U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

62–682 PDF 2010

PERSPECTIVES ON THE LIVABLE 

COMMUNITIES ACT OF 2010 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2010 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Financial Services 

Serial No. 111–157 

( 

(II) 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES 

BARNEY FRANK, Massachusetts, Chairman 

PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois 

NYDIA M. VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

RUBE ́ N HINOJOSA, Texas 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

CAROLYN MCCARTHY, New York 

JOE BACA, California 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

AL GREEN, Texas 

EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri 

MELISSA L. BEAN, Illinois 

GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin 

PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

RON KLEIN, Florida 

CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

ANDRE ́ CARSON, Indiana 

JACKIE SPEIER, California 

TRAVIS CHILDERS, Mississippi 

WALT MINNICK, Idaho 

JOHN ADLER, New Jersey 

MARY JO KILROY, Ohio 

STEVE DRIEHAUS, Ohio 

SUZANNE KOSMAS, Florida 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

JIM HIMES, Connecticut 

GARY PETERS, Michigan 

DAN MAFFEI, New York 

SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama 

MICHAEL N. CASTLE, Delaware 

PETER T. KING, New York 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RON PAUL, Texas 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

WALTER B. JONES, JR., North Carolina 

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JEB HENSARLING, Texas 

SCOTT GARRETT, New Jersey 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

TOM PRICE, Georgia 

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

ADAM PUTNAM, Florida 

MICHELE BACHMANN, Minnesota 

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas 

THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan 

KEVIN McCARTHY, California 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

LYNN JENKINS, Kansas 

CHRISTOPHER LEE, New York 

ERIK PAULSEN, Minnesota 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

JEANNE M. ROSLANOWICK, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on: 

September 23, 2010 .......................................................................................... 1 

Appendix: 

September 23, 2010 .......................................................................................... 21 

WITNESSES 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2010 

Abariotes, Andriana, Executive Director, Twin Cities Local Initiative Support 

Corporation (LISC) ............................................................................................... 10 

Blumenauer, Hon. Earl, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Oregon ................................................................................................................... 1 

Gouge, Julia W., President, Board of County Commissioners, Carroll County, 

Maryland ............................................................................................................... 12 

Knight, Bruce A., Planning Director, City of Champaign, Illinois, and President, American Planning Association (APA) ..................................................... 14 

Murphy, Hon. Bob, Mayor, City of Lakewood, Colorado ...................................... 8 

Sires, Hon. Albio, a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey 3 

APPENDIX 

Prepared statements: 

Sires, Hon. Albio ............................................................................................... 22 

Abariotes, Andriana ......................................................................................... 24 

Gouge, Julia W. ................................................................................................ 30 

Knight, Bruce A. ............................................................................................... 39 

Murphy, Hon. Bob ............................................................................................ 51 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Waters, Hon. Maxine: 

Written statement of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) 54 

Perlmutter, Hon. Ed: 

Written statement of the National Center for Healthy Housing .................. 58 

Gouge, Julia W.: 

Additional information submitted for the record ........................................... 61 

Written responses to questions submitted by Representative Miller ........... 62 

(1) 

PERSPECTIVES ON THE LIVABLE 

COMMUNITIES ACT OF 2010 

Thursday, September 23, 2010 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES, Washington, D.C. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in room 

2128, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ed Perlmutter presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Moore of Kansas, Green, Perlmutter; Capito, Hensarling, Jenkins, Paulsen, and Lance. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. [presiding] This hearing of the Committee on 

Financial Services will come to order. 

Without objection, all members’ opening statements will be made 

a part of the record. 

Mrs. Capito and I have just discussed how we want to proceed, 

because we have a number of votes coming up on the Floor. What 

we would like to do is have our first panel—Mr. Blumenauer and 

Mr. Sires—make their statements for the record. Then Mrs. Capito 

and I, if there is time before the votes are called, will make our 

opening statements. 

Then I think we will have to take a break for the Floor votes that 

we have, and I apologize to everybody who is in attendance, because there will be about six of them, so it will take some time. 

Then, we will reconvene for the testimony of the second panel. 

So, with that, without objection, your written statements will be 

made a part of the record. You will each be recognized for a 5- 

minute summary of your testimony. 

Congressman Blumenauer, if you would proceed. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE EARL BLUMENAUER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and 

Mrs. Capito. I appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of 

H.R. 4690, the Livable Communities Act. I appreciate the attention 

your committee is giving this critical issue and I look forward to 

working with committee members to move the legislation as quickly as possible. 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your particular work in introducing 

this legislation, which will improve the quality of life for communities large and small across the country. 

I have done a lot of work over the years on livable communities, 

working with urban, suburban, and rural communities in all parts 

of the United States, and I have found that these issues are genVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:15 Dec 13, 2010 Jkt 062682 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\62682.TXT TERRIE
2 

erally widely accepted as being vital for American families, for 

where those families live, how they get around, whether their children can walk or bicycle to school safely, whether older members 

of a family can continue not just to live, but to thrive in their 

neighborhoods. 

These communities seek not just assistance and resources from 

the Federal Government on these issues, but in many cases, they 

would actually like the Federal Government to maybe get out of 

the way a little bit and let them move forward. 

This legislation will help on both counts. The Livable Communities Act establishes a grant program to help communities develop 

comprehensive plans that coordinate land use, housing, transportation, and infrastructure planning so that they can grow the way 

they want to grow. It does not dictate any specific plan, or tell communities how to plan, but it does provide important resources and 

a framework. 

Communities need funding, research, and sometimes they need 

ideas. The one Federal program that currently offers some of these 

services, EPA’s Office of Sustainable Communities, is constantly 

oversubscribed. Each year, this program receives more than 100 requests for technical assistance, but it can only meet about 5 percent of them. 

