U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–586 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 111–1192 

OVERSIGHT OF THE 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 21, 2009 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon 

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

BETTINA POIRIER, Staff Director 

RUTH VAN MARK, Minority Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

MAY 21, 2009 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma .................... 1 

Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S. Senator from the State of California ........................ 3 

Bond, Hon. Christopher S., U.S. Senator from the State of Missouri, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 133 

WITNESSES 

Walters, Sandra R., Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development, Economic Development Administration ................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Boxer ................................ 14 

Response to an additional question from Senator Merkley .......................... 17 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe ............................... 17 

Kennedy, Hon. James, Commissioner, Butler County, Pennsylvania, on behalf 

of the National Association of Regional Councils .............................................. 19 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe ............................... 56 

Phillips, LaVern W., President, Woodward Industrial Foundation ..................... 82 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 84 

Response to an additional question from Senator Inhofe ............................. 87 

Mazer, Leanne, Executive Director of the Tri-County Council for Western 

Maryland ............................................................................................................... 89 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 91 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe ............................... 105 

(1) 

OVERSIGHT OF THE ECONOMIC 

DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION 

THURSDAY, MAY 21, 2009 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, Washington, DC. 

The full Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 

406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer (chairman of the full Committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Boxer, Inhofe, Cardin, Klobuchar, Udall, and 

Merkley. 

Senator BOXER. If everyone would kindly take their seats. We are 

so grateful to you all for being here this morning. 

We will start right away. Senator Inhofe has a competing hearing on Armed Services, very urgent, that he has to go to. So I am 

going to do something different today. I am going to give him the 

opportunity to open it up. Senator Inhofe, please. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA 

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thanks for having this hearing today. 

I am hoping that this will precipitate that this will get us into 

the reauthorization. That is something that I have been trying to 

do now for quite some time. I thought we were going to get it done 

last year, but there were some problems, not with this Committee 

but on the House side. 

I want to welcome all of our witnesses, particularly LaVern Phillips, the guy with the green tie, most appropriately, and you would 

expect that. He is the President of the Woodward Industrial Foundation. I was actually in his town to visit with him 3 days ago and 

he was not there. But they have done some wonderful things in 

Woodward and I am very, very proud of it. 

I have had the pleasure of working with the State and local interests to begin to address some of the infrastructural problems in 

Northwest Oklahoma and the Panhandle. For example, the WRDA 

2007 authorized water and waste water treatment related infrastructure, including $1.5 million for Woodward and $16 million for 

Guymon. I also went to Guymon on the same day, on Monday, 

LaVern. 

Anyway, one of my trips to Woodward was last August. It was 

for a $1 million EDA check presentation that will help build the 

Woodward Community Campus. And when you look at the successes that we have had in Oklahoma, and I think other States 
2 

have, too, the leverage is so impressive. We had a total, I believe, 

in this last authorization of some $26 million and that was leveraged into $556 million. If we had released all that stuff that we 

wasted on the bank bailouts in programs like this, it sure would 

be worthwhile. 

This is a program where liberals and conservatives get together 

and say, this is what Government should be doing. I think that the 

successes we have had in Oklahoma are very similar to successes 

all around the Country. 

The EDA’s authorization expired on September 30th of last year 

and I am concerned that the lapse in authorization may leave the 

agency vulnerable to funding cuts during the appropriations cycle 

and more generally result in uncertainty for the agency as well as 

the struggling communities. 

We have a lot of struggling communities, Madam Chairman, in 

my State of Oklahoma. I have so many examples all over the State. 

One thing is the EDA grant that we did down in Elgin, Oklahoma. 

Mr. Phillips precipitated the building of a 150,000 square foot 

building in Laverne, Oklahoma which has a population of 300. It 

shows you that things can be done and that was all done with a 

very small EDA grant. 

So, I am hoping this will lead to authorization, Madam Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Inhofe follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Thank you, Chairman Boxer, for holding this hearing on the Economic Development Administration. Oversight is an important function of our Committee, and 

with reauthorization of the agency several months overdue, as well as a more than 

tripling of funding over the past year through regular appropriations, disaster-related supplemental funding and stimulus bill funding, an oversight hearing now is 

very timely. 

I would like to welcome our witnesses, especially LaVern Phillips, President of the 

Woodward Industrial Foundation in Oklahoma. I visited the city many times, including just last week. I also want to note that I understand that Mr. Phillips and 

the rest of Woodward will be welcoming former President George W. Bush to the 

city to celebrate the 4th of July this year. 

I’ve had the pleasure of working with State and local interests to begin to address 

several infrastructure needs for Northwest Oklahoma and the Panhandle. For example, WRDA 2007 authorized water and waste water treatment related infrastructure, including $1.5 million for Woodward, $16 million for Guymon and $275,000 for 

Oklahoma Panhandle State University. We were able to secure funding for transportation improvements as well, including $6.4 million to construct a viaduct on U.S. 

Highway 270 over the railroad tracks in Woodward and $1 million to widen U.S. 

Highway 54 from north of Optima to the Kansas State line. I intend to continue 

working with dedicated professionals like Mr. Phillips to improve the infrastructure, 

and therefore the economic viability and quality of life, of this area. 

One of my trips to Woodward was last August for a $1 million EDA check presentation that will help build the Woodward Community Campus. I will let Mr. Phillips 

talk more about the details of the project, but I would like to mention that I very 

much support this project and was pleased to see it recognized for funding by EDA. 

The Woodward project is one recent in a long line of smart and incredibly beneficial investments EDA has made in Oklahoma. In fact, over the past 6 years, EDA 

grants awarded in my home State have resulted in more than 9,000 jobs being created or saved. With an investment of about $26 million, we have leveraged another 

30 million in State and local dollars and more than 558 million in private sector 

dollars. 

That’s real economic development with real jobs. I only wish more of the so-called 

‘‘stimulus’’ bill had been dedicated to programs like EDA that are truly successful 

at spurring economic development. 
3 

My belief in EDA’s success is not just anecdotal either. Studies show that EDA 

uses Federal dollars efficiently and effectively, creating and retaining long-term jobs 

at an average cost that is among the lowest in Government. Today’s hearing gives 

us an opportunity to discuss possible tools to improve performance even further during the reauthorization process. 

The EDA’s authorization expired on September 30, 2008. I am concerned that the 

lapse in authorization may leave the agency vulnerable to funding cuts during this 

appropriations cycle and more generally result in uncertainty for the agency as well 

as the struggling communities that depend on its assistance. 

I had introduced a reauthorization bill in July 2008, and this Committee reported 

a bipartisan bill in September. Unfortunately the bill was never enacted. In February of this year, I again introduced a bill to reauthorize and improve EDA’s programs. 

