U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

57–180 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024

S. HRG. 118–452 

STATE OF NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, AND COMMUNITY 

DEVELOPMENT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON 

EXAMINING THE STATE OF NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING 

JUNE 13, 2023 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

( 

Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/ 
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio, Chair 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

JON TESTER, Montana 

MARK R. WARNER, Virginia 

ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts 

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

TINA SMITH, Minnesota 

KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona 

RAPHAEL G. WARNOCK, Georgia 

JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota 

THOM TILLIS, North Carolina 

JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana 

BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee 

CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming 

J.D. VANCE, Ohio 

KATIE BOYD BRITT, Alabama 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

LAURA SWANSON, Staff Director 

LILA NIEVES-LEE, Republican Staff Director 

ELISHA TUKU, Chief Counsel 

AMBER BECK, Republican Chief Counsel 

CAMERON RICKER, Chief Clerk 

SHELVIN SIMMONS, IT Director 

PAT LALLY, Assistant Clerk 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

TINA SMITH, Minnesota, Chair 

CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming, Ranking Member 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

JON TESTER, Montana 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona 

RAPHAEL G. WARNOCK, Georgia 

JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota 

JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana 

BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee 

J.D. VANCE, Ohio 

KATIE BOYD BRITT, Alabama 

TIM EVERETT, Subcommittee Staff Director 

KELSEY PRISTACH, Republican Subcommittee Staff Director 

(II)
C O N T E N T S 

TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 2023 

Page 

Opening statement of Chair Smith ........................................................................ 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 22 

Opening statements, comments, or prepared statements of: 

Senator Lummis ...................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 23 

WITNESSES 

Chelsea Fish, Executive Director, National American Indian Housing Council 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 23 

Responses to written questions of: 

Senator Cortez Masto ................................................................................ 72 

Senator Lummis ........................................................................................ 72 

Patrick Goggles, Executive Director, Northern Arapaho Housing Authority ..... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29 

Responses to written questions of: 

Senator Cortez Masto ................................................................................ 73 

Senator Lummis ........................................................................................ 73 

Pete Upton, CEO, Native CDFI Network, and Executive Director, Native360 

Loan Fund ............................................................................................................ 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 30 

Responses to written questions of: 

Senator Cortez Masto ................................................................................ 74 

Senator Lummis ........................................................................................ 75 

Tammy Moreland, Chairperson, Minnesota Tribal Collaborative to Prevent 

and End Homelessness ........................................................................................ 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 69 

Responses to written questions of: 

Senator Cortez Masto ................................................................................ 75 

Senator Lummis ........................................................................................ 75 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUPPLIED FOR THE RECORD

Statement submitted by the Cedar Band of Paiute Indians, Lower Brule 

Sioux Tribe, Rosebud Sioux Tribe ....................................................................... 77 

Statement submitted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis ................... 87 

Statement submitted by Cook Inlet Housing Authority ....................................... 93 

(III)

(1) 

STATE OF NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING 

TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 2023 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, AND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m., in room SD–538, Dirksen 

Senate Office Building, Hon. Tina Smith, Chair of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIR TINA SMITH 

Chair SMITH. Good afternoon. I want to call this Housing, Transportation, and Community Development Subcommittee to order. 

Thank you so much to our witnesses for participating today and 

thank you also to Senator Lummis and all of your team for working 

us on this bipartisan hearing. 

When Senator Lummis and I first met to discuss our goals for 

this Subcommittee, Native housing emerged as a top priority for 

both of us, and we both understand that finding affordable housing 

is a challenge for every community right now, but in Native and 

Tribal communities barriers to housing and home ownership are 

particularly challenging. And as we know, if you do not have a 

safe, decent place to call home, nothing else in your life works, not 

your education, not your job, not your family, not your health, not 

anything. 

Native people experience this reality in very tangible and specific 

ways, as Tribal leaders in Minnesota and around the country tell 

me all the time. Minnesota is home to 11 sovereign Tribal nations 

and large Indigenous communities in the Twin Cities and Duluth 

and Bemidji, and housing challenges in Native communities, in 

Minnesota and around the country, stretch across the entire housing continuum, from the lack of emergency shelter to a shortage of 

home ownership opportunities on Tribal lands. People struggle to 

get mortgages and appraisals and title insurance. If you own a 

home, keeping it in good repair can be difficult because of a shortage of contractors and skilled tradespeople. Tribal communities are 

often rural and remote which adds to the cost of infrastructure like 

water and sewer. 

These issues are common in rural communities, but they are exacerbated on Tribal land. Leased land and trust land each come 

with their own challenges. Mortgage lending on trust land can 

mean months or sometimes even years of administrative delays, 
2 

working through the BIA, and many lenders just will not do business at all on trust lands. 

Mortgages on leased lands can also face lengthy administrative 

delays. Senator Rounds and I partnered on a bill to take the first 

step on fixing these problems 3 years ago, and earlier this year 

Senator Rounds and Senator Thune and Senator Tester and I introduce a bill to take the next step in addressing these delays. 

In addition, much of the housing stock on Tribal land is substandard and needs significant repair. Homes lack full plumbing, 

complete kitchens, and sufficient heating. According to HUD study, 

housing in Tribal lands is about six times more likely to have heating or plumbing deficiencies in comparison to the rest of the country. Repairs and maintenance are expensive, so many Tribes end 

up spending scarce Federal housing dollars maintaining existing 

housing rather than building the additional units that are needed 

to meet demand. The result is unsafe homes that can sit vacant 

and boarded up, even as the demand for housing is increasing. 

So even with recent increases, inflation-adjusted funding for the 

Indian Housing Block Grant is well below where it was 25 years 

ago, and well below what I believe is needed to meet the trust and 

treaty obligations of the Federal Government for housing in Native 

communities. 

Housing shortages and homelessness are experienced on Tribal 

land when families crowd into homes not nearly big enough for all 

the people living there. This is sometimes called ‘‘doubling up,’’ 

which could suggest a relative sleeping on a couch or sharing a 

bedroom, but in practice overcrowding can be much more intense, 

with reports of 15 or even 20 people sharing a two-bedroom home. 

Native communities have strong cultural traditions of not letting 

relatives go without a place to stay when you have a house to 

share, and I can tell you in cold climates like Minnesota and Wyoming, sleeping outside can be deadly. 

In May of 2021, in my first hearing as Chair of this Subcommittee, we held a hearing on Native housing issues, and we 

heard about the need for more supportive housing that combines 

shelter with culturally specific programming to support Native people experiencing homelessness. In my home State of Minnesota, 

Native Americans account for 13 percent of people experiencing 

homelessness, despite being only about 1 percent of the State’s 

overall population. Without culturally specific programming and 

trauma-informed systems, Native people living with homelessness 

struggle to get access to the services and the stable housing that 

they need. 

We have also heard about the importance of reauthorizing the 

Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act, 

or NAHASDA. This was last updated in 2014, and it is far past 

time that that important bipartisan legislation that will cut red 

tape for housing development in Native communities better uphold 

our promises to Native veterans and put a stop to drug use and 

violent crime. I am very grateful to Senator Schatz and Senator 

Murkowski for leading this effort in the last Congress, and I look 

forward to working with them to finally get this done. 

So I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about 

what we are doing that is working, what is not working, what 
3 

needs reform, and what needs more support. These are issues of bipartisan interest and places where we have demonstrated the capacity to work together. So I look forward to building on that 

shared sense of purpose and progress so that we can make progress 

on issues for Native communities. 

So thank you very much, and I now turn to Senator Lummis for 

her opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS 

Senator LUMMIS. Thank you, Madame Chairwoman, and thank 

you to our witnesses for joining us today. 

I especially want to thank Mr. Patrick Goggles for being here 

today. Mr. Goggles brings vast knowledge and experience working 

on Tribal housing. His resume is very impressive, currently serving 

as the Executive Director of the Northern Arapaho Tribal Housing 

Authority. Mr. Goggles formerly served in the Wyoming State Legislature and on the Northern Arapaho Business Council. Thanks so 

much, Patrick, for being here. 

And I want to thank to the rest of the witnesses as well. The expertise on this panel is exceptional. 

In my State of Wyoming, we have two federally recognized 

Tribes, the Northern Arapaho and Eastern Shoshone. Both Tribes 

share the Wind River Reservation. The Wind River Reservation is 

the seventh-largest American Indian reservation in size and fifthlargest in population. Lack of safe, affordable, and available housing impacts communities across Wyoming, but especially on the 

Wind River Reservation. The housing gap has widened as the demand for housing is outpacing new construction. 

In many cases, as the Chairwoman mentioned, multigenerational 

families are overcrowded in homes. These homes often have serious 

plumbing and electrical problems and are in dire need of repair. 

Congress has provided funding for Native American housing programs for several decades. Tribes and tribally designated housing 

entities use the funding for a range of affordable housing activities 

to benefit low-income Tribal households. This includes developing 

new housing for rental or home ownership, maintaining and operating existing housing units, building infrastructure, and offering 

housing-related services. 

So I look forward to your advice and counsel on all of these 

issues. 

Additionally, want to talk about the uniquenesses of working 

with Indian trust lands. On trust lands, the Bureau of Indian Affairs must process and certify mortgages issued by Federal agencies and lenders. In some cases, the BIA has taken months to process mortgages. It creates particular problems in areas that have 

Tribal trust lands available but do not have fee ownership land 

available. 

That is why I have cosponsored the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act with Chairwoman Smith, to create deadlines that BIA 

must meet for processing title documents. If you have other issues 

you want to raise about how that legislation could improve the delivery of services in this area please let us know. 

I, along with several Members of this Subcommittee, are members of the Senate Community Development Financial Institutions 
4 

Caucus. The Caucus is a platform to address the needs of CDFIs 

so that they have the resources to serve their communities. I believe CDFIs are a wise investment to multiply our Federal dollars 

for maximum impact. 

In closing, our witnesses today provide unique perspectives on 

the state of Native American housing, and I look forward to hearing your testimony. I thank you again for being here, and I am 

looking forward to learning ways to ensure Tribal housing needs 

are met. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. I yield back. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you so much. I will now introduce our witnesses, and thank you, Senator Lummis, for introducing Mr. Goggles. Welcome to the Committee, Mr. Goggles. 

In addition I would like to introduce Chelsea Fish, who is Executive Director of the National American Indian Housing Council. 

Ms. Fish is a citizen of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma. For over 

15 years she has worked at the national level to address socioeconomic concerns on behalf of Tribal communities on issues ranging from Tribal gaming and Native small businesses to health and 

food sovereignty. Ms. Fish earned her bachelor of science in health 

education with an emphasis on public health from the University 

of District of Columbia. She is originally from Tishomingo, Oklahoma—I said that correct, I hope—and currently lives with her 

family in Washington, DC. Welcome. 

Pete Upton is the CEO of the Native CDFI Network, and Executive Director of the Native360 Loan Fund. Mr. Upton is a member 

of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska. He serves CEO, as I said, of the 

Native CDFI Network, which represents Native CDFIs around the 

country. In addition, Mr. Upton is the Executive Director of the 

Native360 Loan Fund, a certified Native CDFI supporting Native 

American business owners in Nebraska, Iowa, and South Dakota. 

And joining us virtually is Tammy Moreland, who is Chair of the 

Minnesota Tribal Collaborative to Prevent and End Homelessness. 

Ms. Moreland is a member of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe. She 

currently serves as the Chair of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative, which was formed by Minnesota Tribal Nations in 2014 to 

understand, prevent, and end homelessness of Native People’s in 

Minnesota. 

In addition to her role with the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative, 

Ms. Moreland is a longtime employee of Tribal Family Services and 

public health departments. 

We will begin with our in-person witnesses and then turn to Ms. 