In addition to providing resources and technical assistance, the 

Livable Communities Act establishes an Interagency Council on 

Sustainable Communities to formulate this Administration’s effort 

to bring HUD, DOT, and EPA together to work on behalf of communities. For too long, these agencies have been working sometimes at cross purposes, sending mixed signals, and, in too many 

cases, issuing rules and regulations that prevent integration of 

housing, transportation, and land use planning. Codifying sustainable community partnerships will help the Federal Government to 

be a better partner on community livability and ensure a more efficient use of taxpayer dollars. 

It must be stressed that these programs and the assistance in 

the bill are entirely voluntary and flexible enough so that communities of all shapes and sizes can take advantage of them. I am impressed that it is supported by a broad collection of stakeholders, 

from the American Association of Retired People, to the American 

Public Health Association, to the Realtors, to the National Association of Counties. 

As the bill moves through committee, I would encourage you, 

however, to consider one small addition to the bill that will make 

it even more effective in improving community livability. I have introduced legislation, H.R. 5824, to provide home buyers and policymakers with information about the costs associated with the location of a home. 

The average American family spends over half its income on 

transportation and housing costs. For some, the cost of transportation is even greater than housing. 

As people move further from their jobs, and community development patterns require communities to drive for most of their outings, this has a powerful impact on how families spend their 

money. 

3 

Living in a neighborhood closer to work, school, stores, and other 

services can significantly reduce the amount that families have to 

spend on transportation. However, transportation costs and savings 

are not currently taken into account in government affordability 

measures and standards, and information is not generally available 

to consumers looking to purchase or rent homes. 

This legislation could easily be incorporated into your Act. It 

would require HUD to develop a transportation affordability index 

to measure and disclose the transportation costs associated with 

the location of a home and make that information available to consumers and local governments. 

Using this information, consumers will be better able to price the 

trade-offs between housing and transportation costs and to measure potential savings associated with living closer to work, school, 

shopping, and transit. 

It will also make the cost of housing transparent for policymakers. Low-income communities can use this information to assist 

low-income families to live in areas with access to transit and services. This legislation is supported by a growing number of organizations including the Realtors, Reconnecting America, the National 

Housing Trust, and the National Low Income Housing Coalition. 

I would also like to support the efforts on behalf of my friend, 

Mr. Sires, the leader on livability for the State of New Jersey, in 

his legislation that he is about to reference, which I am proud to 

cosponsor. 

Finally, I would like to offer support for the proposal by the Association of State Floodplain Managers that would incorporate hazard risk reduction and resilience into the efforts to promote community sustainability. This committee has been working for far too 

long dealing with the consequences of the failure to do this as you 

deal with a seriously flawed flood insurance program. 

I think these would be valuable additions. Thank you for your 

courtesy. I look forward to working with you on this legislation. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. We thank the gentleman. 

Now, the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Sires. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ALBIO SIRES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mrs. Capito. Thank 

you very much. I want to thank Chairman Frank and Ranking 

Member Bachus for holding this important hearing and my esteemed colleague’s, Congressman Ed Perlmutter’s legislation, H.R. 

4690, the Livable Communities Act of 2010. As a former member 

of this committee, I appreciate the opportunity to sit down before 

you today. 

I also would like to thank Congressman Blumenauer for his testimony. I am a proud cosponsor of his legislation, H.R. 5824, the 

Transportation and Housing Affordability Transparency Act, also 

called THAT Act, and I am eager to see this legislation move forward through this legislative process. 

There is a great need for livable communities legislation, and I 

applaud Congressman Perlmutter for introducing the Livable Communities Act and leading efforts here in the House. 

4 

The Livable Communities Act represents an important tool to improve communication and coordination between Federal agencies. 

Specifically, this bill will create the Interagency Council of Sustainable Communities to bring agencies such as the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other agencies to 

the same table. 

Additionally, the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities 

would be established to administer the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development’s sustainability initiatives. 

Lastly, the Livable Communities Act will administer two grants 

program, the Challenge Grant Program and the Comprehensive 

Planning Grant Program, both of which partner with local communities. These competitive grants would allow communities to integrate sustainable development projects and incorporate public 

transportation and affordable housing. 

I also would like to take this opportunity to discuss my legislation, H.R. 3734, the Urban Revitalization and Livable Communities 

Act. Some of you may be familiar with this bill, since 21 cosponsors 

of the 131 total cosponsors sit on this committee. I thank all of 

those members for their support. 

As a former mayor, I know firsthand the benefits that parks 

bring to communities. During my three terms as mayor, I revitalized all the parks in West Newark, New Jersey, and saw our community benefit economically, environmentally, and socially. As a result, I introduced legislation to create four Federal grants programs 

to urban parks and recreation agencies that must be matched by 

local funds. 

There are four major grant programs with H.R. 3734. First, rehabilitation grants would be used for the purposes of remodeling and 

rebuilding recreation areas and facilities. 

Second, innovation grants would be used to cover costs of personnel, facilities, and equipment designed to demonstrate innovative and cost-effective recreation opportunities. 

Third, at-risk youth recreation grants would be either for new 

programs or continuing program support for existing programs that 

provide alternatives to at-risk youth. 

Lastly, there are recovery action program grants which will be 

used for the development of local parks and recreation programs, 

including citizens involvement and planning. 

Research shows that healthy and vibrant urban areas play key 

roles in improving the economy, health, and quality of life of our 

communities. Urban parks and recreation centers are instrumental 

in helping our Nation achieve important national goals, such as increasing exercise and improving health. 

The statistics speak for themselves. Our Nation’s obesity rate is 

rising. Over the last 25 years, obesity among youth between ages 

12 and 19 has tripled. Nearly one-third of Americans live in neighborhoods without sidewalks, and less than half of our country’s 

children have a playground within walking distance of their homes. 

My legislation will ultimately create economic benefits through 

job creation, environmental benefits through improvement of green 

spaces, and health benefits by creating opportunities for Americans 

to become more active. 

5 

In addition to having 131 cosponsors, I have the support of 30 

diverse organizations, including the National Recreation and Parks 

Association, the American Society of Landscapers and Architects, 

the United States Conference of Mayors, and the United States 

Soccer Foundation. 