Madam Chairman, I hope that this hearing is the first step in our Committee 

again reporting an EDA reauthorization bill and this time seeing it through to enactment. I look forward to working with you and our colleagues to accomplish that 

task as soon as possible. Thank you. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. Senator Inhofe, my Ranking Member, I could not 

agree with you more. We need to move on this soon. Regardless of 

whom the Administration names, I feel we need to get ahead of the 

curve here. I have talked to Gary Locke about this. He is very supportive and excited about this. 

I am going to put my statement on the record, but I am going 

to through it just in about 2 minutes. 

[The referenced material was not received at time of print.] 

We know the EDA has a long history of helping economically distressed communities and, as my colleague has said, leveraging 

funds in magnificent ways. This program was created during the 

Johnson administration, so it certainly has been proven. I bet some 

of you in this audience were born well after that. Oh, but if could 

say that about myself. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. As Senator Inhofe has said, from providing 

money for water and sewer improvements to helping manufacturers become more competitive in the global marketplace, the EDA 

provides valuable assistance to communities across the Nation. It 

is cost effective. It has a very important role to play in economically challenging times. 

I went out to Sacramento to an area that has just made a proposal for EDA funding. It is like the perfect place. It is a redevelopment area. They built a stadium there, a ballpark for the farm 

team. It is the biggest field there. And they really are just getting 

ready now to add housing and so on and so forth. It is just the perfect place to leverage those types of funds. 

When the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Economic Development testified before us in September, he stated 

that from Fiscal Year 2004 to 2008, EDA awarded over $1.29 billion in investments which are expected to create 392,000 jobs at an 

average cost of only $2,500 per job. Now I would put that up 

against almost anything else that we do. 

We know that Federal dollars spur large amounts of private sector investment and it is estimated that for every dollar in Federal 

funding, $33 in private sector investment was created. This is really a great success story. 
4 

Congress recognized EDA’s unique role in job creation in the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, our stimulus bill, and I 

worked hard to get this $150 million. Boy, I had to work hard to 

get it. But we did get it. And I want to thank Bettina Poirier and 

her staff on that one because that was a climb. 

But I do look forward today to hearing how those funds have 

been distributed. It may be that they are still being distributed. We 

want to know about that and how those funds are helping our communities across the Nation. 

We also provided EDA with a total of $500 million in natural disaster assistance through supplemental appropriations in 2008 and 

2009 and I would love to hear about how those funds are being 

used to support long-term post-disaster economic recovery in response to hurricanes, floods and other disasters. 

So, as was stated by my Ranking Member, EDA’s authorization 

expired at the end of September 2008, but the agency has been 

able to continue operating through the appropriation of funds. We 

do need to reauthorize and I intend to do it. So does Senator 

Inhofe. And when the two of us get our mind to something, we do 

it. Right, Ruthie? And so, we are going to do it because we have 

got to push on this. This is a win-win. 

I am going to get this going and then, Paul, will you tell me 

when there is like 5 minutes left to go? 

So, Sandra Walters, Acting Assistant Secretary of Economic Development, accompanied by Dennis Alvord, we will start with you. 

STATEMENT OF SANDRA R. WALTERS, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, ACTING ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION 

Ms. WALTERS. Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member Inhofe and 

members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the Economic Development Administration. 

EDA’s mission is to lead the Federal economic development agenda by promoting innovation and competitiveness, preparing American regions for growth and success in the worldwide economy. 

EDA’s achievements have two major goals: attracting private capital investment and creating higher skill, higher wage jobs. EDA’s 

achievements are a reflection of our policy priorities: to encourage 

collaborative regional economic development, to promote competitiveness and innovation, to cultivate entrepreneurship, and to spur 

our economic development partners to take advantage of the opportunities of the worldwide marketplace. 

As part of its 2010 budget request, the Administration has emphasized two priority areas for EDA: regional innovation clusters 

and business incubator networks. EDA is encouraged by this focus 

and finds it consistent with the results of recent EDA research, as 

well as best practice in the economic development field overall. 

EDA has a history of investing in regional innovation clusters 

and business incubator projects, such as a $2.2 million investment 

to JumpStart in Northeast Ohio, which has helped its clients create 

650 new jobs and raise $43 million in private sector investments, 

and a $1.25 million investment in the Bio-Innovations Center in 

the New Orleans Medical District which is assisting in the develop-
5 

ment of biotechnology-related companies looking to commercialize 

technologies from the greater New Orleans area universities and 

research institutions. 

Another critical element to our success is our focus on planning, 

which research shows is essential for successful economic development. EDA is pleased that Congress recently provided the first 

funding increase in the planning program’s contemporary history. 

At the direction of Congress, EDA established the Global Climate 

Change Mitigation Incentive Fund in 2008 to advance the connections between economic competitiveness and environmental quality. 

By using the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy 

and Environmental Design, EDA is able to verify that each fundrelated investment effectively contributes to sustainability and 

mitigates associated environmental impacts. 

EDA is pleased that the President’s 2010 budget request provides for $16.5 million, which represents a $1.8 million increase. 

Another key area for EDA is responding to sudden and severe 

economic dislocations. For example, EDA is on the front line in assisting communities following natural disasters. Last year, Congress allocated $500 million in two supplemental appropriations to 

EDA in response to natural disasters that severely impacted communities across the Nation. To date, EDA has $411.3 million in 

projects in various stages of the application process. Additionally, EDA received $150 million as part of the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to respond to sudden and 

severe economic dislocation and job loss due to corporate restructuring. We are ahead of the curve in implementation, having published a Federal Funding Opportunity notice on March 11th, 2009. 

We allocated funds to each of our six regional offices to initiate the 

process of disbursing funds quickly to assist communities. To date, EDA has $100.3 million in projects in various stages of 

the application process. 

Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member Inhofe and members of the 

Committee, thank you for your time today and for inviting me to 

give an overview of EDA’s programs. With me today is Dennis 

Alvord, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Economic Development, who oversees EDA’s six regional offices. 

We look forward to answering any questions you may have and 

working with the Committee on legislation to reauthorize the agency. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Walters follows:] 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. Can I ask Dennis if he could 

raise his hand so I know—great. Great. And when I get to my 

questions, I am going to ask you for examples of some of these 

projects that you are working on through the stimulus and through 

the emergency. So be prepared to give us a couple of examples. Not 

right now, when I get to questions. 

Now we are going to hear from the Honorable James Kennedy. 

He is the Commissioner, Butler County, Pennsylvania, on behalf of 

the National Association of Regional Councils. After you finish, I 

am going to go vote. If Senator Inhofe does get back, I will ask him 

to convene and he can convene with Mr. Phillips because I know 

he has a special interest in that. And then I will come right back 

and we will continue. 

So go ahead, Mr. Kennedy. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES KENNEDY, COMMISSIONER, BUTLER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGIONAL COUNCILS 

Mr. KENNEDY. Good morning and thank you, Chairman Boxer, 

and Ranking Member Inhofe and the distinguished members of the 

Committee. I am honored to be before you today to testify on the 

Economic Development Administration, the EDA, and its reauthorization, economic stimulus and the idea of sustainable and livable 

communities. 