Moreland, and for witnesses you each have 5 minutes for your 

opening statements. Each of you, I think, have a clock in front of 

you to help you stay oriented to that, and your full written statement will be made part of the record. 

Ms. Fish, you are recognized for your opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF CHELSEA FISH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL 

Ms. FISH. [Speaks Native language.] Hi. My name is Chelsea 

Fish. Did you make it through the night OK? I hope you did. 

I am the Executive Director of the National American Indian 

Housing Council. As Senator Smith mentioned, I am a member of 
5 

the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma and originally from a very small 

town called Tishomingo in southeastern Oklahoma, in one of the 

poorest counties of the State, Johnston County. 

We grew up living in a very overcrowded home in my family. We 

lived just off of a dirt road, and there were ab out 20 of us at any 

given time nestled into my grandmother’s home on our original 

trust land, that was heated by a wood stove. 

The National American Indian Housing Council was created by 

Tribal housing programs back in 1974, and for over five decades we 

have provided invaluable training and technical assistance to all 

Tribes, Tribal housing entities, and to Congress. We represent 293 

members, all of which are federally recognized, and represent 493 

Tribal housing organizations, all of whom are constituents of this 

Congress. 

Ladies and gentlemen, I really appreciate the opportunity to deliver this message on behalf of Tribal communities this afternoon. 

It really is an outstanding opportunity for me, coming from the 

background that I do, just a small little country girl from the middle of nowhere, or so I thought. 

Thank you for allowing this opportunity. I stand before you to 

shed light on a very pressing issue, and that issue is housing in 

Native American communities and here in the United States. It is 

uncanny how unaware that people are of the housing conditions on 

Tribal territories and reservations. Every day I talk to people who 

are completely oblivious to some of the amounts of poverty and impoverished situations, and really the downtrodden situations that 

we find on Indian reservations. It is like nowhere else. 

Despite the progress made in recent decades, many Tribal communities continue to face the significant challenges of poverty, including substandard housing, overcrowding, and homelessness. The 

median income of a Native American household is 30 percent less 

than the national average. 

Native American communities also experience higher rates of 

substandard housing with a significant number of homes lacking 

complete plumbing, kitchen, and sufficient heating. I will say that 

again—significant amount of homes. We are looking at 15.9 percent 

of homes being overcrowded compared to only 2.2 nationally. 

The lack of adequate housing in Indian Country is a direct result 

of insufficient funding and resources. The Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act was enacted in 1996, 

and it was a step in the right direction, but Congress has failed to 

fulfill its trust obligation and really has been neglectful of the Tribal community, by keeping funding stagnant for more than 20 years. 

The purchasing power of these funds, allocated for what we know 

as the Indian Housing Block Grant, which is the mechanism for 

getting money out to the Tribes for developing housing, has diminished significantly due to inflation, leading to a rapid decline in 

new housing construction. Since 1998, Tribal housing programs 

have lost $3.4 billion in funding by not keeping up with inflation, 

compared to our sister program, the National Public Housing Program. 

To address the housing crisis in Indian Country we need Congress to increase funding, and we plead with Congress to increase 

this funding in NAHASDA. The current funding levels are inad-
6 

equate, many Tribes receiving less than $500,000 to operate their 

housing programs. Tribes simply cannot build more homes with 

such limited funding. Our geographical challenges alone, including 

isolation, the lack of developed housing, inaccessible lending markets only exacerbate this problem. 

Reauthorizing NAHASDA is crucial. We need an increased 

amount of resources and programmatic changes that streamline 

our housing programs. This reauthorization bill contains provisions 

that can enhance Tribal access to finding, simply various aspects 

of HUD and the Indian Housing Block Grant program. 

Tribes need the flexibility to tailor their housing plans to their 

specific needs and priorities. An example of this flexibility is the 

prioritization of funds. As Senator Smith mentioned, Indians and 

Native Americans will not allow our elders and our needy and our 

vulnerable persons to go without. They will be prioritized, so a lot 

of our funds go to the prioritization of housing for elderly, and that 

leaves mothers of children, single mothers of children, parents 

whose children are going into the homes of family members, and 

so on and so forth, without. 

I would like to highlight a couple of examples to illustrate the 

current housing situation in Native American communities. In 

Nulato, Alaska, which is a remote village with no roads leading in 

or out, there is need for nearly 20 homes. The population is Nulato 

is just over 200. But the estimated cost of construction of a singlefamily home is over $670,000. The current income level at the 

NAHASDA rate in Nulato only allows for 29 percent of a home to 

be built in one single year. 

Similarly, the Comanche Nation Housing Authority in Oklahoma 

focuses on rehabilitating existing homes due to limited funding. 

There are resources available from various funding Federal agencies, including HUD, U.S. Treasury, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Veterans Administration. However, Tribes often face enormous barriers in accessing these resources. 

Some of these programs have requirements in them that do not 

honor and respect Tribal sovereignty and self-determination by 

forcing them to collaborate with other community-based organizations to have pass-through access to the resources. 

But moreover, home ownership remains a significant challenge in 

Indian Country. As we all just discussed in our opening, Federal 

trust land cannot be used to secure a home loan, and lenders see 

doing business with Tribes a risk. There is no incentive for lenders 

to do business with Tribal nations or Tribal citizens. There are no 

penalties for doing so either. Native borrowers—— 

Chair SMITH. I am so sorry to interrupt you, Ms. Fish. You are 

about 2 minutes over, so if you could wrap up we will be able to 

get at the rest of your comments in our questions as well. 

Ms. FISH. It says I have 2 minutes, 30 seconds remaining. 

Chair SMITH. No. That is how much you are over. 

Ms. FISH. I am sorry. 

Chair SMITH. That is OK. 

Ms. FISH. I apologize. 

Chair SMITH. No worries. No worries. 
7 

Ms. FISH. It is the responsibility of this Committee and Congress 

to fulfill its treaty obligations to Tribal nations and restore 

NAHASDA. Thank you very much. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you so much. 

Mr. Goggles. 

STATEMENT OF PATRICK GOGGLES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NORTHERN ARAPAHO HOUSING AUTHORITY 

Mr. GOGGLES. Good afternoon. Chair Smith and Vice Chair Lummis, for the record my name is W. Patrick Goggles. I am the Executive Director of Northern Arapaho Tribal Housing, and we are located on the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming. 

I want to get started with the things that we came here to talk 

about, and that is, first and foremost in mind, is the reauthorization of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. And the reason that it concerns me is, like 

any other community in Wyoming or in Minnesota, the flow of 

funds into your community help you plan, develop, and implement 

those types of, in my case, housing projects. I have one current 

project that I have been working on for 6 years. It is $9.1 million, 

and I will be completing that project in September of 2023. But it 

has taken me 6 years to do that. 

And so it is important that we reauthorization the funding 

streams that we receive through NAHASDA to allow us to do those 

strategic types of planning that help us plan the types of affordable 

housing that we are going to construct. Not only that but looking 

forward to home ownership for many Federal members. 

And just real quickly, I manage 234 houses. Some of my houses 

are overcrowded, unsuitable crowding. I have one 5-bedroom house 

that has 27 people in it, and I have another 3-bedroom house that 

has 15 people in it. The overcrowding is acute. The shortage of 

housing on our reservation is very acute. There are no private ownerships of individual family homes on the Wind River Indian Reservation currently. And that is my take on NAHASDA because it 

will help provide us with an added allocation that we plan with. 

Just so you understand what my director said, the unemployment rate on my reservation is 35 percent, and getting the kind of 

incomes to afford to make a house payment, it is very difficult to 

do that. 

A few years ago, Congress first funded the Competitive Indian 

Housing Block Grant to allow Tribes and their housing entities to 

apply for development funds. They are not included in the regular 

IHBC, Indian Housing Block Grant. These are competitive funds 

that we apply for. And the experience has been the larger Tribes 

and the medium Tribes and the smaller Tribes is not a level playing field. 

I cannot afford to have an engineer on my staff. An engineer is 

worth their weight in gold in helping you determine how you are 

going to build on your Tribal lands. We have gaming revenue on 

our reservation, but that goes for the other needs that our Tribe 

has such as social services, and Human Services such as dealing 

with the addictions of meth and fentanyl on our reservation. So 

those are real-life kinds of things that we deal with because we are 

in a rural, isolated community. 
8 

My other folks that I represent, because I am Region V representative for Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and Utah, and the 

other Region III, North and South Dakota and Nebraska, are really 

isolated with large land-based Tribes. So many of our reservations 

experience the lack of essential services such as fire prevention 

such as EMT service. In our neck of the woods, law and order is 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and you can have response times up 

to 30 minutes to 2 hours, waiting for an EMT or a police officer 

to arrive on the scene. By the time they show up, you know, other 

incidents have occurred. 

So I wanted to say that much. I know my 5 minutes went pretty 

fast, but I want to answer some of your questions with some more 

additional information for you. Thank you. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you so much, Mr. Goggles. 

Mr. Upton. 

STATEMENT OF PETE UPTON, CEO, NATIVE CDFI NETWORK, 

AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIVE360 LOAN FUND 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you, Chair Smith and Ranking Member Lummis and the Subcommittee for this opportunity to present today. 

My name is Pete Upton, and I am an enrolled citizen of the 

Ponca Tribe of Nebraska, and I am the CEO of the Native CDFI 

Network, and I keep my feet grounded in the work that I do. I am 

the Executive Director of Native360 Loan Fund, and we serve Nebraska, South Dakota, Iowa, and Kansas. On behalf of the Native 

CDFI Network and the 90 certified and emerging Native CDFIs we 

serve, I welcome the opportunity to present about the capital access 

challenges facing Native home ownership and the pivotal role that 

Native CDFIs play in addressing those challenges and what Congress can do to enhance the Native CDFI’s ability to home ownership. 

Despite recent progress by Native CDFIs, the challenges facing 

Native home ownership remains severe. Native communities and 

Native CDFIs face numerous challenges in providing home loans to 

Native communities. The challenges include access to low-interest, 

long-term funding for Native CDFIs, the scarcity of availability of 

housing stock, the lack of infrastructure and skilled workers which 

further hampers the construction and renovation of homes. Land 

issues, including limited availability, complex structures also pose 

hurdles for expanding housing opportunities for the Native populations. These multifaceted challenges highlight the need for targeted support and innovation solutions addressing the housing 

needs in Indian Country. And I want to stress innovative solutions 

and targeted support, and I will get into that when we get into the 

questions. 

The state of affairs is challenging, but there is an effective solution, and that is Native CDFIs when it comes to Native home ownerships. Native CDFIs are proven irreplaceable engines for growing 

vibrant Native economies. According to the Treasury, for every dollar invested in CDFIs they create $8 in private sector investments. 

Our impact is particularly significant in the area of Native home 

ownership, where Native CDFIs are playing a crucial. Native 

CDFIs provide affordable home loans, assistance with 

downpayments, homebuyer education, Native communities who 
9 

have been overlooked by the traditional lenders. Native CDFIs are 

there to provide the support. By offering specialized financial products, comprehensive technical support, and extensive community 

engagement, we are expanding access to affordable home ownership opportunities within Native communities. 

Simply put, Native CDFIs need the support from Congress to 

grow its capacity to meet the moment. We have identified six key 

ways Congress can strengthen Native home ownership and the 

vital role Native CDFIs play in the endeavor. 

First, support us in ensuring that proposed Native CDFI certification reforms do not harm Native CDFIs. The ongoing reform 

process of CDFI certification application and regulations by the 

CDFI Fund pose challenges for Native CDFIs. The proposed 

changes could hinder their ability to promote home ownership and 

economic progress in Indian Country. 