Both Congressman Perlmutter’s bill and my Livable Communities bill and Revitalization Act share the common thread of using 

grant programs to stimulate and create healthy, livable communities. The Livable Community Act is a bill that will benefit our 

local communities in our Nation by assisting local efforts to make 

affordable places to live and work. 

Just last month, the Senate marked up the Livable Communities 

Act, and I am looking forward to Congressman Perlmutter’s version 

moving forward as well. I believe that my legislation complements 

the Livable Communities Act, and I look forward to working with 

this committee in the future. 

I applaud this committee’s work on this important issue, and I 

thank you again for allowing me to testify. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Representative Sires can be found on 

page 22 of the appendix.] 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I thank the gentleman. You were right on 5 

minutes, so congratulations. 

Any questions for either of these gentleman? 

Thank you. 

What we will do is yield 3 minutes to Mrs. Capito for her opening statement. You two can head to the Floor, if you like. We have 

about 6 minutes until the clock is closed. Then we will take a 

break, unless the gentleman from Kansas has an opening statement he would like to make before the votes? 

Mr. MOORE OF KANSAS. No, I would rather wait. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield 3 minutes to Ms. Kaptur. 

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank my fellow members, too, for their testimony. 

Thank you for holding the hearing today on promoting livable 

communities and smart growth in this legislation introduced by 

Congressman Perlmutter. 

I certainly support the goal of promoting livable communities and 

smart growth by coordinating services, transportation, educational 

opportunities, and affordable housing. I can’t tell you how many 

initiatives we have had before this committee over the last several 

years, particularly in the housing area, to try to get better coordinating done cross-agency and within agencies. 

But I am concerned about a couple of the proposals in 4690, one 

of which would be is, it completely necessary to create a new office, 

like the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities at HUD, 

and then a Federal Interagency Council on Sustainable Communities? I think the goals of both of these are good, but do we need 

to create another new bureaucracy? 

In the case of the interagency council, it would be headed by an 

executive director who would not be subject to any confirmation by 

the Senate but would have full discretion over the staffing and outsourcing decisions. Maybe these are issues that we can work on as 

this legislation moves forward. 

6 

But from my perspective, this does bring about visions of some 

of the President’s appointees, either czars or whatever you want to 

call them, new directors, who don’t have oversight in their appointment process through the United States Senate. 

Also I have questions, there was a model cities program that was 

in effect in the 1960’s that was found to be ineffective. What is the 

difference between that and the structure of this? We want to make 

sure we don’t repeat issues that were found to be ineffective and 

not meet the lofty goals that I think are set forward in this legislation. 

The other issue, of course, is the issue of cost. We are in a high 

debt and deficit position right now, we all know this, and I think 

that we have to look long and hard before we create a grant program that would be $3.25 billion over 4 years. 

So, I would be interested in hearing from the panelists, and I 

hope I can come back. I do have to work a bill on the Floor, the 

flood insurance bill, to see what they have to say in developing sustainable communities and why this issue is something that we 

need to handle at the Federal level. 

I read some of the initial testimony. It seems like there is a lot 

at the local and State level in terms of trying to develop and provide the sustainable communities that we all seek. 

Thank you for being here, and thank you for the opportunity. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, and this panel is dismissed. 

What I would like to do is recess. We have six votes, so it will 

probably take between 45 minutes and an hour. We will reconvene 

at 3:45. So, with that, we will stand in recess. The second panel 

will be up next. 

[recess] 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. The committee will now come back to order, if 

the panelists would take their seats, please. 

I thank the panel for waiting through that delay. We had six 

votes, and I actually called the time on it pretty closely. So I appreciate your attendance here today. 

I think the gentleman from Texas has an opening statement he 

would like to share. If that is the case, Mr. Hensarling, I would 

yield to the gentleman. 

Mr. HENSARLING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. How much time do you need, 3 minutes? 

Mr. HENSARLING. The other opening statements, forgive me? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. The only opening statement so far was Mrs. 

Capito, and that was for 3 minutes. 

Mr. HENSARLING. I will try not to hold up progress, Mr. Chairman. Why don’t you give me 3 minutes? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Sure. The gentleman is recognized for 3 minutes. 

Mr. HENSARLING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, Mr. Chairman, I think you know that I have a lot of respect for you personally, and I know you are a very engaged and diligent member of 

this particular committee. I have no doubt that this is a very sincere effort on your part to achieve worthy goals. 

But I must admit after earlier today, just seeing one more new Federal program that costs $30 billion, one more opportunity to 

borrow money from the Chinese and send the bill to our children 

7 

and our grandchildren, when I think about the largest national 

debt in the history of our Nation, red ink as far as the eye can see, 

when I think about the fact that we are coming off of 2 years in 

a row of trillion dollar-plus deficits, I think to myself, at what point 

does the madness end? At what point do we finally say enough is 

enough? The American people want to know what part of ‘‘broke’’ 

does this Congress not understand? 

So I have no doubt that very worthy things can be done with the $3 billion or $4 billion authorization. And I understand by the 

standards of this place, that might be not even a rounding error. 

To the American people, it is real money, particularly at a time 

when we are drowning in debt, when the torch of Liberty is being 

mortgaged. 

I know this is about livable communities, but I have to tell you, 

in my neighborhood, in Dallas, Texas, where two of my neighbors 

have lost their jobs, to me, a livable community is where my neighbor has a job. 

So I am trying to figure out how the expenditure of an additional $4 billion, creating a new government program, a new government 

interagency council, a new czar, a new agency ostensibly to help 

micromanage our community infrastructure, how is that going to 

get my neighbors employed in Dallas, Texas? Quite frankly, it is 

the debt that is helping create greater uncertainty, that is causing 

businesses not to create jobs. 

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve sat before us at that very 

table and told us it was important to put a plan on the table today 

to solve the spending crisis, that it would have a beneficial impact 

on job creation. And job creation ought to be job one, and adding 

even this amount to the Federal debt works against job creation. 