I am James Kennedy, a Commissioner from Butler County, PA. 

I sit on the Board of Directors of Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, SPC. I am also an elected Board Member and Past President of the National Association of Regional Councils, NARC, and 

President of the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania. I am also a lifelong resident of Butler County and serve 

proudly as a Commissioner, an avid regionalist and a dairy and 

grain farmer. 

On behalf of NARC and SPC, I am here to stress the importance 

of the EDA programs, funding and activities, the need for immediate reauthorization, SPC’s successes and challenges with EDA, 

and how EDA can revitalize to meet the growing needs of our communities and regions. 

NARC advocates multi-jurisdictional cooperation as the most effective way to address community planning and development. 

NARC is governed by the local elected officials, like me, and represents regional planning organizations such as SPC that work to 

improve America’s communities, large, small, urban and rural. Regional planning organizations are important to our communities 

and for their delivery of funding and programs, providing support 

and technical assistance, especially during the economic crisis. 

My regional council, SPC, represents the greater Pittsburgh region, a 10-county area with diverse urban and rural make up of 2.6 

million people and 7,000 square miles. SPC is the MPO, the LDD 

and the EDD, and is responsible for regional economic development 

priorities with a wide range of public services including the development and implementing of the region’s Comprehensive Economic 

Strategy, which brings critical funding to our region for improved 

infrastructure, job opportunities and resources. 
20 

In a time of softening economy, declining Federal and State funding, rising unemployment, and the clear need for substantial investments in the Country’s infrastructure, we must revive our Federal commitment to EDA’s core mission, and bring about more comprehensive regional planning activities. For SPC, EDA recently provided $150,000 to Pittsburgh Life 

Sciences for the expansion of the Executive-in-Residence Program, 

which provides capital investments, customized company formation 

and business growth services in the region of life sciences, one of 

my region’s largest targeted industrial clusters. The investment 

part of the $300,000 project was recently profiled in Science 

Progress as an innovative way to create jobs and maintain longterm economic competitiveness. 

Another EDA-supported project in our region is the Armstrong 

County Industrial Development Council in Kittanning, Pennsylvania which received $2 million to construct the Northpointe Technology Center to house advanced technology firms. This is part of 

the $4.4 million project that will generate $20 million in private investment to help create 60 jobs, a typical return on investment for 

EDA funds. 

Based on my experience as a local elected official, I believe that 

the Federal Government should be reestablishing a strong role in 

urban and rural economic development and support local and regional efforts like those I mentioned, while providing sustained 

local and regional authority and increased funding to support these 

levels. 

In order to accomplish NARC’s recommendation, EDA would be authorized a minimum of $500 million to sufficiently provide funding operations for all levels of agencies, including increased funding 

for flexibility and the EDA’s core programs, which should be the 

primary focus of EDA. EDDs have received the same $52,000 per 

year in planning grants for the last 25 years and must be increased. The grants are vital to local governments to address the 

economic development. 

EDA funding is critical in my region, particularly as we face 75 

percent State funding cuts this year. We need to leverage as much 

Federal funds and State and local funding as possible in order to 

work regionally in order to get the biggest return on our investment. 

For Federal economic stimulus, my region conveyed stimulus 

funding opportunities to potential applicants through public participation panels. 

Senator BOXER. Sir, I am going to have to interrupt because your 

5 minutes is up and I just ran out of time to vote. So we will put 

the rest of your statement into the record. But I get your message 

loud and clear and I am with you. We are going to do this. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kennedy follows:] 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 

[Recess.] 

Senator BOXER. Well, I think that what probably happened is 

that Senator Inhofe’s colleagues on Armed Services nabbed him 

away. We will see what happens. In any case, we have had two excellent statements. We will place the full statement in the record, 

Mr. Kennedy, and we will move to Mr. Phillips now. Should we 

move to Mr. Phillips now? OK. 

We move to LaVern Phillips, President, Woodward Industrial 

Foundation. Welcome, sir. 

STATEMENT OF LaVERN W. PHILLIPS, PRESIDENT, 

WOODWARD INDUSTRIAL FOUNDATION 

Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you, Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member 

Inhofe and members of the Committee for the opportunity to testify 

today. 

I am here today to urge the Senate to reauthorize the Economic 

Development Administration and to increase funding to this critical 

Federal agency. 

My name is LaVern W. Phillips. As President of the Woodward 

Industrial Foundation in Woodward, Oklahoma, I am an economic 

and community development specialist for Woodward and Northwest Oklahoma. I previously served as Chairman of the Governor’s 

Economic Development Team for the State of Oklahoma. 

The EDA supports important economic projects affecting the citizens of the U.S. It also provides funding for the Economic Development Districts that plan economic strategies for their areas. Many 

small, rural communities simply cannot afford to develop their own 

economic development plans. 

The EDA supports a professional planner at the Oklahoma Economic Development Authority who brings the region together behind development of a comprehensive economic development strategy. In my position with the Woodward Industrial foundation, I 

work directly with the EDA district on this regional plan. 

Madam Chairman, we know how important it is to preserve our 

rural American society and the EDA is an essential funding resource and partner for rural communities in that endeavor. Our experience in Northwest Oklahoma is a good example. 

Woodward is the regional hub of Northwest Oklahoma and community leaders have worked hard to expand and diversify financial 

opportunity for residents, especially our young people. Their diligence has paid off, and our region has reversed the loss of population common in many rural areas. Now we are taking the next 

step by providing easier access to higher education. 

Intensive studies in 2000 and 2004, sponsored by the city of 

Woodward and coordinated by the Oklahoma Community Institute, 

identified the need for a multi-purpose education and conference 

center campus. The initiative is now called the Woodward Community Campus Project. 

Within the next few months, the city of Woodward will begin construction on a 36,000 square foot multipurpose conference and educational center on 40 acres of prime land within the city limits adjacent to the USDA Southern Plains Range Research Station. Next 

door, Northwestern Oklahoma State University has just completed 

construction of a 22,000 square foot Woodward branch to provide 
83 

higher education opportunities for full-time students and young 

married students working to support their families. 

These two facilities will be linked together via interactive television and video conferencing with Northwestern Oklahoma State 

University’s main campus in Alva. The Woodward Community 

Campus will offer academic, entrepreneurial, work force and economic development programs to address problems facing rural communities. The facilities will open up career options so people can 

remain in rural Northwest Oklahoma. 

The EDA is providing $1 million for the construction of public infrastructure needed by the Woodward Community Campus. This is 

only 15.5 percent of the cost of the conference and education center, 

with the city of Woodward committing the remaining 84.5 percent 

or $5.4 million. 