Native CDFIs would either need to make drastic operational 

changes or alter their programs and products, or forego certification, resulting in reduced access to vital capital for serving their 

Native community. We urge Congress to address our concerns by 

advocating for a formal listening session with the CDFI Fund and 

the Native CDFI leaders, executive directors, to discuss and address the potential impacts of these reforms. 

Second, establish a Native Advisory Committee within Treasury 

and the CDFI Fund. This committee should be made up of Native 

CDFI executive leaders that would engage directly with Treasury 

and the CDFI Fund and provide valuable input on how policy and 

programs impact the flow of capital to communities and listen to 

the Native CDFIs who are the boots on the ground in the community, doing the work. Congress should mandate that Treasury establish a Native Advisory Committee made up of CDFI executive 

directors, and that committee would meet at least annually with 

the Treasury Secretary and the CDFI director. Third, increase NACA appropriations to $50 million. Capital is 

needed to provide long-term, low-interest funding for homeowners, 

Native American homeowners. 

And fourth, increase the annual funding of the HUD Section 4 

to $50 million and establish a 10 percent set-aside for Native communities. 

Fifth, pass the Rural Housing Reform Act. 

And finally, pass the Native American Direct Loan Home Act. 

And I want to conclude by thanking the Congress and this Subcommittee and encouraging you to maintain a relationship and a 

collaboration with Native CDFI leaders in developing funding of innovative policies that address the capital needs of Indian Country. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you very much. 

And last we will hear from Ms. Tammy Moreland, who is joining 

us virtually. 

STATEMENT OF TAMMY MORELAND, CHAIRPERSON, MINNESOTA TRIBAL COLLABORATIVE TO PREVENT AND END 

HOMELESSNESS 

Ms. MORELAND. Aanii Boozhoo, Niigaanii Animikii Benesi Ikwe 

ninidizhizikaaz, Migizi nindoodem, Odawa Anishinaabe Kwe 

ndawaa, Wiikwewang nindonjiibaa. 
10 

My Government name is Tammy Moreland. I have a small correction. I am a Tribal member of the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. I work for the Mille Lacs Band of 

Ojibwe in central Minnesota, and I work for the Aanjibimaadizing 

Program. I have the honor and the responsibility of chairing the 

Minnesota Tribal Collaborative to prevent and end homelessness, 

which is a tribally initiated and innovative approach to address 

housing and homelessness for American Indians in Minnesota. 

I am honored to appear before you today to talk about the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative’s work to ending homelessness to State 

and Federal change. Thank you, Senator Smith, for calling this 

hearing and inviting me to testify on behalf of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative. 

The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative was funded in 2014, when a 

group of Tribal Housing and Human Services staff in northern and 

central Minnesota began to meet together with other supporting organizations to learn from each other about new resources and ideas 

for promising practices that help meet the unique needs of American Indians experiencing homelessness. 

In addition to the direct services that it provides, the Minnesota 

Tribal Collaborative has a strong advocacy for reforming State and 

Federal law. We have been successful lobbying for changes to State 

and Federal law because of our first-hand experience with homelessness and its root causes and because we never give up. The reform to the Federal law that the collaborative has accomplished 

with Senator Tina Smith and other allies on Capitol Hill means 

that not only Minnesota Tribes will have access to increased Federal funding support but hundreds of Tribes throughout the United 

States will also be able to access those increased resources for our 

shared mission to reduce homelessness in Indian communities. 

In Minnesota, American Indians are more than 12 times more 

likely to experience homelessness and to be homeless longer than 

the white population. The most recent reservation homeland study, 

conducted in 2018, found that half of the people homeless on reservations were children, youth, and elders. Most people met the 

definition of a chronic or long-term homeless, and nearly half of the 

people surveyed had a chronic health condition that impacted their 

ability to work or find housing. 

Our collaborative is successful because the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative are fearless. We usually take the hard way and not the 

easy way to accomplish our goals, and our goals are not just for us, 

but we look forward several generations. The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative wants future generations to know that we came together 

with leaders to write new rules for society about how to thrive together. We experienced immense challenges, but in the end we succeeded. We want future generations to know that this was a powerful generation that rose from adversities, and we gave them legacies and resources to take inspiration from. We want them to look 

at us with courage, as we went through a difficult period of triumph and struggle. We hope they will talk about us as examples 

to emulate, as something to be, and to go onward to the future 

with. 

We want to end homelessness in our communities. The members 

of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative always show up, we chal-
11 

lenge the status quo, and we hold ourselves and other accountable 

for change. We have made changes, significant changes, and we intend to make more. We believe that nothing about us should happen without us, and we push to be part of meetings, funding, 

trainings, and we always insist that our voices are heard. 

For the Tribes to be successful in ending homelessness, both on 

and off the reservation, we ask the following from Congress. I have 

five points, but due to time I am only going to mention one. We 

ask that you support Tribal efforts to end homelessness among 

Tribal members as they move between the reservation and urban 

communities. Federal policies have pushed American Indians into 

and out of reservation communities for decades. This destruction in 

community life is one of the root causes of homelessness. 

Today the Federal Government should support Tribes’ efforts to 

meet the needs of Tribal members where they are today. This is 

a Federal Government problem that can be solved by Tribes and 

the Federal Government working together. 

Miigwetch. Thank you for your time, and by partnering together 

and sharing resources, we can end homelessness for America’s first 

people. Thank you. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you so much. Thanks to all of our witnesses 

for your testimony today. 

We will now move to a 5-minute round of questions from Members of the Committee, and I defer to Senator Tester from Montana 

to begin. 

Senator TESTER. Well, I want to thank the Chair, and I also 

want to thank all the folks who testified here today. I appreciate 

it very much. 

You know, it has always been very, very difficult to get 

NAHASDA passed, and it is something that is very, very important, and we need to get it funded at a level that will work. 

I agree with you, Ms. Fish. People do not understand the housing 

challenges in Indian Country. Many folks back here do not understand the trust responsibilities we have to Native Americans. They 

are special to Native Americans. And I do think that the housing 

goes hand-in-hand with those responsibilities. I have also said that 

if we really want to address any issue—I do not care if it is schools, 

law enforcement, housing, the list is quite long, especially for those 

large land-based Tribes—then we need to figure out ways to empower Tribes to do that and support them in their efforts. 

One of the ways that was supposed to do that is through HUD’s 

Training and Technical Assistance Program, ensuring that Tribes 

are knowledgeable and able to make housing decisions for their 

communities. It is not easy work. 

I have heard from Tribes in Montana who have had difficulty in 

accessing the technical assistance system as it is currently implemented by Housing and Urban Development. So this question is for 

you, Ms. Fish, and you can add in, Mr. Goggles, Mr. Upton, Ms. 

Moreland, if you would like. 

NAIHC runs a Technical Assistance Training Program for Tribal 

housing entities. From your perspective, what needs to be done to 

improve training and technical assistance to Tribes that are utilizing those HUD dollars, to really make a difference getting housing in Indian Country? 
12 

Ms. FISH. Thank you, Senator Tester. One of the ways that we 

have explored developing an efficacious technical assistance delivery system is to return to the way that our technical assistance 

funding was passed down to the National American Indian Housing Council. We currently work off of a cooperative agreement. The 

process for receiving technical assistance assignments, invoicing for 

that technical assistance is very burdensome. The administrative 

process alone, working through this mechanism, I have two staff 

members that predominantly do this work, working in the DRGR, 

working with the different operational systems that HUD has in 

place, working with their Office of Procurement. OPM is very difficult. Getting contracts passed that support the technical assistance delivery is very difficult, working through that mechanism. 

And so we have explored the option to return to the old way, 

which was where we received a grant, and we were able to receive 

the technical assistance requests directly and then deliver the technical assistance. In the same stroke or in the same step, we are 

also able to develop best practices, case studies and do our own research in a very streamlined way. 

There you go. 

Senator TESTER. Good. Would anybody else like to comment? Mr. 

Goggles. 

Mr. GOGGLES. Senator Tester, thank you. TNTA at the National 

American Indian housing level works. I can attest to that. I have 

13 years of unmodified opinions on my financial compliance audits. 

So we are good stewards of the Federal assistance and Uncle Sam’s 

dollar. It impacts how we deliver services to our clientele. So I 

know the TNTA works. When we had it before at NAIHC we had 

folks coming to our reservation without too much of a bureaucratic 

system in place. Now it is more having a couple of folks that you 

have to jump through some hoops for. But getting that service to 

us, getting out the grantees helps them understand Federal regulation, like 2 CFR, understanding Native American Housing and 

Self-Determination Act, understanding the eligible activities that 

you can participate in, and the kinds of activities under the Indian 

Communities Development Block Grant Program. 

Senator TESTER. OK. And really quickly, and it is for you, Mr. 

Upton, you listed a half a dozen things that we could do in Congress. Could you give me your number one issue, of those six? 

Mr. UPTON. Of the six would be to increase appropriations for the 

NACA program. It was stagnant from 2014 to roughly 2020 at $16 

million. There are 72 Native CDFIs, and it is up to approximately 

$23 million now. Fifty million is what we need, and that would 

make a huge impact, especially if we are going to make Native 

CDFIs 184 lenders, we need capital. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you, Senator Tester. 

Senator Lummis. 

Senator LUMMIS. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Mr. Goggles, you mentioned it took 6 years to jump through all 

the hoops necessary to get your now September 2023 project to this 

point. Could you describe some of those hoops, and how can we 

help cut that down, the amount of time? 
13 

Mr. GOGGLES. Vice Chair Lummis, one of the areas has been the 

working relationship with the Bureau of Indian Affairs Realty Department. It took me approximately 2 years to master-lease the 

subdivision metes and bounds of the survey that we did, plus 2 

years of delay from the pandemic. So it took me about 4 years to 

obtain the leasing authority through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

Currently they are understaffed. There are only two people in the 

Realty Division at the Wind River agency. So that is one of the 

challenges is getting the land. 

The other challenge is when we develop a project, infrastructure 

is always one-third of our development cost. At the Chief Black 

Coal project, $9.1 million total, and $2 million is for infrastructure. 

And putting that infrastructure according to Federal regulation, according to ONAP and HUD regulations, under the Indian Housing 

Block Grant, under the Indian Community Development Block 

Grant, and the use of community facilities from USGA, each one 

has its own set of regulations. 

Senator LUMMIS. Yeah. That is so embarrassing. 

Mr. GOGGLES. So navigating these regulatory requirements requires experience. It requires training, like we were talking about 

TNTA. Everybody’s shop does their own thing. 

The third is environmental reviews. 

Senator LUMMIS. Are those houses on well and septic? 

Mr. GOGGLES. We are developing this project with domestic 

water, domestic wastewater and drainage. Individual homesites 

use the septic system and cisterns when they are developing, even 

out in the country, and there are 21⁄2 acres generally. What I have 

leased for a subdivision is about 20 acres. For 20 homes, the cost 

is part of that, for the 10 units that I am building, that are 3-bedroom, $252,000 apiece, for the 10. Four-bedrooms, $267,000 apiece. 

These are manufactured housing units. 

Senator LUMMIS. Geez. 

Mr. GOGGLES. Yep. 

Senator LUMMIS. And it was earlier mentioned, numbers like 

$600,000. I cannot remember who said that. 

Mr. GOGGLES. That is in Alaska. 

Senator LUMMIS. Oh, in Alaska. 

Mr. GOGGLES. In Alaska, just talking to my colleagues in that 

area, there are two seasons up there. That is the season that they 

play basketball and the other is for getting materials up there in 

a timely manner so you can construct a house. 

So two very different methods of building, in the Northern 

Plains, Great Plains of our area versus Alaska, they are very different. In the Southwest you find very different methods as well. 

Senator LUMMIS. Can you see ways that we could fold the programs you mentioned into one and streamline it? 