So with all due respect, I cannot support this Act. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. The gentleman yields back. 

I will just take a moment for a brief opening statement, and then 

I don’t know if the gentleman from New Jersey or the gentlewoman 

from Kansas has an opening statement, but they certainly can 

share if they wish. 

I appreciate the comments of my friend from Texas, but what we 

are here today to really discuss is H.R. 4690, the Livable Communities Act of 2010. Probably the difference of opinion is expenditure 

versus investment. 

In my opinion, the effort here is to invest in the future of this 

country, which ultimately will reap rewards for the people who live 

in the communities, as well as the country as a whole, and that it 

is an investment that will save people money in their daily lives, 

as well as provide well-planned, well-structured communities 

where business can thrive. 

This bill is companion legislation to Chairman Dodd’s Livable 

Communities Act which was favorably reported out by the Senate 

Banking Committee in August. Since its introduction, this bill has 

generated lots of interest in local communities across the country. 

The Livable Communities Act is an example of legislation crafted 

with comprehensive input. 

At this time, I ask unanimous consent that the letters of support 

be entered into the hearing record. These letters show livable comVerDate Nov 24 2008 17:15 Dec 13, 2010 Jkt 062682 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 K:\DOCS\62682.TXT TERRIE
8 

munities have a variety of support, including the U.S. Green Building Council, the National League of Cities, Enterprise Community 

Partners, the National Association of Realtors, and many, many 

more, both nationwide and at the local level. Without objection, 

they will be made a part of the record. 

This legislation is drafted to be incentive-based, providing local 

communities the tools and resources necessary to develop and implement comprehensive regional plans. Liveable communities are 

about creating better and more affordable places to live, work, and 

play. 

In addition, this legislation will eliminate current barriers by creating an interagency council for HUD, DOT, EPA, and other Federal agencies to coordinate. It will also codify the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities within the Housing and Urban Development Department. 

Liveable communities provide benefits to communities across the 

country, including my congressional district. My mayor, Bob Murphy, is here from Lakewood, Colorado, today to testify about the 

impact this type of legislation would have on Lakewood, as well as 

the rest of metropolitan Denver. 

Colorado is already beginning cooperative projects that fit within 

the goals of this bill. H.R. 4690 will enhance the process, capabilities, and efficiency of executing these collaborative projects and 

eliminate barriers to Federal agencies working together to provide 

the necessary resources and technical assistance. 

For these reasons, I introduced the Livable Communities Act of 

2010, and I look forward to working with members of the committee and other committees of jurisdiction to move this important 

legislation forward. 

Does the gentleman from New Jersey have any opening remarks? 

Thank you. 

With that, the Chair will now take testimony from the second 

panel. The Chair now recognizes Mayor Bob Murphy from Lakewood, Colorado, a friend and a neighbor of mine and an outstanding mayor, to speak for 5 minutes. 

The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BOB MURPHY, MAYOR, CITY 

OF LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 

Mr. MURPHY. Thank you. I would like to thank Chairman Frank, 

Ranking Member Bachus, and, of course, Representative Perlmutter, our terrific Congressman from Colorado’s Seventh District, 

for this opportunity to appear before you today to talk about the 

importance of the Livable Communities Act to towns and cities 

across the Nation. 

As you heard, I am the mayor of Lakewood, Colorado, a first tier 

suburb of 150,000 adjacent to the west side of Denver. I also chair 

the Metro Mayors Caucus, a unique organization of 39 communities that collaborates on issues of transportation, economic development, sustainability, and health and wellness. 

One of our best known examples of collaboration even here inside 

the Beltway is the manner in which we coalesced around the 2004 

fast tracks ballot initiative. This voter-approved measure launched 

9 

the Nation’s current transit construction project, 122 miles of new 

rail, 54 new transit stations, and 18 miles of BRT. 

The first line, the West Corridor, is currently under construction 

through Lakewood, connecting the major employment centers of 

downtown Denver, the Denver Federal Center, and the Jefferson 

County Government Center in Golden. The West Corridor, indeed 

every transit corridor, presents unique opportunities for community 

building and job creation, but along with it comes daunting challenges. 

Simply put, transit and the communities we designed around the 

new stations have the potential to create equal access to opportunity for everyone, including enhanced access to employment and 

educational opportunities, more housing choices, improved access to 

medical care and healthy food options, and better access to regional 

amenities. 

These opportunities expand to benefit our regional economies 

and our environment by: reducing auto trips and greenhouse gas 

emissions, thus bettering air quality; improving public health; lowering health care costs because of more walking, bicycling, and exercise; creating jobs through design, building, and operation of infrastructure, housing, and commercial centers; lowering the public 

subsidy of transit through increased ridership; and creating a green 

dividend for regional economies as savings on household transportation costs become discretionary income for food, clothing, and 

education. 

The average American household spends over 50 percent of their 

budget on housing and transportation. This burden falls even heavier on low- to moderate-income households. These households use 

transit more than those with higher income, and as we build our 

communities near transit, they stand to benefit the most from 

transportation cost savings, a wider variety of housing choices, and 

better accessibility to work, schools, daycare, and recreational options, all resulting in more opportunity, productivity, and time with 

family. 

Affordable housing stimulates the local economy. A 2010 homebuilders study in Denver measured the 1-year estimated economic 

impact of building 615 new low-income housing tax credit units and 

found $57 million injected into the economy, $5 million in additional revenue to local governments, and 732 new local jobs. 

Opportunities abound to plan and build livable communities 

along transportation corridors and rail stations, but significant barriers remain. The areas surrounding future fast track stations in 

our cities and suburbs are encumbered by aging infrastructure, 

Brownfield sites, lack of bike and sidewalk connectivity, absence of 

open space, and fragmentation of parcel ownership. The costs for 

remediation are often beyond the scope of local governments, even 

in partnership with the private sector. 