But this is the main point I want to make today: That relatively 

small percentage of EDA funding was essential to the success of 

the project. Without EDA’s help, the Woodward Community Campus, and the creation of good, new jobs, simply would not happen. 

So let me use this forum today to thank EDA and to tell of the 

positive experience I had working with the agency. The EDA Austin Regional Office Staff and their Director, Pedro Garza, are true 

professionals dedicated to job creation and preserving rural America. 

I respectfully urge this Committee to fully fund the U.S. Economic Development Administration and to adopt a 5-year authorization bill that provides stability and policy direction for the agency. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman, Senator Inhofe and members of 

the Committee for the opportunity to testify, and I welcome your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Phillips follows:] 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 

Senator BOXER. Thanks so much, Mr. Phillips. And our last, but 

not least, speaker, is Leanne Mazer, Executive, Tri-County Council 

for Western Maryland, on behalf of the National Association of Development Organizations. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF LEANNE MAZER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 

THE TRI-COUNTY COUNCIL FOR WESTERN MARYLAND 

Ms. MAZER. Good morning Chairman Boxer, Senator Inhofe and 

members of the Committee. 

My name is Leanne Mazer. I currently serve as Immediate Past 

President of the National Association of Development Organizations and Executive Director of the Tri-County Council for Western 

Maryland, an EDA-designated economic development district serving the three western-most counties in the State. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of a multiyear reauthorization bill for the Economic Development Administration, as well as discussing the agency’s role in post-disaster and 

stimulus recovery efforts. I will limit my oral remarks to four main 

points. 

First, EDA has a proven track record in helping its local partners 

create and retain high-quality jobs in distressed areas, including 

those suffering from chronic poverty and those suffering from economic dislocations caused by plant closures or downsizing, natural 

disasters or changes in global trade. 

In reauthorizing the agency, we encourage the Committee to restore the local match rates for distressed communities to at least 

the pre-2005 agency rule changes. This is one of the most important legislative fixes needed to help the agency serve distressed 

areas. 

Senator BOXER. Could you repeat that sentence again? 

Ms. MAZER. Absolutely. In reauthorizing the agency, we would 

encourage the Committee to restore the local match rates for distressed communities to at least the pre-2005 agency rule changes. 

This is one of the most important legislative fixes needed to help 

the agency serve distressed areas. 

Second, Madam Chair, we would urge Congress to strengthen 

local control of EDA’s Revolving Loan Fund Program. The RLF 

Program is a proven economic development tool for addressing the 

credit needs in under-served areas. RLFs are managed by public 

and private nonprofit organizations to further local economic development goals by lending their capital and then re-lending funds as 

payments are made on the initial loans. 

Locally managed RLFs have provided business capital to thousands of new and existing companies that have difficulty securing 

conventional financing. Over the years, EDA has provided grants 

to nearly 600 RLFs with net assets approaching $850 million. 

EDA’s RLF Program has the unique distinction of being one of 

the only Federal grant programs that never loses its Federal identity. The initial RLF grant, and any income or interest derived 

from it, is considered Federal property forever. RLF operators are 

forced to continually comply with expensive and burdensome reporting requirements, even those dating back to the late 1970s. 

Ownership of EDA RLFs should be fully transferred to local inter-
90 

mediaries once all of the initial funds have been loaned out, repaid 

and fully revolved. 

Third, NATO and its members respectfully urge Congress to increase the minimum funding level for EDA’s partnership planning 

program from $27 million to $34 million. This small yet highly effective program provides essential seed capital and matching funds 

for 378 economic development districts, numerous Tribal planning 

partners, and other State and local entities. With an average grant 

of only $54,000, the EDA planning program provides matching 

funds to multi-county organizations, such as Tri-County Council for 

Western Maryland, to help local governments and others work together on a regional basis to develop solutions, partnerships and 

strategies for addressing area-wide economic development issues. 

EDA’s on time project completion rate, high rates of leveraging 

private sector investment, and impressive job creation statistics are 

tied directly to the groundwork and planning that proceeds project 

development and implementation. With the growing complexities of 

the growing economy, increased mandates by EDA, and mounting 

local economic pressures, a modest increase in the annual EDA 

planning grants for economic development districts would make a 

significant difference. 

Finally, Madam Chair, there is a need to provide broader incentives to foster regional collaboration and partnerships among local 

governments, along with the private sector, educational and nonprofit institutions. While the EDA reauthorization bill established 

two new performance award programs, these incentives are very 

limited in scope and have demonstrated little impact. EPA would 

benefit from much broader and more aggressive policy incentives 

and approaches related to regional economic collaboration and cooperation. 

Congress is urged to build upon the existing set of multi-jurisdictional EDDs to encourage and facilitate regional development activities including increasing the EDA’s share in projects with significant regional impact and collaboration. 

Madam Chair and members of the Committee, thank you again 

for the opportunity to testify today, and I would welcome any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mazer follows:] 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Ms. Walters, I am not going to ask you to respond to these ideas 

that Ms. Mazer put out. But could you be sure that you and your 

staff could, first of all, tell us if any of her ideas are ideas that you 

are thinking about and, if not, would you be willing to write us, 

and let us know in writing, how you would feel about her recommendations? Should we call on Mr. Alvord? 

Mr. ALVORD. Yes, Senator, in fact these are ideas that we are 

considering internally and we are certainly open to exploring them 

further. 

Senator BOXER. OK, excellent. For Senator Inhofe and me, we 

would love to get your feedback from the Administration, and as 

well from Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Phillips. If they could take some 

time to look at these ideas and give us feedback, we would appreciate it. If there are a few that are consensus ideas, I would like 

to include them in the new approach. 

So, Dennis Alvord, I have asked you, given the needs in this 

Country and we know what they are, we have got credit problems, 

we have got jobless problems, are there any barriers that will impact EDA’s efforts to fully distribute the stimulus funds. Now, we 

had a report, it looked like a lot of them were already in the works, 

but do you have any concerns that you may not be able to get all 

of those out? 

Mr. ALVORD. No. I think that we are quite confident that we will 

be able to get the money out and obligated and we are working to 

do that as diligently and quickly as we can. 

We have been hampered in that, up until this fiscal year, we had 

not received any additional salary and expense resources to support 

the administration of that funding, both the awards of the grants 

and then the administration and oversight of them having made 

the awards. This fiscal year, we were grateful that Congress recognized those needs and provided us some additional funding in the 

form of $3 million as part of the Bureau’s RLF allocation as well 

as $4 million from its EDAP allocation that can be directed to 

meeting some of these needs. 

As a result, we are in the process of advertising and filling a 

number of term positions that will help us meeting those needs. In 

the interim, our regional office staff has really been doing yeoman’s 

work to get these grants queued up and awarded and I am very 

pleased with the progress that they have been making. 

Senator BOXER. Good. So, you feel that you will be able to send 

out that stimulus, you will be able to spend out? 