Mr. GOGGLES. Under the Indian Community Development Block 

Grant program we could make that program more flexible, that it 

could fund infrastructure. One of the areas that I am working on 

is redevelopment of streets. They have not been repaired or rebuilt 

since the time they were first put in by HUD. And now that I have 

taken over, I am having difficulties just preparing streets. 

This last winter, we were using our monies to provide snow removal services because of an extremely harsh winter. 
14 

Senator LUMMIS. Extremely harsh. 

Mr. GOGGLES. Extremely harsh winter. So the Indian Community Development Block Grant, making that program more flexible. 

And the Indian Housing Block Grant as well. You know, we can 

use these funds to develop infrastructure and fund development at 

the same time. 

Senator LUMMIS. What if you find a house that needs plumbing 

and electrical upgrades, and heating upgrades? Are there programs 

that are easily accessible to take care of those needs? 

Mr. GOGGLES. Senator Lummis, under our Indian Housing Block 

Grant we repair and rehab and modernize housing. Some of the 

housing stock I have now is about 40 years old. So when you get 

into that house you are going to repair electrical because back 40 

years ago we did not have the electrical devices we have now. And 

the houses need two bathrooms, not just one. So you are looking 

at the modernization of houses so they have at least two bathrooms. And in the case of the pandemic, you could quarantine a 

family in that type of house with two bathrooms. 

Senator LUMMIS. Yeah, good point. Thank you, Mr. Goggles. I appreciate it. 

Mr. GOGGLES. Thank you. 

Chair SMITH. Senator Lummis, if you have additional questions 

you would like to ask so you do not break up your flow, please go 

right ahead. 

Senator LUMMIS. OK, great. Thank you. 

Ms. Fish, what reforms do you think are necessary to improve 

NAIHC? 

Ms. FISH. I just want to clarify, the National American Indian 

Housing Council? 

Senator LUMMIS. I guess I have the wrong acronym. What is it— 

NAHASDA? 

Ms. FISH. NAHASDA? 

Senator LUMMIS. I am sorry. I get the acronyms mixed up. I intended to say NAHASDA. 

Ms. FISH. We simply need to get this legislation passed. That is 

the first grand step is simply passing the legislation. 

Senator LUMMIS. OK. Mr. Upton, how are Native Community Development Financial Institutions providing support to prospective 

Native homeowners? 

Mr. UPTON. You know, first of all, I think they are being innovative with the products that they design, and also they are really focusing efforts in collaborative ways, statewide and regionally, by 

developing collaborations of Native CDFIs. They provide support 

when it comes to Native home ownership. That is where Native 

CDFIs come into play. 

Senator LUMMIS. But do they work on Tribal trust lands, or can 

it only work on fee land? 

Mr. UPTON. No. I was just up in South Dakota last week and this 

was interesting. Of the 86 related loans that were closed last year, 

totaling $7 million in South Dakota, CDFIs made up 85 percent of 

the lending, and those were acquisitions, 39 homes, 9 homes were 

newly constructed, and 7 were interim construction, and 24 rehabs. 

But Native CDFIs made up the lending portion of that, 85 percent 

of it came from Native CDFIs. 
15 

Senator LUMMIS. Thank you. And then a quick question for Ms. 

Moreland. Do you find there is data available to accurately determine housing needs on and off the reservation? 

Ms. MORELAND. I believe that there is a start, at least in Minnesota, for collecting the data. Minnesota has worked with Wilder 

Research, and they do a reservation-specific survey, and this is the 

year that we are doing it. We are going to be doing it toward the 

end of this year. And we will be able to collect that data. We have 

been working with Wilder since about 2006, so we do have some 

data that is available. 

One of the innovative things with the data that we collect with 

Wilder is Wilder has respected Tribal sovereignty, and the data 

that is collected is owned by each Tribe, and the Tribe will decide 

how they would like to disperse that information and use that information. So it is not data that is being collected by non-Natives, 

used in a non-Native way. The Tribes own their data. 

Senator LUMMIS. Thank you. And this question is for anyone who 

wishes to weigh in. Are there special programs for Native American veterans to obtain housing, and who administers those and 

how are they working? Ms. Fish. 

Ms. FISH. Thank you for the question, Senator Lummis. Yes, 

there are programs that allow access to housing for Native American veterans. One bill that is out there right now that was introduced by Congressman Tom Cole is the Tribal HUD–VASH, which 

is a result of a demonstration program allowing vouchers to be 

used for the subsidization of housing for veterans. And it has 

worked very well, and we are looking at, in the future, being able 

to transition those into home ownership as well. 

Another program that allows for home ownership and purchase 

is run out of the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Senator LUMMIS. Veterans Affairs. OK. 

Mr. UPTON. Could I comment on that one? 

Senator LUMMIS. Yes, please, and then I will yield back. 

Mr. UPTON. OK. The other bill that I think that really needs the 

support is the Native American Direct Loan Improvement Act. It 

is Senate bill 185, as part of the five veteran bills that went to the 

floor on April 26, 2023, and unfortunately failed. But it would create $5 million of relending program that would allow Native CDFIs 

who intimately understand Native communities and the mortgage 

lending process on Tribal trust properties to obtain a loan through 

the Native American Direct Loan Program at 1 percent interest 

and allow veterans to use the program to refinance non-VA mortgages so that Native veterans have the same opportunity as nonNative veterans to use their VA benefits to refinance existing mortgage loans. So that one would be extremely important to pass. 

Senator LUMMIS. Thank you, witnesses. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you very much. 

We are now going to turn to Senator Cortez Masto, from Nevada, 

who is asking her questions remotely. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to 

the Ranking Member as well. 

It has been a great discussion and I could not agree more with 

my colleagues, and the need to pass NAHASDA and so many other 

essential housing bills that we can to support Tribal housing. 
16 

Let me ask a question that has not been asked yet, around manufactured homes, because I know there is a lot of support in Nevada, and really across the country, where I see a third of new 

homes on Tribal lands are manufactured homes. And Ms. Fish, let 

me ask you this question. One, why is there that popularity in 

Tribal homes? Are there financing issues associated with these 

Tribal homes, and are there programs, including CDFI funds, that 

help home buyers finance a manufactured home? 

So maybe, Ms. Fish, let me start with you. 

Ms. FISH. I want to respond and give you an example of the 

Rosebud Sioux Tribe with the manufacturing of homes. So in the 

’60s there was a Tribal housing program that created transitional 

housing for the Rosebud Sioux Tribe Tribal citizens. They were living in downtrodden circumstances and living in shacks and tents. 

So they were transitioned into this temporary housing. 

Then, in the late ’60s, you had something called Sioux 400, which 

built 400, 2-bedroom houses that now have three to four families 

living in them. In the ’70s and ’80s, there were approximately 1,200 

or 1,160 homes created, and that is the stock of housing that the 

Rosebud Sioux Tribe now uses in their formulated Indian Housing 

Block Grant. They have since purchased, to your point, a housing 

plant. They purchased that 12 years ago, and now plan to use 

ARPA funds to supplement the manufacturing of 100 new homes 

in the next 2 years. In addition to that, they used ARPA funds to 

furnish kitchens and develop innovative kitchen designs that folks 

would be able to have shared spaces that would accommodate eating at a table, and so on and so forth. 

I do not know the details around the CDFI network and their 

support of manufactured homes, but I do know that they—— 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. ——single-family construction homes. Is 

that right? 

Ms. FISH. Yes. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. OK. I would be curious, because I know 

this is an option that should be considered. But I also understand, 

and I am grateful that the ARPA funds and other appropriations 

that we have identified have helped. But I am curious how the financing comes together, if CDFI can be a part of it. 

And then let me just put on your radar, there is a new HUD program called Preservation and Reinvestment Initiative for Community Enhancement Grant Program, called PRICE. It was included 

in the Appropriations Bill, and it provided $225 million in grants 

to assist manufactured home communities already existing, to repair their sewer and water, to fix the roads, to support flood mitigation. I am curious if the Tribes have taken advantage of those 

funds or are even aware of those funds that are eligible. And they 

are only there for a short period of time. 

So those are two questions. Let me throw those out there. And 

maybe, Mr. Upton, CDFI. Is there an option for that financing to 

come to help manufactured homes? 

Mr. UPTON. You know, again, the challenge with Native CDFIs 

is it is underfunded for the last 10 to 15 years, especially for the 

appropriations under the NACA program. Currently, again, it is 

about $23 to $23 million, and we have the appropriations to in-
17 

crease to $50 million. And by being able to leverage private dollars 

with that, that would make a significant impact. 

Manufactured housing is a product that Native CDFIs would finance, but 9 times out of 10, before I came on this trip I reached 

out to probably 20 to 30 Native CDFIs, and the No. 1 challenge 

was the lack of capital. We do not have the capital. And I know 

in the HUD Section 184 it was, well, they are wanting to make 

CDFIs lenders. Well, we cannot be lenders without the appropriate 

capital. You know, you are inviting us to a game that we cannot 

play. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. So has the Federal Home Loan Bank 

system, in your area, are they providing advancements or support 

for housing, particularly in Tribal communities? I am curious. 

Mr. UPTON. You know, in our particular area we are multistate. 

I am not an expert on what they provide, but I do know it is very 

limited when it comes to Native CDFIs. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Yeah, and that is a problem. And listen, 

we see it. I know my time is running out and I appreciate it, 

Madam Chairwoman. But we have seen the benefits through the 

CARES Act, through the American Rescue Plan, through ARPA, 

where we actually carve out and focus on set-asides for our Tribal 

communities, and I think it is so important we continue to do so. 

But we also talked if there are other funding opportunities, 

whether it is the Home Loan Banks—there are Home Loan Banks 

that their mission is to be in our communities, looking at affordable 

housing, and housing in general, that they also are focusing on our 

Tribal communities. 

And then the only other final question I have is to the extent 

that you are not aware of that new HUD program, the PRICE program, that helps existing manufactured homes, I hope you take advantage of those opportunities as well. 

So thank you. I am going to stop there. Thank you so much. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto. 

We have Senator Sinema, who is also joining us remotely. Senator Sinema. 

Senator SINEMA. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to our 

witnesses for being here today. 

Twenty-two federally recognized Tribes call Arizona home, and I 

am proud to work with them closely to be a voice and advocate for 

Indian Country. It is important to me that Tribes receive the respect, recognition, and resources owed to them by the Federal Government. 

There is a housing shortage throughout Arizona, but the issues 

that face Tribal communities in Arizona are unique, complex, and 

deserve additional attention and focus. 

So Ms. Fish, thank you for being here. I have heard from Native 

housing authorities in Arizona about the growing problem of 

fentanyl and methamphetamine use in their communities, which is 

a trend we are also seeing in non-Native communities. My understanding is that the cost of remediating housing units where drug 

use has occurred is quite expensive, particularly for smaller Tribes. 

Is this a problem in other parts of the country, and more generally, what can you share with the Subcommittee today on this 

topic? 
18 

Ms. FISH. Thank you for the question, Senator. The short answer 

is yes. This is a very common problem in Indian Country or in 

Tribal communities, and in fact, we spend most of our Indian Housing Block Grant funds in remediating, maintaining, and rehabbing 

homes than we do in any type of development or new construction 

of homes. Yes. 

Senator SINEMA. Thank you. I have also heard that this is a 

growing problem, and the Tribes are using their Indian Housing 

Block Grant allocations to pay for remediation costs. One Tribe in 

Arizona told me that they are spending around $1 million per year 

on remediation activities associated with meth and fentanyl. This 

worries me for many reasons, but especially because it means that 

these dollars are not used toward expanding affordable housing. 

So Ms. Fish, is this scenario I just described in Arizona an 

outlier, or is this happening all over? 

Ms. FISH. This is happening all over. 