Historically, existing Federal funding has been focused on specific aspects of the metropolitan landscape like transportation, 

housing, and environmental quality, rather than on comprehensively what it takes to build resilient communities that will sustain 

for generations. 

Many programs of DOT, HUD, and EPA have had a high level 

focus on the same outcome, better communities, but have been 

10 

hamstrung by different regulatory requirements and embedded organizational cultures. 

The 2009 formation of the Office for Sustainable Housing in 

Communities inspired the Denver region to, once again, take a collaborative approach to meeting our challenges. The West Corridor 

formed a unique partnership involving our cities, housing authorities, and transportation authorities to comprehensively plan for 

station area land use, affordable housing, infrastructure needs, and 

future economic development along the corridor. 

Our Denver Regional Council of Governments, 55 members, are 

cooperating to update our Metrovision plan with a new centers and 

corridor strategy aligned with the new urban centers developing 

along our new transit corridors. Through DRCOG, the Denver region applied for the first HUD sustainability planning grant. Many 

regions around the country did the same thing, and that is my 

exact point. This is already working. 

Applicants, even if unsuccessful, have had to forge the precise 

type of regional coalitions that will be vital to provide services in 

a future with restrained resources. 

It is for this reason I want to commend the groundbreaking partnership that has already occurred between these three agencies. 

Secretaries Donovan and LaHood and Administrator Jackson 

should be commended for their foresight in linking these programs, 

policies, and funding. And a special thanks, too, by the way, to 

Shelly Poticha, Director for the Office of Sustainable Housing and 

Communities, for her advice, inspiration, and on-the-ground implementation of these policies. Together, we will all build better communities. 

Thank you for the opportunity. 

[The prepared statement of Mayor Murphy can be found on page 

51 of the appendix.] 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you. 

Next, we have Andriana Abariotes from Minnesota. I am sorry 

that Mr. Ellison is not here to introduce you today, but you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF ANDRIANA ABARIOTES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TWIN CITIES LOCAL INITIATIVE SUPPORT CORPORATION (LISC) 

Ms. ABARIOTES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good afternoon, and I would like to also offer my thanks to 

Chairman Frank, Ranking Member Bachus, and the members of 

the committee. I am pleased to be here today to speak about the 

Livable Communities Act of 2010. 

My name is Andriana Abariotes. I am the executive director of 

the Twin Cities Office of the Local Initiative Support Corporation, 

or LISC, which includes the Minneapolis and St. Paul metropolitan 

region. 

Congressman Ellison certainly has been supportive of our work 

and has been a true leader in our community. I would also like to 

thank you, Congressman Perlmutter, for your leadership on this 

important bill. 

For almost 3 decades, LISC has been connecting community developers with resources to revitalize neighborhoods and improve 

11 

quality of life, a strategy we call building sustainable communities. 

Historically, LISC has invested over $9.6 billion in communities 

across the country. In the Twin Cities, this has translated into over 

$370 million in investments, resulting in over 9,000 affordable 

homes and 1.3 million square feet of retail, community and educational space. 

I am here today to talk about the relationship between community development activities and the Livable Communities Act. We 

applaud the coordination promoted by the Livable Communities 

Act, which has the potential to combine community-based planning 

with regional planning efforts. In the Twin Cities, we have seen 

this integration take place with a great deal of success. I would like 

to provide a specific example. 

The central corridor is a new 11-mile light rail corridor and will 

be the second line in the Twin Cities regional transit system, that 

when complete, connects the downtown of Minneapolis to the University of Minnesota through the capital campus into downtown St. 

Paul. This new corridor will run through the heart of one of St. 

Paul’s most historic African-American communities, the Rondo 

community. 

When planning began for the light rail, there was a great deal 

of apprehension and mistrust by residents and community leaders 

due to the checkered history of transportation in this particular 

community. Forty years ago, Interstate 94 was built on top of 

Rondo Avenue, cutting right through the heart of the neighborhood 

and displacing residents and a whole range of community institutions, including housing, community businesses, and services. 

LISC has partnered in the central corridor with the City of St. 

Paul and 10 community-based organizations to engage community 

leaders and residents in connecting a broader vision for the corridor with housing preservation, small business support, neighborhood jobs, and minority contracting and energy improvements. 

LISC’s work in this area is not unique to the Twin Cities. Sixteen of LISC’s 28 local offices are participating in regional partnerships that have applied for HUD’s sustainable community grants 

program, including Boston, where LISC is working with four community-based community development corporations, or CDCs, to 

organize residents in a planning vision for new developments on 

vacant, underutilized land along the region’s Fairmont commuter 

rail line, which is in Congressman Capuano’s district. 

We know that community-based nonprofit CDCs provide vital 

services to residents in low-income communities, particularly communities of color. In order to ensure that input from nonprofits is 

considered early in the planning process and before critical decisions are made, they should be included in the regional planning 

processes at the time of application rather than one year after the 

grant is awarded, as required by the Act. The benefit will be a 

much more robust community involvement component which could 

mitigate future opposition by gaining community buy-ins early in 

the process. 

It is our hope that as the bill moves forward through Congress, 

it retains the provisions that seek to promote integration of low-income and affordable housing planning in the Act’s grant programs. 

12 

The cost of acquisition of land for transit-oriented development 

is often the barrier to keeping housing units affordable, and this 

planning early in the process can help affordable housing developers make development decisions before land prices escalate beyond their reach. 

It is critically important that low-income and moderate-income 

neighborhoods, rural communities, and cities that have experienced 

significant population loss have equal access to the type of planning and development opportunities promoted in the Livable Communities Act. We believe that this can be accomplished through the 

equitable inclusion of communities of all races, ethnicities, ages 

and income levels, a setaside of 15 percent of the grant dollars for 

rural communities, and the creation of community regeneration 

planning grant programs for communities that have lost population, both of which were passed in the Senate Banking Committee’s version of this Act. 

This concludes my testimony, and I would be happy to answer 

any question you may have. Thank you again for the opportunity 

to speak with you today. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Abariotes can be found on page 

24 of the appendix.] 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. And thank you. We appreciate your testimony. 