Mr. ALVORD. I have complete confidence. In fact, we have set an 

internal stretch goal to have our $150 million in stimulus funding 

full obligated by the end of this fiscal year, a full year in advance 

of the expiration of those funds. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I think that it shows what a great program 

this is. Despite the fact that there is a credit crunch and other 

problems, it is still doing what Mr. Phillips so eloquently said. It 

stimulates. It is a small amount but it gets things really started. 

It is really, I think, a great program. 

Could you give us one or two examples, off the top of your head, 

of some stimulus programs that you have funded? I do not care 

which State, just to give us a sense of it. 
107 

Mr. ALVORD. Absolutely. Well, I would say that I am pleased to 

report that EDA investments related to the Recovery Act really run 

the gamut. You know, they are targeting to supporting near-term 

recovery and they range from traditional brick and mortar type investments of rail spurs, water and sewer type investments, infrastructure to support port improvements, to really more cutting edge 

and leading edge economic development investments and things 

like business incubators, science and technology parks, green buildings and other activities. 

The focus is on investments that we can get started quickly and 

that are going to be—— 

Senator BOXER. Could you give me an example of one or two? 

Mr. ALVORD. Sure. They run the range of things like capitalization—— 

Senator BOXER. Just give me an example of a real program, not 

just they run the range. In Oklahoma you did this, in California 

you did this. Just give me a couple. 

Mr. ALVORD. Sure. In the Western United States we are looking 

at capitalizing a revolving loan fund to assist with a region that 

has been impacted by natural resource depletion. That is going to 

help that industry to have the capital that it needs in this time of 

credit crunch to reform that—— 

Senator BOXER. What States are those? 

Mr. ALVORD. There is one in the State of Montana that we are 

looking at right now as a prospective investment. 

Senator BOXER. Can you give me an example of something that 

you already did? 

Mr. ALVORD. Well, we have not yet made an award related to 

ARRA. We are on the very cusp of being able to make an award. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

Mr. ALVORD. We have a pipeline that represents about $100 million of the $150 million—— 

Senator BOXER. Will you please do us a favor? Will you please 

give us a report of, let us say, your first 10 grants? Would you do 

that for Senator Inhofe and I? Send it to us, and we will inform 

the Committee. Would you do that? 

Mr. ALVORD. I would be happy to do so. 

Senator BOXER. OK. Very good. Senator Inhofe. 

Senator INHOFE. Thank you. Madam Chairman, I was a little 

confused as to your line of questioning there when you say, give us 

an example of the grants. Were you talking about—— 

Senator BOXER. From the stimulus. 

Senator INHOFE. From the stimulus. Part of the $150 million? 

Senator BOXER. Yes. I am just trying to understand. 

Senator INHOFE. OK. All right. Well, first of all, Ms. Mazer, you 

mentioned something about stronger incentives to reward regional 

collaboration. Could you expand on what you mean? What do you 

have in mind? Do you want to advise us as to something that we 

should have that would promote the regional concept? 

Ms. MAZER. Yes, Senator, thank you. Research has shown that, 

to be competitive in the global economy, we have to work regionally. NATO would actually just like to work with the Committee to 

explore some ideas to use match rates and maybe apply other types 
108 

of incentives to reward those projects that create a real regional 

significant impact. 

Senator INHOFE. Good, good. Mr. Phillips, you know, we could 

have had any number of people from Oklahoma. I am glad we had 

you. You are very articulate and we made great progress. I think 

that the example that he gave is as good an example as you can 

have. In the example in my opening statement, in talking about 

what $2.25 million did down there. That actually has opened up a 

half-billion dollars down in that part of the State, that is the 

Southwestern part of Oklahoma as opposed to the Northwestern 

part. 

For the knowledge of our members up here, Woodward is kind 

of the gate of the Panhandle of Oklahoma. It is an area that is very 

much like Colorado. It is very sparsely populated. I have used your 

example, LaVern, several times as to the success of this kind of a 

program. 

Is there anything else that you would like to say? Because I want 

to make sure you get all the time possible on examples that we 

have done and that you are familiar with in Northwest Oklahoma. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. Well, thank you, Senator. 

Senator INHOFE. In your opening statement, I got in halfway 

through, did you cover all the windmills and the other stuff that 

we have? 

Mr. PHILLIPS. No, I have not. 

Senator INHOFE. I will give you that opportunity. I want to make 

sure the Chairman knows that we are leading the way of all 50 

States right now. I want everyone to know that, in terms of our 

wind generation. 

Senator BOXER. I did not know that. 

Senator INHOFE. And it’s all right where he is. 

Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you, Senator. We are very pleased. I like to 

say that we are definitely and oil and gas community, and agriculture, and those two entities have their ups and downs and now 

we are leading the State and the region in wind power development. Right now, we have about 300 towers in our immediate area 

and I think before too long we will be kind of like Sweetwater, 

Texas is: we will be the epicenter for wind power. One of the 

things, it does not replace oil and gas. It is kind of like T. Boone 

Pickens says, which is that we need to quit buying fuel, or crude, 

from people that do not like us. And we are doing that as a Nation, 

importing over 75 percent of our fuel right now. 

I think we can help, in our part of the State, solve this Nation’s 

energy crisis by the natural resource that we have which is wind, 

and it is huge investment by those companies that are coming in. 

But when you do a wind farm of 80 turbines, you are talking about 

$160 million in investment. It helps the landowner. It helps the 

public education by the ad valorem taxes. So, it is a real benefit, 

Senator, and we are excited about being able to contribute to the 

Nation’s energy crisis. 

Senator INHOFE. That’s true. Of course, there is some disagreement at this table. But I think, my position, I have always said we 

want all of the above. And certainly Oklahoma is known, not just 

for oil and gas, but also coal. But people are not aware of what we 

are doing right now. The fact that OG&E right now is the major 
109 

contractor and is using wind power and we are leading the way 

there. I like to use Northwestern Oklahoma as an example of how 

we can wean ourselves off the obligations we have, as you termed 

so accurately, from people who do not like us. 

Mr. Kennedy, could you be more specific about the stimulus 

funding issue raised in your testimony? I do not really think you 

had a chance to elaborate on that. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Our comments on the testimony reflected SPC’s 

support in the establishment and success of the coordinated regional process that SPC goes through for the EDA projects and recommendations for funding. We know that the coordination of these 

types of things between the locals and the regional organizations 

and Federal agencies works. 

We believe that is a better conduct of consultation of EDA and 

the applicant grants and SPC’s established regional economic development committees which are composed of practitioners and 

local elected officials and businesses and ensure the projects are coordinated with the regional approved economic development plan. 

What happens over time is, in the practice of grant seeking, it 

has been done through direct contact through the www.grants.gov. 

Our preference to best ensure consistency in the public transparency process is for EDA project submissions or applicants to go 

first through the regional economic development coordinating committee structure that works within our region and many others. 

