funding prevail,
NAIHC shuts down, it is that simple. For fiscal year 2007, the House
has proposed $990,000 for technical assistance and training services
for the NAIHC and it is no exaggeration to say that, with this or a
similar level of funding in the next fiscal year, the NAIHC will close
its doors in or around January 2007. Perhaps HUD intends to satisfy the
demand for technical assistance and training by tribes and TDHEs
thereafter, Mr. Chairman, but this is the stark reality for the NAIHC.
The NAHASDA defines a clear government-to-government relationship
between the U.S. Government and Indian tribes for purposes of providing
housing and sets forth the trust responsibility of the U.S. Government
to assist tribes in providing housing and improve economic development
to their members. Indian Self-determination, to be meaningful, means
that the Indian tribes themselves, not HUD, design, implement, and
conduct housing and related programs for their members. Under this
policy, tribal governments plan, conduct and administer Indian housing
programs and services for their own people. In passing the NAHASDA,
Congress intended HUD's role to be residual and to be minimally
intrusive into tribal decisionmaking when it comes to housing. HUD's
extensive and often heavy-handed oversight of Indian housing programs
undermines the ability of tribal governments to make their own
decisions about how to house and protect their people and manage their
affairs. Rather than promoting Indian Self-Determination, tribes are
subjected to severe and overly burdensome regulations that not only
hinder their housing programs but, more significantly, the regulations
harm the welfare of their people.
In an attempt to resurrect the original intent of NAHASDA, the
NAIHC, tribes and TDHEs have established a legislative working group to
identify and address legislative and regulatory issues of tribal
concern with the statute as it now stands. Their issues include: the
impediments of the Program Assessment Rating Tool [PART] process and
how to improve the data collection and reporting elements as they
relate to Indian housing; the severe problem with methamphetamine in
Indian communities; the insufficient or non-existent infrastructure in
Indian communities; addressing the problem of mold in federally
assisted tribal homes; the establishment of development reserve
accounts as an eligible activity under NAHASDA; replacing the 30
percent income rule with fair market rents; Federal procurement issues
relating to housing materials; the elimination of secretarial approval
for long term leases and; overdue and necessary reforms to the Bureau
of Indian Affairs Title Status Report process.
The NAIHC is committed to finding resolutions to these problems and
is developing creative solutions to deal with these issues. For
example, the Title Status Report process can be improved if tribes were
broadly authorized and encouraged to contract these functions such as
under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of
1975, as amended, 25 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 450 et seq. NAIHC has offered
several training sessions on this topic for its members. In order to
address the insufficient or non-existent infrastructure in Indian
country, the NAIHC is collaborating with Federal agencies in the
development of an infrastructure Memorandum-of-Understanding that will
encourage agencies to assist tribes with infrastructure development. In
addition, NAIHC has established a second internal working group to deal
with issues related to the Native American Housing Block Grant
Allocation Formula. The NAIHC recognizes the importance of
collaboration and is committed to working with tribes and TDHEs across
the Nation to address these issues and reach resolutions on them.
The Native American Housing Block Grant program is the main program
for funding tribal housing under NAHASDA. NAHASDA relies on definitions
of ``Indian'', ``Indian tribe'' and ``Indian area'' for the purpose of
designating allocations. The definitions of ``Indian'' and an ``Indian
tribe'' are included in the NAHASDA at section 4, paragraph 9. The term
``Indian'' means any person who is a member of an Indian tribe and the
term Indian tribe means a tribe that is federally recognized or state
recognized.
Historically, decennial census numbers have been one element in the
calculation of distribution of Native American Housing Block Grant
funds. A change in the census collection technique in the 2000
decennial census led to a change in distribution patterns causing a
question to be raised regarding the use of a specific set of census
data. A failure of the negotiated rulemaking committee to arrive at a
consensus on which census data to use caused HUD to utilize a specific
data set and has led to a disagreement among tribes concerning the
formula for distribution.
The NAIHC membership recently passed a resolution to endorse the
use of ``single-race data'' in the formula calculations for the Native
American Housing Block Grant allocation. However, this committee knows
that there remains disagreement among NAIHC membership concerning the
way in which American Indians and Alaska Natives are counted by the
U.S. Census Bureau. In an attempt to reach consensus on this issue, the
NAIHC has established a Task Force with the goal of arriving at a
position that is agreeable to all tribes regarding the counting of
American Indian and Alaska Natives in the formula. The Task Force is to
formulate a position which they will then present to the NAIHC
membership for approval. Because this issue is unresolved at many
levels, we request the active support of the Committee on Indian
Affairs in these efforts.
The NAIHC is gravely concerned about HUD's recent decision to
potentially withhold allocation of the remaining fiscal year 2006 funds
if the department is unable to obtain a stay pending appeal of the
Court's decision in the Fort Peck Housing Authority v. U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (Civ. Action No. 05-CV-00018-RPM-CBS,
May 25, 2006). While we understand the difficulties presented by the
Fort Peck decision, responding to what is a narrow decision possibly
only affecting the Fort Peck Tribe by withholding funds for hundreds of
tribes may be outside of HUD's legal authority to do. Even more
fundamental is the severe hardship such a decision by HUD will have on
recipients whose funding is inappropriately withheld. As you are aware,
many if not most tribal and TDHE recipients are dependent on such
funding to continue operating and providing service to their low-income
members. Disruption of funding will impose substantial limitations on
these tribes and TDHEs, conceivably leading to some completely shutting
down.
Additionally, many tribes have pledged their Native American
Housing Block Grant funds as security for title VI or section 184 loans
and HUD's proposed course of action would result in default on those
loans, requiring the United States to assume the payment of these
loans. Placing the tribes and TDHEs at risk of an adverse credit rating
is unacceptable. NAIHC urges this committee to persuade HUD to
reconsider its decision and seek an alternative solution for the
situation at hand.
In conclusion, I would like to thank you, Chairman McCain, Vice
Chairman Dorgan, Senator Murkowski, and the members of the committee
for your continuing support of Native people and their housing
programs. The NAIHC is eager to work with the committee on all the
issues affecting Indian housing programs--no matter how difficult--so
that together we can achieve objectives we both share, for example,
more and better housing for Native people, increasing homeownership in
Native communities, and building stronger tribal economies along the
way.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8468.039
<all>