Senator SINEMA. Thank you. I am working to provide some more 

attention and funding on this issue, to help Tribal housing authorities address remediation issues and expand access to affordable 

housing in Indian Country. 

Switching gears now, I want to touch on the HEARTH Act and 

Indian home ownership briefly. As you all know, the HEARTH Act 

allows for leasing of Tribal trust lands, in accordance with Tribal 

law, without requiring the Interior Department to approve each 

transaction. I would like to hear briefly from each of our witnesses 

today on why more Tribes have not utilized this law, and are there 

barriers that we should be aware of that we can assist with? 

And I am also going to submit this question for the record so that 

each of you have more opportunity to provide expansive responses. 

So if you would, in the time that we have together, be somewhat 

brief. 

Mr. GOGGLES. Thank you. This is Patrick Goggles from the State 

of Wyoming. John Barrasso sponsored that legislation, consulting 

myself on the use of it. On the Wind River Indian Reservation we 

have two Tribes, the Northern Arapaho and the Eastern Shoshone, 

and getting the two Tribes to agree on a set of regulations that govern each Tribe commonly has been difficult to come by. 

The HEARTH Act allows Tribes, or Tribe, in some cases, whether 

it is a single Tribe on the reservation, to promulgate regulations 

under the HEARTH Act for leasing. They still have to have the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ approval to implement those regulations in 

terms of leasing of individual homesites or subdivision in their 

area, which includes rights of ways, easements, road easements, 

and utility rights of way. 

In my case, I use a utility license agreement with the Northern 

Arapaho Tribe in place of the HEARTH Act right now to get that 

job done and streamline that process. 

Mr. UPTON. Senator, I always refer to what we do on a daily 

basis as a big jigsaw puzzle. Each community has their own set of 

pieces, and just like you mentioned there, not utilizing the 

HEARTH program and utilizing another program that fits, that is 

really what we do on a daily basis, is we look for what fits for our 

community and what is going to be streamlined and probably the 

quickest and the fastest, and what we are most comfortable with. 
19 

And Native CDFIs, whether it comes to fund, you know, not 

every Native CDFIs probably can use the 502, but they might be 

able to use other programs. So we are constantly looking for different pieces to make it work in our communities. Each community 

is a little bit different. Last week I spent a week up in South Dakota with the South Dakota Native Home Ownership Coalition. 

There were about eight Native CDFIs in the room, and they introduced the new Freddie Mac program, and only maybe two of them 

said it could work for them. I said, but that is a positive thing because that piece fits your puzzle. 

Ms. FISH. Thank you for the question. The short answer is that 

it is difficult and very challenging for Tribes. So the Tribes work 

with the BIA’s Realty Office to be able to exercise the HEARTH 

Act, and that Realty Office is challenged with getting Tribes ready 

to take over leasing, and they need the local capacity to take over. 

So really it is a capacity issue within Tribes themselves and also 

within the BIA. So that component of the process is so overwhelming that Tribes are discouraged from being able to exercise 

it. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you, Senator Sinema. 

Senator SINEMA. Thank you, Chairwoman. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you very much. 

So, let’s see. I have a couple of questions I would like to follow 

up on. Mr. Upton, let me start with you. You, in your testimony, 

you refer to these proposed rule changes at the Department of 

Treasury. You and I have spoken about this before, I think, when 

I came to visit the Native CDFI Coalition. 

Could you just identify, with a little bit more specificity, what 

you see as some of the challenges—or let me put it this way, how 

those proposed rules would negatively affect how Native CDFIs operate. 

Mr. UPTON. Probably the top of mind for me would be when it 

comes to the prohibiting balloon payments, doing an amortization 

for maybe 30 years and ballooning it after 10 to 15 years. I mean, 

that is a daily practice in the banking industry. And then also prohibiting interest-only loans. We deal with so many contractors, and 

that is how they operate. And we do not let our loans go evergreen, 

like on our interest-only loans. There are very skilled contractors 

that we use. They do a job, they draw down on their line of credit, 

and when the job is over they pay it off and they roll onto the next 

job. And that would really prohibit a lot of Native CDFIs by being 

creative in finding new products to get Native homeowners. 

And one more point I just want to draw. We had a loan back in 

2013, that we did, when we did a balloon payment, 30 years, 15- 

year balloon on it. And we bought it for $90,000, and she would not 

have been able to get into that loan. She could not have afforded 

a 15-year mortgage, but we were able to go 30. We bought it for 

$90,000, and just recently sold it for about $200,000. So that was 

a significant increase. 

Chair SMITH. You used the analogy of a puzzle and how it is constantly trying to figure out how to put these puzzles together. And 

I think one of the things we have learned is that Native CDFIs are 

particularly skilled at understanding how to put those pieces of the 

puzzle together for Native people on Tribal land. And so I think I 
20 

will continue to lift up these concerns with the Treasury rules. I 

think that they are important to keep in mind. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you. 

Chair SMITH. Ms. Morehead, you, in your testimony, identified 

five, I think, or so, important issues for us to consider, and you focused on one of them. I want to focus in on another of them, which 

has to do with the issue of how continuum of care work. 

You came to my office. I think we had a discussion about this a 

couple of years ago, and we talked about how Tribes were not eligible to receive funding to respond to homelessness under the Continuum of Care program. And so we worked together with Senator 

Murkowski to pass the Tribal Access to Homeless Assistance Act. 

It is a mouthful, but it essentially allowed Tribes to become able 

to participate in this. 

But I think you and I both know there have been some issues 

with implementation here. Could you just talk a bit about why it 

was important to make this change to allow Tribes to participate 

in Continuum of Care, and what we need to do so that this is actually working well for Tribes? 

Ms. MORELAND. Thank you for the question. One of the issues 

that we are finding that is a struggle to implement is the pro rata 

on how they decide how much funding you get. Tribes typically are 

checkerboard—at least they are here in Minnesota—which means 

that their land is not touching each other. And so the formula kind 

of gets messed up, and we would not receive very much funding, 

enough funding to actually have a project. So we can apply through 

our Continuum of Care, but that is not something that we want to 

do. We want to be able to receive that funding directly. 

With the formula, we would like for the formula to be distributed 

kind of like they are in the territories. When Federal dollars go to 

like State agencies, it rarely trickles down to Indian communities 

when it comes through the State government. And so by providing 

the Tribes greater access to the money by receiving it directly, that 

will help projects that can be meaningful, and it can help address 

the root cause to homelessness. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you. 

Ms. MORELAND. One other quick thing that goes to the thing 

about HUD’s definition of homelessness. In Minnesota, we have 

really cold winters, and families, like the other partners have said, 

have a lot of overcrowding in our houses. And then by having the 

overcrowding then that makes the houses become substandard. 

And so if the definition was changed it would allow access to help 

the individuals. When a person is homeless and then they go for 

the winter and they stay with a relative, just for a short period of 

time, then they become un-homeless because they are housed, even 

though technically they are really still homeless. They are just 

staying somewhere so they can stay alive. 

And so it would be something to consider changing that definition of what homelessness is for HUD. So many of the times here 

in Minnesota, I do not know if people are familiar about fish 

shacks or fish houses. It is a tiny, little house and it sits on a lake. 

Usually there is a propane heater and maybe a wood stove and a 

bed, and a hole in the floor so you can fish. And quite frequently 

we have people who are living in these very small fish houses be-
21 

cause they do not have anywhere else to go. And if they are living 

in a fish house, then that makes them housed, and so then they 

do not fit in the definition of being homeless. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you. That is very helpful. I think Senator 

Lummis and I are both familiar with fish houses. 

I am past my time, but I am going to ask one last question, and 

then unless Senator Lummis has other questions I will be ready to 

close this up. But I want to just ask a question of Mr. Goggles. Everybody, all of our members of the panel, have talked about how 

important it is to reauthorize NAHASDA, which I certainly agree 

with. I was wondering, Mr. Goggles, if you could give us just one 

or two very specific examples about how a reauthorized NAHASDA 

would help you and when it is not reauthorized how that hinders 

you in your work. 

Mr. GOGGLES. Thank you, Senator, for the question. First of all, 

in the past we have lived off a continuing resolution. Under a continuing resolution you are allocated funds that are only good for 

that year, so you do not know what you are going to get the following fiscal year. 

Chair SMITH. Right. You cannot plan. 

Mr. GOGGLES. In terms of planning, yes. Just like any other municipality in the country, if you have a known stream of revenue 

coming your way you can plan for those projects, but you can also 

plan to fund your employees as well, them not knowing if they are 

going to get a raise or not, and me not being able to give it makes 

me the bad guy. So that would be one instance of the reauthorization of NAHASDA. 

The other is that what we are asking for in the reauthorization 

is Section 8, the Housing Choice Voucher. Under the Housing 

Choice Voucher, most of America receives home assistance with the 

Housing Choice Voucher. We, in Indian Country, are not able to 

use Section 8 because of the acute shortage on our reservation. We 

would be able to use Section 8 in the local municipalities to help 

ease the overcrowding or acute lack of housing in our area. That 

would be very helpful to us. 

Those are two short examples, Senator. Thank you. 

Chair SMITH. Thank you very much. 

Well, I want to thank all of our witnesses today for being here 

and for providing excellent testimony. Before we adjourn I would 

like to enter into the record a report on Native homelessness in 

Minnesota and a report on homelessness mortality. Is there any objection to that? Hearing none, that is so ordered. 

Chair SMITH. For Senators who wish to submit questions for the 

record, those questions are due 1 week from today, which will be 

Tuesday, June 20th. For our witnesses, you will have 45 days to 

respond to any questions for the record. 

Thank you again for taking the time to participate in this hearing. Thank you to Senator Lummis. And with that this hearing is 

adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:46 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

[Prepared statements, responses to written questions, and additional material supplied for the record follow:] 
22 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIR TINA SMITH 

Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community 

Development will come to order. 

Thank you to our witnesses for participating today, and thank you to Senator 

Lummis and her team for working with us on this bipartisan hearing. 

When Senator Lummis and I first met to discuss our goals for this Subcommittee 

this Congress, Native housing emerged as a top priority for both of us. 

Finding affordable housing is a challenge for every community right now, but in 

Native and Tribal communities, barriers to housing and home ownership are particularly challenging. 

And we know, without safe, decent place to call home, nothing in your life 

works—not your work, your family, your health, not anything. 

Native people experience this reality in very tangible and specific ways—as Tribal 

leaders in Minnesota and around the country tell me all the time. 

Minnesota is home to 11 sovereign Tribal nations, and large Indigenous populations in the Twin Cities, Duluth, and Bemidji. 

Housing challenges in Native communities stretch across the entire housing continuum, from the lack of emergency shelter to a shortage of home ownership opportunities on Tribal lands. People struggle to get mortgages, appraisals, and title insurance. If you own a home, keeping it in good repair can be difficult because of 

a shortage of contractors and skilled trades-people. Tribal communities are often 

rural and remote, which adds to the costs of infrastructure like water and sewer. 

These issues are common in all rural communities, but they are exacerbated on 

Tribal land. 

Lease land and trust land each come with their own challenges. Mortgage lending 

on trust land can mean months or years of administrative delays working through 

the BIA, and many lenders won’t do business on trust lands at all. Mortgages on 

lease land can also face lengthy administrative delays. Sen. Rounds and I partnered 

on a bill to take the first step on fixing these problems 3 years ago, and earlier this 

year, Senators Rounds, Thune, Tester, and I introduced a bill to take the next step 

to addressing these delays. 

In addition, much of the housing stock on Tribal land is substandard and needs 

significant repair. Homes lack full plumbing, complete kitchens, and sufficient heating. According to a HUD study, housing in Tribal areas is about six times more likely to have heating or plumbing deficiencies in comparison to the rest of the country. 