This would expedite project approval, funding and implementation 

and ensure the consideration for these consistencies. 

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Mr. Kennedy, and for the benefit of 

the rest of our Committee here I just want to make sure I am on 

record as saying that we are very anxious, I think the Chairman 

and I are both anxious, to get this thing reauthorized and get it 

done because it is one of the things where conservatives and liberals alike can really serve well. I am very proud of what we have 

done in Oklahoma. So, maybe we can get some deadlines and get 

the House lined up and get this done. 

Senator BOXER. Yes. 

Senator INHOFE. And I am going to go to my second round of 

questions at Armed Services now. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator Inhofe, so much. I look forward to marking this bill up in the very near future. 

Senator Merkley. And we will go Merkley, Udall and Cardin in 

order of arrival. Senator Merkley. 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

I just want say to Senator Walters and Dennis Alvord that when 

my staff reached out to our folks in Oregon, they had nothing but 

praise for your regional staff and the cooperation you have demonstrated with the grants underway. Anytime that type of robust 

praise gets expressed, I want to feed it back. Apparently, you are 

doing some things very, very well. 

One of those partners is Vernon Jorgen [phonetically], which had 

devastating floods and they received a grant to help with a topographic study to try to avoid rebuilding in a manner that endangers them again and they wanted to note that these funds are incredibly important since, especially during this economic crisis, 

local funds and State funds are very hard to obtain. 
110 

In that light, they mentioned that at some time in the past, the 

match rate was one local dollar to three grant dollars, and that it 

had been changed to a one to one ratio. And that was extremely 

difficult for them to come up with under the current circumstances. 

I thought maybe I would just ask you all to give a little bit of 

history of when that changed and why it changed and whether it 

is under consideration for economically distressed communities to 

change that ratio back. 

Mr. ALVORD. First of all, thank you very much for the kind 

words. It is always good to hear feedback about the good work that 

I know our regions are doing out in the field. 

With regards to the match rates, I think that there was a change 

in the grant rate structure that occurred during EDA’s last reauthorization in 2004. That change was driven, I think, largely by the 

economic conditions at the time and the amount of appropriations 

that EDA had and the need to do as much as it could with the 

available resources at its disposal. EDA is certainly cognizant of 

the very pressing economic conditions that we are facing nationally 

today and we do have a fair amount of flexibility under PUEDA 

[phonetically] to address grant rate issues. 

In fact, while the standard matching rate is 50 percent Federal 

to 50 percent local, we do have the authority, under statute, to go 

to an 80 percent Federal share on a sliding scale based on the economic distress in the region. And in some exigent circumstances, 

we can go in fact beyond that up to 100 percent if the local community can demonstrate an exhaustion of taxing and borrowing authority. 

We have taken great pains to ensure that we get out to our regions maximum flexibility with regard to dealing with these issues 

and we have well-established procedures and can certainly work 

with them on grant rate issues as they arise. 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you very much for clarifying that. Had 

you not already had that flexibility, I was going to suggest that 

might be appropriate. So you are way ahead. 

And a second issue has come up with the university partners in 

Oregon. Those partners now participate in a competitive grant program started under the Bush administration and the feedback from 

the universities was that this pits very types of programs against 

each other in a single grant competition, something like apples and 

oranges, one stimulating manufacturing in one place versus development of tourism in another. 

So the universities thought they were doing a tremendous 

amount more effort to do applications in a setting that really is 

very hard to score between these, and whether or not we should 

revisit the competitive nature of the university grant program. Any 

thoughts or insights on that? 

Mr. ALVORD. Yes. I think that is absolutely correct. Several years 

ago, EDA did make a shift to a competitive university center competition. We think that this has been very beneficial to the program, that is has really helped us to reinvigorate the program. I 

am certainly sensitive to the issues that you mention in that there 

is a very diverse mix of applicants for this program. We have 

smaller learning institutions, large, major research universities 

and really everything between. 
111 

We have tried to craft a Federal funding opportunity and notice 

that it allows for those different types of institutions to compete on 

a level playing field and to recognize that there are certainly significant economic differences across the Country. The needs of one 

part of the Country may be very different from another. So, an emphasis on manufacturing in one section of the Country may need 

to be addressed by the university center applicant whereas service 

industries or some other type of economic issue might need to be 

addressed in another. 

In crafting the program, we have tried to provide the maximum 

amount of flexibility available. It is a program for which the demand outstretches the resources. We think the competition has 

been beneficial in getting us the best possible applicants. We are 

certainly open to continuing to look at the criteria that we use in 

making those selections. 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. My 

staff will follow up with you with one more question but I am going 

to hold it for now so that we can get on to some questions from 

my colleagues. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator Merkley. Senator 

Udall. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank all of the witnesses for being here today. 

Let me revisit one of the topics that I believe our Chair brought 

up earlier on the issues of increasing cost share. I am going to 

focus on a little bit different issue, but I am also interested in what 

she mentioned. 

When, and I understand your desire to stretch your limited budget, and this question is really directed to Mr. Alvord and Ms. Walters, I understand your desire to stretch your limited budget at far 

as you can, but high cost shares can be an obstacle when we are 

dealing with economically distressed areas. I am particularly worried about the ability of small, rural communities and tribal communities to meet their cost shares to achieve positive economic development in New Mexico. 

Has there been any study on the impact of these higher cost 

share requirements on small communities or tribal communities? 

Have you heard any complaints that they are not able to meet 

these? 

Mr. ALVORD. I am not aware that there has been a study per se, 

either an internal study or an academic study of any kind. I am 

aware, anecdotally, you know, I have heard from regional office 

staff and practitioners in the field, about the challenges that they 

are confronting in meeting these cost shares. We have tried to be 

very responsive to meeting those needs by utilizing the flexibility 

that we have under statute to provide additional Federal share 

whenever we can. In fact, in rolling out our national disaster supplemental appropriations and our Recovery Act supplemental appropriations, we put specific internal guidance in place giving 

greater flexibility to our regional offices to make determinations 

about the appropriate level of cost share based on the conditions 

on the ground for those communities that met a certain threshold 

level of distress or showed a certain level of demonstration that 

they were not able to meet that share. 
112 

Senator UDALL. You are willing to work with them if they come 

in and make the case that they are not able to meet the cost share? 

Mr. ALVORD. We absolutely are. I think part of what makes our 

program so strong is that we have looked at every prospective 

grant application on a case by case basis. We evaluate the distress 

and the particular nature of the investment, and we try to account 

for that and work with grantees to the best of our ability. 

Senator UDALL. Now, you have also raised the issue of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act moneys that are out there. I 

wanted to follow up on that because New Mexico is in the Austin 

Region and, the way you allocated money, raises some questions, 

I think. New Mexico has the second lowest total of $13 million, just 

above the Denver Region at $9 million, and both are less than half 

of what has been allocated to the four other regions. 