Now, we will hear from Julia Gouge, president of the Board of 

County Commissioners in Carroll County, Maryland, so she is our 

neighbor. 

STATEMENT OF JULIA W. GOUGE, PRESIDENT, BOARD OF 

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CARROLL COUNTY, MARYLAND 

Ms. GOUGE. Good afternoon, Chairman Frank, Ranking Member 

Bachus, and members of the Financial Services Committee, and to 

you, Representative Perlmutter, we appreciate very much your introducing this bill. 

I am Julia Gouge, president of the Carroll County Board of Commissioners, member of the National Association of Counties, NACo 

Board of Directors, Environment, Energy and Lands Use Steering 

Committee, and the Rural Action Caucus. I would like to thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today on this Livable Communities 

Act. 

NACo is the only national organization representing America’s 

3,068 counties, and we support the Livable Communities Act which 

provides incentive grants to local areas for regional planning 

around housing, transportation, the environment, energy, land use, 

and health initiatives. NACo has passed a resolution supporting 

the Livable Communities Act. 

NACo has worked to support members in achieving sustainable 

development for over 15 years through assistance on issues including smart growth and planning, economic development, and business retention. Priorities now include clean energy development 

and disaster recovery. 

In 2007, NACo began the Green Government Initiative, providing 

comprehensive resources for local governments on all things green. 

NACo will soon release a survey on 2010 sustainability efforts 

which captures close to 600 counties’ differing levels of sustainability. 

13 

Planning for sustainability communities is, by nature, a regional 

effort. Whether individually, with neighboring jurisdictions, or 

through regional councils, counties have the primary role in planning and economic development decisions impacting and determining growth, development, and livability. 

Many rural and mid-sized counties would like to begin development and planning, but lack the resources to do so. This legislation 

will be effective because it meets communities where they are, at 

the planning and implementation stage. 

Carroll County, Maryland, has a population of 175,000. We have 

created three lead-certified green buildings oriented for site optimum lighting, storm water management, geothermal systems, and 

the use of high recycled content materials. To reduce our carbon 

footprint, we invested in the purchase of hybrid cars for our fleet, 

as well as hybrid vans for our transportation system. 

Carroll County participates in the Energy Management Initiative 

provided through the Baltimore Metropolitan Council, and in Fiscal 

Year 2009, Carroll County estimated an electricity savings of over 

$8900,000. 

To preserve our rural history, we implemented an installment 

purchase agreement program for farm preservation. This allows us 

to purchase development rights by leveraging our money so more 

land can be purchased at today’s prices. To date, we have placed 

over 60,000 acres in permanent preservation. 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, 

has created the Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities. 

This legislation would formally establish this office and the Interagency Council, and we appreciate HUD taking the lead with EPA 

and the Department of Transportation to break down the silos 

within the Federal Government. HUD also has grant money available for Fiscal Year 2010 on sustainable planning, and Carroll 

County has utilized block grants from HUD extensively over the 

past 30 years. 

In addition to Section 8 funding, we have been awarded Community Development Block Grants from the Maryland Department of 

Housing and Community Development continuum of care for the 

homeless. We have also received home funding which we use for 

transitional housing programs and rental assistance. 

NACo continues to believe sustainability should be voluntary and 

encouraged through a Federal grant program, rewarding communities undertaking sustainable programs. We do not believe sustainability should be a condition for receiving housing, transportation, and other traditional sources of Federal funding. What we 

do support is having a setaside for a subcategory of rural areas, 

such as the one included in the Senate committee-passed bill. 

Our rural communities represent the majority of the Nation’s 

land mass. Of the over 3,068 counties, over 90 percent have populations under 200,000, with many under 100,000 or 50,000. When 

Federal funding is involved, efforts at integrated local and regional 

planning are often hindered by the States when funds are not 

granted directly to local governments, and NACo appreciates that 

the bill allows local entities to receive direct funding. 

I would like to thank you for this opportunity to testify, and I 

would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. 

14 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Gouge can be found on page 30 

of the appendix.] 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you very much for your testimony. 

Now, the committee will recognize Mr. Bruce Knight from Champaign, Illinois, to testify for 5 minutes. You are recognized, sir. 

STATEMENT OF BRUCE A. KNIGHT, PLANNING DIRECTOR, 

CITY OF CHAMPAIGN, ILLINOIS, AND PRESIDENT, AMERICAN 

PLANNING ASSOCIATION 

Mr. KNIGHT. Good afternoon, and thank you, Chairman Frank, 

Ranking Member Bachus, and the distinguished members of the 

committee for holding this important hearing, and I also thank 

you, Congressman Perlmutter, for your leadership in this issue, 

and congratulations on being APA’s Legislator of the Year. 

I am Bruce Knight, planning director for the City of Champaign, 

Illinois, and president of the American Planning Association. At a 

time when planners are hard at work laying the foundation for economic recovery and on behalf of our 40,000-plus members, I am 

very pleased to be able to testify in support of legislation that offers 

vital resources for good planning, breaks down barriers to efficient 

infrastructure investment, and advances local quality of life. 

The Livable Communities Act provides critical support for good 

planning. There are, I believe, six innovations and benefits that 

make the bill an important step forward: it promotes integrated 

planning and eliminates barriers to regional cooperation; it recognizes the importance of comprehensive planning; it is driven by 

data and performance indicators; it supports both planning and 

plan implementation; and it provides particular benefits for communities hit hard by recession. 

I also want to underscore the fact that the bill is not top-down. 

It is incentive-based, and the plans are driven by engagement, participation, and vision of local residents. 

Much of this committee’s attention has been focused on housing 

and the foreclosure crisis. This bill provides another opportunity to 

help places struggling to restore prosperity and offers desperately 

needed tools to help communities. Virtually every HUD program 

would be more effective and efficient as a result of the plans and 

the tools in this bill. 