Repairs and maintenance are expensive, and so many Tribes end up spending scarce 

Federal housing dollars maintaining existing housing up, rather than building more 

units to meet the demand for more housing. The result is unsafe homes that sit vacant and boarded up, even as the demand for housing is increasing. 

Even with recent increases, inflation-adjusted funding for the Indian Housing 

Block Grant is well below where it was 25 years ago—and well below what I believe 

is needed to meet the trust and treaty obligations of the Federal Government for 

housing in Native communities. 

Housing shortages and homelessness are experienced on Tribal land when families crowd into homes not nearly big enough for all the people. This is sometimes 

called ‘‘doubling up,’’ which suggests a relative sleeping on a couch or sharing a bedroom. In practice, overcrowding is much more intense, with reports of fifteen or even 

twenty people sharing a two-bedroom home. Native communities have strong cultural traditions of not letting relatives go without a place to stay when you have 

a house to share. In cold winter climates like Minnesota, and Wyoming, sleeping 

outside can be deadly. 

In May 2021, in my first hearing as chair, this Subcommittee held a hearing on 

Native housing issues, and we heard about the need for more supportive housing 

that combines shelter with culturally specific programming to support Native people 

experiencing homelessness. In my home State of Minnesota, Native Americans account for 13 percent of people experiencing homeless despite being only about one 

percent of the State’s overall population. Without culturally specific programming 

and trauma-informed systems, Native people experiencing homelessness struggle to 

access services and find stable housing. 

We also heard about the importance of reauthorizing of the Native American 

Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act, or NAHASDA. That was last updated in 2014, and it’s far past time to pass that important, bipartisan legislation 

that will cut red tape for housing development in Native communities, better uphold 

our promises to Native veterans, and put a stop to drug use and violent crime. I’m 

grateful to Senator Schatz and Senator Murkowski for leading this effort in the last 

Congress, and I look forward to working with them to finally get this done. 
23 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about what we are doing that 

is working, what’s not working, what needs reform, and what needs more support. 

These are issues of bipartisan interest, and places where we’ve demonstrated the 

capacity to work together. I look forward to building on that shared sense of purpose 

to make progress on these important issues for Native communities. 

I’ll now turn to Senator Lummis for her opening statement. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR CYNTHIA LUMMIS 

Thank you, Madame Chairwoman. And thank you to our witnesses for joining us 

today. 

I want to start by welcoming Mr. Patrick Goggles. Mr. Goggles brings vast knowledge and experience working on Tribal housing. 

His resume is impressive, currently serving as the Executive Director of the 

Northern Arapaho Tribal Housing Authority. Mr. Goggles formerly served in the 

Wyoming State Legislature and on the Northern Arapaho Business Council. 

Thank you to the rest of the witnesses. The expertise on this panel will certainly 

provide for a robust conversation on an issue that is so critical to Tribal nations 

across the country. 

In my State of Wyoming, we have two federally recognized Tribes, the Northern 

Arapaho and Eastern Shoshone. Both Tribes share the Wind River Reservation. The 

Wind River Reservation is the seventh-largest American Indian reservation in size 

and fifth largest in population. 

Lack of safe, affordable, and available housing impacts communities across Wyoming, but especially on the Wind River Reservation. The housing gap has widened, 

as the demand for housing is outpacing new construction. 

In many cases, multigenerational families are overcrowded in homes. These 

homes often have serious plumbing and electrical problems and are in dire need of 

repair. 

Congress has provided funding for Native American housing programs for several 

decades. 

Tribes and tribally designated housing entities use the funding for a range of affordable housing activities to benefit low-income Tribal households. This includes 

developing new housing for rental or home ownership, maintaining and operating 

existing housing units, building infrastructure, and offering housing-related services. 

I look forward to hearing from the panel of witnesses about the challenges they 

have encountered when working with Federal agencies and ways these programs 

can be improved to better serve their communities. 

Additionally, I am concerned about the barriers to home ownership on Tribal 

lands. Home ownership is shown to benefit and stabilize communities, but there are 

many factors making this more difficult for Native people. 

On trust lands, the Bureau of Indian Affairs must process and certify mortgages 

issued by Federal agencies and lenders. In some cases, the BIA has taken months 

to process mortgages. 

That is why I have cosponsored the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act with 

Chair Smith, to create deadlines that BIA must meet for processing title documents. 

This leads me to recognize the work of Native Community Development Financial 

Institutions, which serve as a vehicle for economic growth in communities that have 

often faced barriers to accessing capital and financial services. 

I, along with several Members of this Subcommittee, are members of the Senate 

Community Development Finance Caucus. The Caucus is a platform to address the 

needs of CDFIs so that they have the resources to serve their communities. I believe 

CDFIs are a wise investment to multiply our Federal dollars for maximum impact. 

In closing, our witnesses today provide unique perspectives on the state of Native 

American housing. 

I look forward to hearing their testimony and discussing ways to ensure Tribal 

housing needs are met. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHELSEA FISH 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL

JUNE 13, 2023 

Good afternoon. My name is Chelsea Fish, and I am the Executive Director of the 

National American Indian Housing Council. I am a citizen of the Seminole Nation. 

I want to thank Chairwoman Smith, Vice Chair Lummis, and all Members serving 
24 

1There are 574 federally recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native villages in the United 

States, all of which are eligible for membership in NAIHC. Other NAIHC members include 

State-recognized Tribes eligible for assistance under the 1937 Housing Act and that were subsequently provided funding pursuant to the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the State agency that administers the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program. 

on this Subcommittee for acknowledging Native American housing as a pressing 

issue and having this hearing today. This is an opportunity to recognize and understand that Tribal housing issues and the reauthorization of the Native American 

Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) are important priorities for Tribes, their members, and for this 118th Congress. I also want to thank 

this Committee, as stewards of Government and ally of Tribal nations, for continuing to ensure the United States is fulfilling its trust and treaty obligations towards Indian Country with respect to providing safe, affordable housing opportunities in Tribal communities and to Native people anywhere in the country. 

Background on the National American Indian Housing Council 

The National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) was created by Tribal 

housing programs in 1974 and for nearly five decades has provided invaluable 

Training and Technical Assistance (T&TA) to all Tribes and Tribal housing entities; 

provided information to Congress regarding the issues and challenges that Tribes 

face in their housing, infrastructure, and community development efforts; and 

worked with key Federal agencies to ensure their programs’ effectiveness in Native 

communities. Overall, NAIHC’s primary mission is to promote and support American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians in their self-determined goal 

to provide culturally relevant and quality affordable housing for Native people. 

NAIHC is a membership organization comprised of 293 members representing 

493 1 Tribes and Tribal housing organizations. NAIHC’s membership includes Tribes 

and tribally designated. There are 574 federally recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native villages in the United States, all of which are eligible for membership in 

NAIHC. Other NAIHC members include State-recognized Tribes eligible for housing, housing entities across the United States, including Alaska and Hawai‘i. 

NAIHC members are constituents of every Member of this Committee, either directly through Tribes located in your States, or generally through the United States’ 

Government-to-Government relationship with all Tribes within the United States. 

NAIHC represents our members’ unified interests and are deeply appreciative of 

your work to improve the lives of Indigenous Peoples throughout the Country. 

Profile of Indian Country 

There are 574 federally recognized Indian Tribes in the United States. Despite 

progress over the last few decades, many Tribal communities continue to suffer from 

some of the highest unemployment and poverty rates in the United States. Historically, Native Americans in the United States have also experienced higher rates of 

substandard housing and overcrowded homes than other demographics. The U.S. 

Census Bureau reported in the 2019 American Community Survey data that American Indians and Alaska Natives were almost twice as likely to live in poverty as 

the rest of the population—23.0 percent compared with 12.3 percent. The median 

income for an American Indian Alaska Native household is 30 percent less than the 

national average ($45,476 versus $65,712). 

In addition, overcrowding, substandard housing, and homelessness are far more 

common in Native American communities. In January 2017, the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published an updated housing needs assessment for Tribal communities. According to the assessment, 5.6 percent of homes 

on Native American lands lacked complete plumbing and 6.6 percent lacked complete kitchens. These are nearly four times than the national average, which saw 

rates of 1.3 percent and 1.7 percent, respectively. The assessment also found that 

12 percent of Tribal homes lacked sufficient heating. 

The assessment highlighted the issue of overcrowded homes in Indian Country, 

finding that 15.9 percent of Tribal homes were overcrowded, compared to only 2.2 

percent of homes nationally. The assessment concluded that to alleviate the substandard and overcrowded homes in Indian Country, 68,000 new units need to be 

built. 

In 2018, the United States Commission on Civil Rights updated its ‘‘Broken Promises’’ report first released in 2003, and found that housing conditions had deteriorated, with the number of overcrowded households or households with inadequate 

plumbing growing by 21 percent, and the number of families facing severe housing 

costs growing by 55 percent. 
25 

State of Housing Development in Indian Country 

Since the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

(NAHASDA) was enacted in 1996, Tribes have built over 37,000 new units according 

to HUD. Between FY 2007 and 2010, Tribes were averaging over 2,400 new unit 

construction, but it dropped significantly in recent years to only 2,000 new units between 2011 and 2014. HUD estimates less than 1,000 new units will be built in future years as Tribes focus on maintaining existing housing stock over new development. 

The problem is evident. Indian Country needs to build more housing units to meet 

its persistent and growing need which is largely due to the lack funding and insufficient resources. The solution is simple, and it starts with Congress fulfilling its trust 

obligation but instead Congress has kept funding for the Indian Housing Block 

Grant (IHBG) (established by NAHASDA) at stagnant levels for more than 20 years. 

Lawmakers have been decreasing the amounts of housing assistance to Tribal communities each year by leveling funding for NAHASDA programs while inflation has 

grown over the last two decades. In that time, inflation has diminished the purchasing power of those dollars and new unit construction has drastically declined 

as Tribes must shift their efforts to rehabilitating existing units. In FY20, Congressional IHBG formula funding was $650 million which provided 

roughly two-thirds the purchasing power that Tribes received at the inception of 

NAHASDA in FY98 ($600 million in FY 1998). In IHBG funding tracking since 

NAHASDA’s passage has revealed that annual appropriations compared to inflationadjusted levels have caused Tribal housing programs to lose $3.4 billion since FY 

1998. Recent funding additions to NAHASDA programs, such as the competitive 

IHBG funding, are welcome and encouraging, but alone are insufficient to make up 

for the loss of funding over time. 

Since 1997, Tribes have used IHBG funding to create almost 41,500 affordable 

housing units and restored an additional 105,000 units. Autonomy over IHBG funds 

allows Tribes to leverage private investments alongside Federal dollars to create 

more affordable housing for Tribal citizens and families. However, higher costs of 

construction and land acquisition remain the largest hurdle for Tribes and increased 

development costs and loss of purchasing power has motivated many Tribes to shift 

its priorities away from constructing new units and focus instead on rehabilitating 

and maintaining existing housing units. 

According to HUD’s Housing Needs Study, an estimated 68,000 units are needed 

to address Indian Country’s overcrowded and substandard housing conditions, 

though with new housing construction or acquisition fairly stagnant at around 1,000 

new units per year in Tribal communities, it is highly likely that the need has only 

increased. It is the responsibility of this Committee and Congress to uphold treaty 

and trust obligations that includes funding and resources for housing opportunities 

across Indian Country. 

To put the funding into perspective, the FY 2021 IHBG funding levels provide 379 Tribes/grantees with less than $500,000 to operate their housing program, which includes managing their existing housing units, providing low-income rental assistance, other housing services AND developing new housing units. Further, 175 of the 

IHBG grantees received less than $100,000 a year to carry out these activities. 

Tribes simply cannot build more homes with the inadequate funding from IHBG 

and ICDBG alone. 