So, I am wondering, what were the economic and demographic 

criteria that were used to derive the formula for distributing the 

funding to the six regional offices? 

Mr. ALVORD. Well, EDA has different allocation algorithms that 

it uses for all of its different sources of funding. So, for our regular 

economic development assistance programs, we have different allocations that we use for, say, public works, economic adjustment, 

planning, technical assistance, those are all based on different criteria. Likewise, when we received the disaster supplemental funding, we developed an allegation algorithm that was particular to 

the circumstances on the ground there. In that case, we are responding to counties that have had some type of natural disaster 

designation by FEMA. 

In the case of the Recovery Act funding, the Act charged EDA to 

respond to sudden and severe economic dislocation and job loss as 

a result of corporate restructuring. While we think that EDA’s regular allocation formula for our public works and economic adjustment programs do a pretty good job at getting at that, they do in 

fact have what we think of as somewhat lagging indicators in that 

they look at a 24-month unemployment and they look at poverty 

levels as among the different elements in that allocation. 

So, for the purposes of the Recovery Act, we thought that it 

would be prudent to really try to target those areas of the Country 

that have the most acute economic distress at this time. As a result, we decided to utilize the most contemporary snapshot of unemployment that we could capture and we fell back on utilization 

of 3 month unemployment levels for the allocation of that funding. 

We think that resulted in a good distribution across our six regional offices relative to economic distress. I should say that, in 

comparing that to the standard EDA allocation, there is not a significant difference in the way that funding would have gone out 

had we utilized the standard formula. It is really rather small 

tweaks around the edges. It is certainly not order of magnitude differences in the allocation. 

Senator UDALL. OK, well, I would like my staff to follow up with 

you because I think on the unemployment front, I mean, we have 

three counties in New Mexico that have significantly higher unemployment than the national average. So, we have high unemployment and then the poverty is, well, the entire State would qualify 

for EDA assistance since our per capita income is 80 percent of the 
113 

national level. So, I think there is a real argument for looking at 

the way you develop the criteria to do that, especially if we are 

going to do another round of this. 

So, thank you very much. And thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Senator Udall, I just wanted to let you and Senator Cardin know that before you got here this panel gave very 

strong support for EDA reauthorization and some ideas from Ms. 

Mazer about how we can make it better along the lines of your 

questioning, Senator Udall, and Senator Merkley’s. 

Senator Inhofe and I are very anxious to get this done. There is 

very strong bipartisan support, which is great. So what I would 

urge you to do is, if you have, and you and your staff want to make 

sure you communicate with my staff and Senator Inhofe’s staff as 

we go about the reauthorization because I would like to get it right. 

I think the other thing is they also reported that they have got 

about 100 million, am I right, of applications in the pipeline for the 

stimulus and they have not awarded anything yet but they are 

going to send us their first 10 awards so that we can keep up with 

what is happening. 

But this is an example of a great program that is working now 

when bank lending is so tight. We need the jobs and it is very important. So that is why Senator Inhofe and I want to move quickly. 

So please, all of you are so helpful to us, let us get your advice in 

their now so that we do not have to face amendments and we can 

just get everything in the bill. 

Senator Cardin. 

Senator CARDIN. Well, Madam Chair, thank you for having this 

hearing. I appreciate your commitment on the EDA program and 

trying to have it reauthorized in the right way and to get the funding levels working with the appropriators so that we can get the 

funding levels appropriate for the mission. 

I want to particularly welcome Leanne Mazer to the panel. All 

of you, I welcome, but Leanne is my constituent and does a great 

job in the Western part of our State with the Tri-County Council. 

I know she is here for NATO this morning, to talk on behalf of the 

organization. But we are very proud of the work that you do with 

the tri-county areas. 

EDA programs become particularly important in the Western 

part of our State. The economic challenges are very difficult, to 

bring in jobs. It is not in a major population center and we are trying to create new job opportunities. A State like Maryland, many 

times people think you are the Baltimore-Washington Corridor. It 

is where most people live. That is where jobs are created. But we 

have a major priority to create opportunities in all parts of our 

State, and the Tri-County Council has done a fabulous job. 

And the EDA program has been a valuable tool, Madam Chair, 

for that part of our State. For all of Maryland, it has been very valuable. We have had, in a 2-year period in Maryland, 14 projects 

that have created 1,800-plus jobs, leveraging $160 million in investments. So, it is a huge issue. 

I saw in your testimony about the cost benefit ratios, which are 

very, very impressive, $2,000 to $4,000 for creation of a job that 

will double in a short period of time. That is an impressive number 

as far as the work. 
114 

I really do urge us to get the recovery money out quickly. I understand the responsibility that we have to make sure it is spent 

appropriately and all the requirements are met. But our effort 

right now is to create jobs. And the EDA program can create jobs, 

particularly in those parts of our community where it is difficult to 

get investments made. I would just urge us, consistent with the requirements of Federal law, to do everything we can to expedite the 

process so that we can get the benefits of the Recovery Act. 

Ms. Mazer, I just want to ask you, there has been a lot of conversation about the match requirements or what the locals have to 

come in with in order to be able to qualify for an EDA and it is 

your testimony that there has been a change in attitudes in the 

agencies in the last several years that has made it even more difficult for distressed communities to be able to come up with the 

match. Senator Udall has already talked about the need to modify. 

Can you be more specific as to what you would like to see in the 

Reauthorization Act, as it relates to, particularly, in distressed 

communities, their needs to match or to come up with a share of 

the EDA grant? 

Ms. MAZER. Absolutely. Thank you. And thank you for the kind 

words, Senator. 

The match rates changed, actually, during the 2005 rulemaking 

process. It was not the intent of Congress to change the match 

rates. That was part of the rulemaking process that followed. 

Particularly given the current economic environment where the 

economy changes so quickly, we have mentioned the 24-month period where we look at those characteristics of distress. I think it 

would be our request just to roll back EDA’s match requirements 

to those pre-2005 levels, which would still maintain the flexibility 

that EDA has to go beyond that. 

Senator CARDIN. I should ask EDA that. The reason for change 

by regulation in 2005? 

Mr. ALVORD. I believe, Senator, that the change was made as a 

result of recognition of the current economic conditions and EDA’s 

appropriation levels at that time. The desire to extend the EDA 

funding as far as we possibly could, and address as many communities and areas as we could, with the acknowledgment that we do 

have the flexibility under statute to fund on a sliding scale, between 50 and 80 percent based on the level of economic distress. 

It was to really target that funding to those areas that had the 

most acute economic distress. That was the rationale, I believe, at 

the time that was done. I was not involved in that decisionmaking 

process. 

Senator CARDIN. It seems like the change in 2005 made it more 

difficult for all communities, including distressed communities. 