The planning in this legislation supports your work promoting 

greater energy and location efficiency in housing policy. It is easy 

to focus on individual buildings and the effort to green neighborhoods, but it is critical that the issues of job access, travel options, 

and housing choices also be considered. 

This committee took bold bipartisan action earlier in the year in 

approving the Green Act. This bill takes those same concerns to a 

broader scale. 

The bill advances integration and interagency coordination. APA 

applauds the efforts of HUD, DOT, and EPA in forming an interagency partnership on sustainable communities. This important 

collaboration is long overdue. 

The agencies have already taken steps to promote closer integration, but passage of this bill would take that integration further by 

establishing a common planning process that is comprehensive and 

coordinates with capital investments. The legislation would ensure 

15 

that these efforts are not a momentary occurrence. The bill encourages regional cooperation. 

True regionalism is notoriously difficult to achieve. Our system 

of multiple, sometimes overlapping units of local government, make 

regional collaboration hard. That said, many of our most important 

challenges are regional in nature, including housing affordability, 

transportation options, community development, and watershed 

protection. 

The bill brings together municipalities in the region and key 

stakeholders from the private and nonprofit sectors. The plans that 

emerge from this process will support Federal livability principles, 

and guide infrastructure investment, while informing local plans 

and codes that are vital to the coordination and effectiveness. 

To achieve the outcomes that citizens envision in the planning 

process, plans must be implemented. The legislation also provides 

critical support for these activities. Communities can choose to 

apply for support to move plans to implementation to those outcomes that residents wants and need. 

In my own city, we are seeking initial funding to support a new 

green code that will help implement key sustainability components 

of our comprehensive plan. 

In my role as president of the American Planning Association, I 

have spent much of the last year and a half traveling to communities across the country. I have seen firsthand the serious economic challenges confronting many neighborhoods. 

Planners in places large and small are struggling to cope with 

tough problems. All too often, I have also seen serious cuts in planning in these same communities. This disinvestment comes at the 

worst possible moment. 

The places that are investing in good planning will be the placing 

best positioned for recovery. After all, the planning process provides a clear strategy to efficiently achieve outcomes, good choices, 

choices where we live and work and how we travel, safe neighborhoods, affordable housing, and a clean environment, outcomes 

which residents value and demand. 

I firmly believe that now is the time to invest in planning, and 

that those communities that do so will recover from the Great Recession first. That is because they are the communities that will be 

prepared to reinvent themselves and take advantage of new opportunities. 

This is only likely to happen if policymakers are making decisions also guided by smarter, greener plans leading to development 

regulations designed to promote greener, more sustainable communities. This is why the Livable Communities Act is so important 

and invests in plans that lay the foundation for economic vitality. 

I thank you for holding this important hearing and the opportunity to testify today. I encourage you to move forward with this 

legislation, and I am happy to respond to any questions. Thank you 

very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Knight can be found on page 39 

of the appendix.] 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Knight. 

I appreciate the testimony of this panel. 

16 

I am just going to make a couple of comments. I have a couple 

of questions, then I will yield to Mrs. Capito for her questions. 

Since there are only two of us here, we won’t waste a lot of time, 

but I know we do have some questions and comments. 

What I would like to comment on are both concerns that Mrs. 

Capito raised as well as Mr. Hensarling in the need to make sure 

that whatever structure the organization has put together, and we 

have certainly the structure in the livable communities, but to the 

degree there are ways to utilize metropolitan planning organizations or use the same terminology so that there is no confusion that 

it is a system that we know can get the grants to the local governments so that the local governments can then work together in a 

regional and cooperative basis. That is what I want to see. So I certainly am willing to work with you all on that, in that regard. 

With respect to the grants themselves, to the degree that local 

governments can put them to good use to plan their communities 

for decades to come, I think we are putting money to good purpose. 

I would say to my friend from Lakewood, Colorado, recently, he 

and I had an instance of working on a project which was a former 

Remington arms plant that was created by the United States of 

America for World War II purposes, and at its height was producing 6 million rounds of bullets a day. 

The City of Lakewood, working in conjunction with the Federal 

Government and with the regional transportation district with a 

variety of organizations cleaned up what was the shooting range 

for that property, added light rail, has a hospital, will have affordable housing, will have a whole variety of things, to take what was 

a mess and really make it a livable, sustainable community. 

It is that goal that I think that I know I seek, something like 

that, for other towns and communities around the country. Obviously, it is happening. But these grants would allow those communities who for whatever reason don’t have the opportunity to do regional or really forward-thinking kinds of plans the opportunity to 

integrate transit, housing, cleanups, brownfields, energy issues. 

So, I would ask you, Ms. Gouge, just a couple of questions. You 

said in Carroll County you have been able to take some grants and 

work in a regional way with the City of Baltimore and others, and 

through your savings, you have come up with some 60,000 acres of 

preservation? How has that worked? After that, I will yield to Mrs. 

Capito for her questions. 

Ms. GOUGE. We have been working on farm preservation for a 

number of years. As money has become more scarce, and farmland 

has become more expensive, I gave a challenge a couple of years 

ago to our staff to come up with a plan. That plan uses zero-based 

bonding. We have worked with our bond counsel and with other attorneys to have a plan so that we can go to the farmers and offer 

them the money. But we are leveraging our money, through the 

zero-based bonds. 

Consequently, it is 40 percent of the value of the land at that 

time. We are offering that to the people now, so we are getting 

more farm for our dollar. We are actually able to give them taxfree money on those bonds for the time that they have that. 

17 

We have set it up for 20 years, so the bond money will be there 

and the interest will be there for those folks. That is the reason it 

has become so important. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you. 

Mrs. Capito has to go back to the Floor, so she won’t be asking 

any questions. That is good for all of us. 

What I would like to do now is to yield to Mr. Al Green from 

Texas. I know you just are sitting down and you may want to collect your thoughts, but generally he will get right to the point. 

So, Mr. Green? 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the witnesses for appearing. 