Geographic challenges continue to impede housing efforts on Tribal lands. Isolated 

areas often lack a developed housing and lending market, leaving them almost entirely dependent on Federal funding. Building costs in rural areas surge as a result 

of the need to transport materials, as well as their need to accommodate workers. 

Many reservations are not in close proximity to power, water, roads, and other services which not only adds to their overall building costs, but also discourages outside 

funding and development interests. 

NAHASDA was passed in 1996 to streamline Tribes’ access to housing programs 

dollars by consolidating multiple programs into a single block grant. However, with 

the lack of increased appropriations to NAHASDA programs, Tribes are again piecing their housing programs together by finding resources from different programs 

across the Federal Government. In a 2018 survey conducted by NAIHC, only 17 percent of our members who responded indicated they planned to utilize non-HUD 

funds in their programs. So, while there are various resources available to Tribes, 

it takes a lot of work to gather these pieces and leverage it with multiple funding 

opportunities, while also operating the day-to-day housing program and caring 

about the community. 

The Laguna Housing Development and Management Enterprise (LHDME) has established one of the most effective housing authorities in Indian Country by 

leveraging different sources of funding and utilizing programs such as Low-Income 
26 

Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to build homes for their members. The ‘‘Laguna #3’’ 

Housing Project is currently underway and will provide housing for 20 families by 

fall 2024. 

Elevating the State of Native American Housing 

The success of Tribal housing programs was evident early on in NAHASDA, when 

Tribes were producing new housing units at rates similar to or higher than HUD 

prior to NAHASDA’s enactment. The success of NAHASDA and Tribal housing programs stems from NAHASDA’s self-determination roots that allow Tribes themselves to develop their own Indian Housing Plan for the communities. Tribe tailor 

these plans to their housing needs and priorities and its able provide the flexibility 

Tribes need to carry out their programs. For example, a Tribe can prioritize senior 

assisted housing, rental assistance, or home ownership by incorporating those services in their Indian Housing Plan. Tribes know best how to take care of their own 

citizens which is the main reason lawmakers should focus their efforts to empower 

Tribes by reauthorizing NAHASDA. 

Reauthorization of NAHASDA means increased resources: NAHASDA was last reauthorized in 2008 and expired in 2013. While Congress has continued to provide 

funding to NAHASDA programs, and even increased some program funding in the 

last few years, there are some programmatic changes that recent reauthorization 

bills contain that could streamline various aspects of HUD and IHBG programs. For 

example, one long-standing fix would address duplicative environmental reviews, 

which Tribes often face when they leverage multiple Federal funding sources. Recent reauthorization bills have also contained provisions to create an Assistant Secretary for Indian Housing to provide enhanced attention at the senior leadership of 

HUD. 

The Senate reauthorization bills from the 117th Congress also has several important leveraging provisions that allow Tribal housing projects to utilize the Indian 

Health Service’s Sanitation funds, provide access to HUD Housing Counseling 

grants, and encourage leveraging other Federal funds by relaxing match requirements. Other smaller fixes include simplifying Total Development Cost allowances, 

clarifying the rent-to-ownership process and allowing Tribes to assist with student 

housing. One provision related to promoting Tribal sovereignty and self-determination, a key component of NAHASDA, would allow Tribes to set minimum rent rates 

for its housing units, and NAIHC supports its continued inclusion in NAHASDA reauthorization efforts. 

NAIHC recognizes the progress that has been made on getting NAHASDA reauthorization enacted, and particularly would like to thank the Chair and Vice Chair 

of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for their efforts. 

Example: Housing Situation of Nulato, Alaska 

Nulato, Alaska, is located on the west bank of the Yukon River 310 air miles west 

of Fairbanks. It lies in the Nulato Hills, across the river from the Innoko National 

Wildlife Refuge. There are no roads that lead in or out of the community. The Population of Nulato, according to the 2020 US Census, is 239 people. The price of a gallon of unleaded gasoline is $7.20, heating oil is $6.80 and shipping from Fairbanks 

via airline is $1.80 per pound of cargo, groceries or otherwise. A round trip air ticket 

to Fairbanks, the closest urban community, is $500 per person. $2500 for a family 

of 5. 

Nulato has 4 homeless elders, 12 homeless young adults and a housing need of 

20 homes. Much of the adult community live with their parents or relatives. Most 

homes were built in the early 80s and are up to 70’s code. Windows are not Egress 

as they either do not open or cannot fit an adult in case of emergency. Electrical 

systems are corroded or also out of code. There are no electricians, nor plumbers 

who live in Nulato so contracted rehabilitation is out of the question. 

Current housing construction of a single-family home is estimated to cost 

$670,000. The current income level for NAHASDA for the Nulato Tribal Council is 

$200,101. At which rate 29 percent of a home can be built in one year’s time. That 

is not including any cost of real estate. That means it would take 3.3 years of program income in order to complete one home. 

Example: Comanche Nation, OK 

On trend with most Tribes and Tribal housing programs that are shifting focus 

from housing development to housing rehab, in 2022, the Comanche Nation Housing 

Authority (CNHA) expended its IHBG funds mainly on modernizing and rehabilitating existing homes for Tribal citizens living within the five-county service area 

in Oklahoma. 
27 

HUD Office of Native American Programs. Tribes across Indian Country rely 

heavily on assistance from HUD Office of Native American Program (ONAP) Headquarters and regional offices to help clarify NAHASDA programming and funding 

eligible activities. Tribes utilize and benefit from many HUD housing programs and 

resources, some general, some Tribe-specific, including the Indian Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG), the HUD 184 Native American Loan Guarantee 

Program, NAHASDA Title VI Loan Guarantee Program, the formula funded and 

competitive IHBG programs, and Native Hawaiian programs. Other HUD programs 

have varying levels of eligibility for Tribes. Because Tribes depend on funding and 

services from these programs, it is imperative that Congress and Federal partners 

improve Tribal access on a more national scope. 

HUD ONAP has opportunities to strengthen its partnership with Tribes and Tribal housing programs with policy flexibilities and fixes. The best example is the HUD 

Housing Counseling program, which Tribes are currently ineligible to apply for 

funds but may soon find themselves subject to housing counseling regulations not 

tailored for Tribal communities. Another example is the Continuum of Care program, which was addressed by Congress through the inclusion of the Tribal Access 

to Homeless Assistance Act in the FY 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act in 

which Tribes are now eligible to participate in. In addition to HUD, Tribes can find 

housing resources at the U.S. Treasury, such as tax credit programs and the recently created Emergency Rental Assistance Program and Homeowner Assistance 

Funds; the U.S. Department of Agriculture and its Rural Housing programs; the 

Veterans Administration and its Native American Direct Loan Program; and others. 

Home Ownership. There are many barriers to home ownership in Indian Country 

namely the that Federal trust land cannot be used to secure a home loan. Instead, 

Tribes can issue a leasehold interest to the borrower that can be used as collateral. 

Generally, banks see doing business with Tribes and/or Tribal citizens as a risk because if the borrower defaults on the loan, the lender cannot seize the land from 

a Tribe to recoup monies. Other socioeconomic determinants like isolation and poverty also factor into inequitable lending practices among Native American families. 

The history of subjugation, expropriation, assimilation, and the undermining of 

Tribal self-determination are evident in the long standing prejudices and traumas 

which have contributed to systemic issues that continue to disadvantage Native 

Americans and impeded mortgage lending on reservation lands. 
28 

In addition, Native borrowers on average pay approximately 2 percent more than 

borrowers off-reservation which can total an additional $100,000 over a 30-year 

mortgage. Investment from lenders is often hindered by a lengthy review process 

that is needed when investing in Federal trust land. As a result, approximately 93 

percent of loans granted through HUD programs have been on fee land. Lack of investment from lenders can also be attributed to a disparity in professional resources 

needed to plan and implement larger housing developments. However, lawmakers 

have the ability to strengthen housing programs that expand and enhance home 

ownership opportunities for Tribal citizens and veterans. 

Example: Salish and Kootenai Housing Authority; Flathead Indian Reservation, MT 

The Salish and Kootenai Housing Authority’s (SKHA) Homebuyer Readiness Program offers Tribal citizens the tools and resources need to become responsible homeowners. SKHA offers downpayment and closing cost assistance for Tribal members 

and sees approximately 155 clients annually. Every applicant must complete the 

Pathways Home curriculum, a comprehensive homebuyer education program sponsored by the National American Indian Housing Council. SKHA learned that working with local banks and lenders builds trust with the borrower. Though not all interested clients qualify or get approved, SKHA continues to assist with credit repair 

to prepare them for home ownership. 

HUD Section 184 Loan Guarantee Program: The 184 Loan Guarantee program 

helps a Tribe or Tribal member secure a mortgage for an existing or new-construction home by providing a loan guarantee to a private sector bank or lending institution. While the program is targeted to Tribal communities and nearby service areas, 

the program has struggled to incentivize mortgages on trust lands in Tribal communities, where many families reside on land that their families have held for generations. Obstacles include a slow and burdensome title process involving the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs and banks and lenders general preference to work with the more familiar property held ‘‘in fee,’’ Improvements include 

streamlining the process at the BIA, encouraging more private lenders to participate 

in the program generally and participate through mortgages specifically on trust 

lands. 

VA Native American Direct Loan Program: The Veteran Affairs Native American 

Direct Loan Program (NADLP) provides loans to eligible Native American veterans 

to purchase, construct, or improve homes on certain types of land. However, according to a 2022 GAO Study, in FY 2012–2021, the VA NADL issued only 89 loans 

to veterans across the United States, 91 loans in Hawai‘i, and none in Alaska. This 

represents loans to less than 1 percent of the estimated potentially eligible population of 64,000–70,000 veterans in these areas. The NADL loans don’t require 

downpayments or mortgage insurance, and closing costs are limited, according to 

the announcement. The VA has poorly upheld its obligations to Native veterans 

though recently the VA lowed its loan interest rate from 6 percent to 3.5 percent 

for Native veterans. This effort is appreciated but is only a start to addressing the 

housing needs for Native veterans who bravely served this country. It is well known 

that Native Americans have served in the United States Armed Forces as higher 

rates than any other demographic, so it is vital that Native veterans are provided 

the support they deserve and have earned through their service. 

Further incentivize private investment in Tribal communities: Indian Country is 

almost always last to receive the attention of private, commercial banking. The lack 

of economies of scale in Tribal communities, increased development costs, and the 

complexities of Tribal lands and communities (both actual and perceived) simply 

lead private banking to avoid Tribal areas. While there have been national tax credit programs or other incentives available for years to spur development in underserved areas, the programs have generally been less effective for Indian Country. 

Strengthening incentives for development in Indian Country or creating specific setasides or mandates through these programs is needed to ensure that Tribal communities are not left further behind. 

Urban Indian Housing. There is little research on the housing experiences of 

American Indian and Alaska Native people in urban areas, but the need is evident 

with the high number of unsheltered or homeless Native Americans. The Indian 

Health Service states that about 70 percent of AIAN people live in urban areas. 

Example: Siletz Tribe of Oregon 

The Siletz Tribe of Oregon and the Native American Youth Association (NAYA) 

partnered to open the Mamook Tokatee ‘‘Making Beautiful’’, a housing community 

for artist and American Indians and Alaska Natives living in Portland who are experiencing homelessness or struggling with addictions. Siletz filled in the financial 

gaps using funding from the Indian Housing Block Grant to set aside 20 units for 
29 

Tribal members which helps alleviate stress on the housing needs for American Indians and Alaska Natives living in urban areas. Mamook also offers resident and 

support services and is only one several projects that NAYA has partnered with 

Tribes to support housing services through IHBG. 