They may be in a position on the discretionary provisions, but they 

overall requirements make it more difficult. And, of course, this 

economic recession makes it even more problematic for communities to come up with the matches. It is not unusual for us to 

waive, totally, the matches during these types of periods. 

Mr. ALVORD. We agree, and are trying to be as flexible as we can 

in addressing match rates with the discretion that we have. 

Senator CARDIN. Well, we might have to help you a little bit 

there. 
115 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Mr. Kennedy, I thought maybe you could, I 

wanted to hear a specific project, if you could, of how EDA has 

helped Southwestern Pennsylvania. Can you give us an idea, like 

Mr. Phillips did, of a specific project? 

Mr. KENNEDY. On EDA projects that have been specific to the 

Pittsburgh region, a Pittsburgh science facility was awarded some 

money and we did do that in order to make sure that we would get 

that money flowing within that sector. It was a recognized project 

in the community—— 

Senator BOXER. Science Center? 

Mr. KENNEDY. Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse. We can respond better and give you other investments that we have made. 

We would be glad to do that in writing. 

Senator BOXER. I would so appreciate that. 

Well, let me just thank the panel. You know, this is not one of 

those issues that everybody comes in the door and is banging down 

the door to hear about. But it is such a quiet success story, the 

work that you do. And I know it because, when I go around my 

State, my State is suffering mightily from economic downturn and 

high unemployment and pockets of unemployment of 15 percent, 25 

percent. There is one particular county that just told me about 

EDA about a year ago, that it just came in and just saved the community. It rallied around, they leveraged the funds, and it was fantastic. 

I would like to know, under the rulemaking, what type of discretion you do have? If you could get back to me in writing, because, 

to the extent that we will do our reauthorization, we want to know 

if you need more discretion, if the way to do it is to give you full 

discretion in a high unemployment area, a distressed area, so let 

us know. 

But again, the fact that we did not have a lot of penetrating 

questions from Democrats and Republicans shows me that this is 

a project program that they really, really support. 

So, we thank you very much, EDA folks, for your, as President 

Obama likes to say, your empathy, your understanding, what your 

job is, what your role is, and I think you can hear, from the folks 

on the ground, that it is working. 

So, this reauthorization is a priority for me, it is a priority for 

Senator Inhofe and I think it is very key. We are not worried about 

the program being zeroed out or anything. But it certainly is better 

to have an authorization. Otherwise, there is no guidance and it is 

just not going to be viewed as a priority. 

We commit that we are going to get this done. And we look forward to hearing from all of you specific examples from your region, 

and then from Mr. Alvord and Ms. Walters the first 10 grants that 

are made. I really need to know because I want to highlight those. 

So, we are waiting for that. Do you think it will be in the next 30 

days that you will do that funding? 

Mr. ALVORD. I suspect that it will, yes. 

Senator BOXER. If you are saying that you are getting it out the 

door, you know, then you probably have to start getting it out the 

door. So, we are very excited to hear about those. 
116 

Is there anything else? Oh, I would ask unanimous consent that 

statements from the International Economic Development Council 

and Educational Associate of Universities be inserted in the record 

and since I am the only one here, I see that there is no objection 

to that. So, we will do that. 

[The referenced documents follow:] 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 

Senator BOXER. We stand adjourned. We will work together with 

you on the reauthorization. 

[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

[An additional statement submitted for the record follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI

First, thank you, Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe. I am pleased to 

be here to discuss a subject vital to the State of Missouri and the Country, the reauthorization and oversight of the Economic Development Administration. 

In addition, I appreciate all the witnesses appearing before us today. Your experiences with this issue and this agency are important to understanding the economic 

impact the EDA has across the country and how best to craft a reauthorization that 

improves EDA in order to make the United States more efficient and competitive 

during this difficult economic time. 

The Economic Development Administration was established nearly 45 years ago 

under the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965. During those 

years, our economy has enjoyed significant economic growth and has weathered 

through some tough times. 

This hearing couldn’t come at a more pertinent time as we face another period 

of economic challenge. At this time, it is important to maximize the utility of all 

our economic tools to better equip our country to address the problems we face 

today. A properly formed and funded EDA reauthorization can be one of those tools. 

The EDA is the only Federal agency that concentrates on private sector economic 

sustainability. While other agencies play an important role in helping communities 

in times of crises, it is EDA that can provide long-term economic stability. 

It is important to reauthorize EDA in order for it to keep pace with the changing 

economic climate and to enable the EDA to continue to fulfill its mission of leading 

‘‘the Federal economic development agenda by promoting innovation and competitiveness, preparing American regions for growth and success in the world economy.’’ 

The EDA investment in economic development initiatives across Missouri has 

worked to diversify our job base by focusing on high-tech, high-growth industries. 

This refocusing has allowed Missouri to compete globally for the private investment 

that attracts and maintain higher paying jobs in the area. 

For example, EDA awarded a $2.9 million grant as seed capital for the Center 

of Research, Technology and Entrepreneurial Expertise (CORTEX) in St. Louis. The 

Federal funds helped immediately leverage over $30 million to create a life science 

research and commercialization district that focuses on transforming scientific innovation into new companies to create jobs in the St. Louis urban core. In the long 

run, this research center is expected to encourage over $400 million in investment 

by concentrating the essential life science resources. 

Recently, the EDA also provided $1.7 million for the development of a MidwestChina Air Cargo Hub in the St. Louis area. The development of this trade route 

will put St. Louis at the center of Chinese U.S. commerce. By doing so, it will increase access for our U.S. exports, cultivate commercial opportunities, generate new 

jobs and provide sustainable economic development in a community that suffered 

the economic distress of a natural disaster. 

In the past, the symbol for economic growth and development was embodied in 

the bricks and mortar of buildings. They represented a place where people went to 

work and where business got done. However, while that ideal remains partially 

true, we are beginning to see a shift. 

The economic promise of this country is no longer encapsulated in a building; it 

is in the promise of ideas. It is in the patents being developed across the country 

in this nation’s incubators and laboratories. It is the recognition and development 

of potential new trade routes. 

By supporting these ideas, we will be investing in the job creation of tomorrow. 

We must provide EDA with the ability to empower these ideas in order to grow our 

economy and offset the economic strain of disaster. 

As we move forward, there are many issues that need to be addressed in reauthorization include altering local match levels during this time of economic hardship, more attention paid to the economic development needs in rural communities 

and EDA staffing in local offices. In addition, I want to see EDA refocus on the basics with more attention and funding going to public works, flexible economic adjustment assistance and an efficient revolving loan fund. 
134 

We must build a reauthorization that provides the tools necessary to generate 

good jobs in the areas that need them the most to keep the United States competitive. 

Again, I thank Senators Boxer and Inhofe and the witnesses for their hard work. 

I look forward to your testimony and working together to ensure that the EDA continues to be a vital tool to help empower economic development. 

Æ