Mr. Chairman, I apologize for my late arrival. I am also a member of the Homeland Security Committee, and we had a hearing 

that was taking place that required my attention. So, my apologies 

to all. 

But I do want to talk to Ms. Abariotes, and I trust I will pronounce your name correctly, Ms. Abariotes. Is that close? 

Ma’am, you referenced, I believe, an 11-mile rail line you have 

been working on. We have a similar circumstance in Houston, 

Texas. It is 8.27 miles, and it connects the medical center with an 

urban area. 

I am interested in your rail line because it seems quite similar 

to what we are doing, and I would like to get more intelligence on 

how you are perfecting this project, because we are in our infancy 

and it seems you are much more along the way than we are. So 

I welcome any comments that you can share with me. 

Ms. ABARIOTES. Thank you for the question, Congressman Green. 

I would also probably turn to my colleagues here on the panel, because they may have other experiences in communities where they 

are far ahead of us, and I am thinking of the Denver area as well. 

In the City of St. Paul, and really between the two cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, the 11-mile stretch is actually a second line 

of a transit system. So there were a greet deal of learnings in the 

first line, which is the Hiawatha corridor that links the Minneapolis downtown business district with the Mall of America and 

the airport. When the initial planning was done, it was much more 

important to get the line built than to think about the development 

opportunities around it. So the community has been playing catchup. 

In the case of building up the new central corridor line, I think 

the opportunity to do things differently, to engage residents and 

small business owners, institutions that align what will be the new 

line, was the opportunity, and it really sparked both the creativity 

on the part of the city, both cities, the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis, but also to engage the philanthropic community, to create 

a learning forum called the Central Corridor Funders Collaborative. 

They were able to raise, I believe they have raised $5 million collectively toward the goal of raising $20 million to put towards both 

planning around station areas and future rail transit line opportunities in the whole region. 

So I think it is both sparking new partnerships on the ground 

between residents and different community institutions where 

18 

there might be transit stations, sparking the ability to learn more 

about how to do transit-oriented development, and how to do deep 

community engagement with residents in new and different ways. 

And I think the opportunity, like the Livable Communities Act, 

would be to be able to leverage those additional resources that 

would be beyond the resources outlined in the bill that would include both private and philanthropic resources and create more 

synergy and more attention. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you. I would welcome any additional comments. Yes, sir? 

Mr. KNIGHT. I would just comment that I think this is a classic 

example of how the separate planning requirements of Federal 

funding areas has led to a disconnect between issues of transportation and housing and job placement, and that is what the Livable 

Communities Act is all about. 

If we can, instead of having these separate planning requirements, bring them together, look at these issues comprehensively 

and think about how transit operates in conjunction with where 

housing is located, where jobs are located, how that impacts the environment, how we can reduce housing costs because people now 

can not only live in affordable housing, but they have affordable 

transportation choices to their places of destination, that is the key 

difference that we believe this Livable Communities Act will bring 

by again having communities think comprehensively and regionally 

about these solutions, rather than thinking about them independent of each other. 

Mr. MURPHY. I would just add, sir, that in Denver, we have a situation that may or may not be similar to yours. We have a 12-plus 

mile line going out from our core city out to the western suburbs, 

and it has caused us, of course, to work together in collaboration, 

the representatives from each city, the housing authority is a very 

important component to site affordable housing at the appropriate 

station areas, and the transportation district, and the General 

Services Administration which runs the Denver Federal Center. So 

we have been working for over a year and put together a plan that 

coordinates the land use, not just at each station, but hopefully 

along the entire corridor. 

One of the things you find as you get into this, it is not easy, 

but in a citizen-involved process, you can plan for what you think 

is the appropriate land use, then you evolve into how do you create 

a sense of place at each of these stations, how do you incentivize 

people to get off the line at each of the stations? And the result of 

all of that is more and more regional collaboration and more and 

more citizen buy-in. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I appreciate, obviously, we appreciate the testimony of the panel today. This is a subject that I think really needs 

the attention of the Congress. We are happy that the Senate has 

acted on its bill and will hopefully bring it to the Floor of the Senate. This is something that I believe, contrary to what Mr. Hensarling had to say, is really an investment. And this country needs 

to make investments. We have, over time, deferred a lot of investments, whether it is in our transportation system, our housing, and 

certainly we need to be building our jobs, wherever they may be, 

19 

whether it is Lakewood or Minneapolis or Baltimore or Champaign. 

So we appreciate your testimony. Obviously, you all are experts in 

this arena, and you can be assured you will be consulted with as 

we go forward trying to make a package here that really works for 

local governments as well as works at the Federal level with these 

agencies talking to one another and not operating in isolation. 

So, with that, I would like to ask unanimous consent to insert 

statements for the record from the National Association of Home 

Builders and the National Center for Healthy Housing. And without hearing any objection from Mr. Green, they will be inserted 

into the record. 

The Chair notes that some members may have additional questions for this panel which they may wish to submit in writing. 

Without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 30 days 

for members to submit written questions to these witnesses and to 

place their responses in the record. With that, this hearing is adjourned and the panel is dismissed. 

[Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(21) 

A P P E N D I X 

September 23, 2010 

22 


62682.001
23 


62682.002
24 


62682.003
25 


62682.004
26 


62682.005
27 


62682.006
28 


62682.007
29 


62682.008
30 


62682.009
31 


62682.010
32 


62682.011
33 


62682.012
34 


62682.013
35 


62682.014
36 


62682.015
37 


62682.016
38 


62682.017
39 


62682.018
40 


62682.019
41 


62682.020
42 


62682.021
43 


62682.022
44 


62682.023
45 


62682.024
46 


62682.025
47 


62682.026
48 


62682.027
49 


62682.028
50 


62682.029
51 


62682.030
52 


62682.031
53 


62682.032
54 


62682.035
55 


62682.036
56 


62682.037
57 


62682.038
58 


62682.039
59 


62682.040
60 


62682.041
61 


62682.042
62 


62682.043
63 


62682.044