Make HUD–VASH Permanent and Expand to All Tribes: Currently, only 26 

Tribes have participated in the Tribal HUD–VASH program, which provides both 

housing and supportive services to Tribal veterans and their families that are homeless or at-risk of homelessness. HUD–VASH is another example of a larger, national 

housing program that originally left Tribal communities out when it was created in 

2008. Congress expanded the program through a Tribal demonstration project beginning in FY 2015. The program has identified obstacles, such as the lack of housing stock in Tribal communities to house veterans through the program and the 

need for greater supportive services from the VA to Native veterans in Tribal communities. Many of the Tribes participating in the pilot have found ways to provide 

these supportive services through various partnerships between the VA and Tribal 

or IHS professionals and Tribes may be more able to secure housing units for the 

program if it was made permanent and Tribes had more certainty for future funding 

of the program. 

Restore Access to Section 8 Vouchers: Prior to NAHASDA, many Tribes have been 

receiving tenant-based vouchers to provide low-income rental assistance to members 

in Tribal communities. With NAHASDA providing the single block grant to Tribes, 

NAHASDA expressly restricted Tribes from accessing vouchers moving forward. 

However, with NAHASDA funds remaining stagnant (or decreasing due to inflation), Tribes find it difficult to provide the same low-income rental assistance yearto-year or to expand that assistance as new housing units come online in their communities. Congress routinely adds vouchers to the larger national program to keep 

pace with the need, or to fund existing vouchers adequately each year, while Tribal 

programs have no similar mechanism. While the restriction on section 8 vouchers 

could be removed entirely, past NAIHC resolutions have called for the specific restoration of vouchers for LIHTC projects in Tribal communities, as the two programs 

work together well in the non-Tribal setting. 

Conclusion 

NAIHC thanks the Members of this Subcommittee for holding this important 

hearing and we want to thank all the Members of Congress who have introduced 

and sponsored bills and supported efforts to improve housing opportunities in Tribal 

communities. Tribes have consistently shown how far they can stretch their housing 

dollars to help the most members of their community as possible, and NAIHC and 

Tribal housing programs look forward to working with our partners in Congress and 

Federal agencies to continue building safe, affordable housing in our communities. 

NAIHC asks for the full Committee’s support to reauthorize NAHASDA, increase 

funding to critical Tribal housing programs, and help address the incredible need 

for housing units and developments across Indian Country. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PATRICK GOGGLES 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTHERN ARAPAHO HOUSING AUTHORITY

JUNE 13, 2023 

For the record my name is W. Patrick Goggles, Executive Director of Northern 

Arapaho Tribal Housing. I reside on the Wind River Indian Reservation, Wyoming. 

I am also a Region V board member to the National American Indian Housing 

Council, the national organization representing Federally recognized Tribes, Tribally 

Designated Housing Entities and Tribal Housing Authorities from Hawai‘i, Alaska, 

and the lower 48 States. 

First and foremost, I would recommend the Committee to consider the reauthorization of Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

(NAHASDA) of 1996. The reauthorization of the NAHASDA would provide Tribes 

and their housing entities the opportunity to plan, develop, and construct affordable 

housing on Tribal lands. NAHASDA has not been reauthorized since 2013, for at 

least 10 years. NAHASDA has been funded by continuing resolutions that provide 

a yearly allocation to Tribal Housing entities and leaves little room to effectively 

plan for affordable housing development, either rental or home ownership. 

NAHASDA provides Tribal recipients with an annual allocation; the Indian Housing 

block grant (IHBG). The block grant funds the operation of Tribal housing operations that also provides meaningful employment to Tribes. As a side note, the unemployment rate on the Wind River Indian Reservation is approximately 35 percent. 
30 

Three years ago, Congress first funded the Competitive Indian Housing Block 

Grant to allow Tribes and their housing entities to apply for development funds that 

were not included in their regular block grant. The challenge for Tribes to compete, 

especially Tribes, without gaming revenue is to match or leverage requirement of 

the Competitive Indian Housing Block Grant. Leverage requirements become a significant barrier to Tribes and THDEs of all sizes and capacities to access additional 

funds to satisfy the competitive leveraging requirements. I urge the Committee to 

direct HUD ONAP to remove all competitive requirements related to the Competitive Indian Housing Block Grant as well as the Indian Community Development 

Block Grant. Removing the leveraging requirements will allow more Tribes to compete for these important supplemental development funds. 

The challenge of building affordable housing on Tribal lands in the total of cost 

of development; Infrastructure is approximately one-third of the total development 

costs. Current Federal assistance prioritizes ‘‘construction-ready’’ projects. In the regions I represent, Region V (Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah) and Region 

III (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska), many of the Tribes are large landbased Tribes supporting rural Native communities that are miles from the basic essential services, such as emergency services (fire, ambulance, law enforcement). 

I would encourage the Subcommittee to allow Tribal housing programs to gain access to the Housing Choice Voucher (HVC) /Section 8 program that now comprises 

the vast majority of housing assistance funds provided in the United States. Access 

to Section 8/HCV would allow Tribes to provide housing vouchers to their tax credit 

and other units in the same manner public housing authorities are doing today. 

Housing stock on Indian Reservation is virtually nonexistent. Conditions of overcrowding and an acute shortage of safe and stable affordable housing units on Tribal lands have existed during my 20 years as the Executive Director of Northern 

Arapaho Tribal Housing. 

Tribes are also working to expand housing opportunities for Tribal members with 

affordable rental units as well as home ownership. Under the HUD Section 184 loan 

guarantee, Tribes and individual Tribal members can seek assistance to access lending funds to purchase or build a home on Tribal lands. It is my opinion that HUD– 

ONAP should be consulting Tribes when proposing a change to the Section 184 loan 

program. The current changes to the Section 184 program are making it increasingly difficult to use the program on Tribal lands which was the original intent of 

the 184 program. HUD has announced that it is drafting a handbook to operate the 

new Section 184 program and Tribes should be involved in the drafting as well. 

In regards to Native American Veterans, the HUD–VASH (Veterans Supportive 

Housing) voucher has been implemented for the last few years as a demonstration 

project. I would encourage the Subcommittee to consider funding the Tribal VASH 

on a regional basis to allow for all Tribes to participate. Regional VASH voucher 

pools could be established for each ONAP region to allow all TDHEs access to 

vouchers to service Native American veterans. 

In my experience as an Executive Director, over the years, the one barrier has 

been the inability of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to lease Tribal lands to 

housing entities or Tribal members in a timely manner. I have experience instances 

of three to four years to finalize a master lease for a Tribal subdivision or two to 

three years for a Tribal member to lease a homesite. I would encourage the Subcommittee to visit with the Select Committee of Indian Affairs on a congressional 

level to fully understand the scope of their stewardship on Trust and allotted Tribal 

lands. 

In closing, Northern Arapaho Tribal Housing appreciates the Subcommittee on 

Housing, Transportation, and Community Development for the invitation to myself 

as Executive Director to provide testimony. I would like to thank the Chair of the 

Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development Senator 

Tina Smith and Ranking Republican Member Cynthia Lummis, Wyoming, for holding the hearing on housing for American Indians and Alaska Native Communities. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PETE UPTON 

CEO, NATIVE CDFI NETWORK, AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIVE360 LOAN FUND

JUNE 13, 2023 

On behalf of the Native CDFI Network (NCN) and the 64 Treasury-certified Native community development financial institutions (CDFIs) and roughly two dozen 

emerging Native CDFIs we serve across 27 States, I welcome this opportunity to 

present to this Subcommittee our shared perspectives on the capital access challenges related to housing and in particular home ownership faced by American In-
31 

1 Center for Indian Country Development (Patrice Kunesh, ed.), ‘‘Tribal Leaders Handbook on 

Homeownership’’, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 2018, p. 4 (https:// 

www.minneapolisfed.org/-/media/files/community/indiancountry/resources-education/cicdtribal-leaders-handbook-on-home-ownership.pdf). 2Diane K. Levy, et al., ‘‘Housing Needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives in Urban 

Areas: A Report From the Assessment of American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian 

Housing Needs’’, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, January 2017 (https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/ 

NAHSG-UrbanStudy.pdf). 3 U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, ‘‘Broken Promises: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall 

for Native Americans’’, Briefing Report, December 2018, p. 137 (https://www.usccr.gov/files/ 

pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-Promises.pdf). 4Laura Cattaneo and Donna Feir, ‘‘The Higher Price of Mortgage Financing for Native Americans’’, Working Paper Series No. 1906, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, September 17, 

2019, p. 1 (https://www.minneapolisfed.org/media/assets/papers/cicdwp/2019/cicd-wp201906.pdf). 5 CDFI Fund, ‘‘Native Initiatives’’ webpage, U.S. Department of the Treasury (https:// 

www.cdfifund.gov/programs-training/programs/native-initiatives). 6 CDFI Fund, ‘‘The CDFI Fund’s Native Initiatives: Fostering Economic Self-Determination 

for Your Native Community’’, Fact Sheet, U.S. Department of the Treasury, February 2020, p. 

1 (https://www.cdfifund.gov/sites/cdfi/files/documents/cdfi7205-fs-ni-updatedfeb20.pdf). 

dian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian communities, the pivotal role Native 

CDFIs play in helping to address those challenges and the tremendous potential 

they possess to further cultivate economic growth in those communities, and what 

Congress can do to transform that potential into reality. 

The Capital Access Challenges Facing Native Housing and Home Ownership in Indian Country 

Despite recent advancements and success stories forged by Native CDFIs, Tribal 

governments, other key Native-run entities, and our partners across Indian Country, the challenges facing Native housing and home ownership remain severe and 

pervasive. As the Center for Indian Country Development with the Federal Reserve 

Bank of Minneapolis explains, ‘‘in 2016, just 52.9 percent of all Natives were homeowners, down from 55.5 percent in 2000. In Tribal areas, there is a strong and as 

yet unmet demand for home ownership among Native households: 75 percent report 

a strong desire to own their home. Concerns about chronic housing shortages, quality, and over-crowdedness suggest additional demand for new investments in private 

homes in Indian Country.’’ 1 Historic and persisting redlining as well as chronic 

underinvestment in vital Federal programs like the Native American CDFI Assistance (NACA) Program continue to plague Indian Country’s access to capital generally and financing for Native home ownership in particular. These factors and others contribute to a situation where, among other troubling statistics, Native people 

live in overcrowded households at a rate of nearly 700 percent higher than the rest 

of the U.S. population, 2 and the number of Native families facing severe housing 

costs grew by 55 percent over a recent 15-year period. 3

Meanwhile, Indian Country’s challenges when it comes to financial literacy, access 

to credit, and the prices Native people pay when they finally do get a home loan 

are equally severe. Just before the pandemic hit in 2019, the Federal Reserve found 

that Native Americans living on reservations who want to buy homes are significantly more likely to have high-priced mortgages, and those mortgage rates average 

nearly two percentage points higher than for non-Native people outside reservations. 4 According to the Federal Reserve, this means a Native family purchasing a $140,000 home on a reservation could pay $100,000 more over the course of a 30- 

year loan than a non-Native purchasing a home outside a reservation would pay. 

This state of affairs is simply unacceptable, but there is a proven solution for improving it—Native CDFIs. 

The Vital Role Native CDFIs Play in Native Housing and Home Ownership 

As the CDFI Fund explains on its website, Native CDFIs’ origins can be traced 

to the 1994 Congressional legislation authorizing the Fund’s creation, which contained among its provisions the mandating of a study examining lending and investment practices in Native communities. 5 Titled the ‘‘Native American Lending 

Study’’, the study identified 17 major barriers to investment in Indian Country, and 

‘‘affirmed the importance of developing Native CDFIs to play a key role in the 

broader effort to lead Native Communities into the Nation’s economic mainstream.’’ 6

In the two decades since the study’s release, Native CDFIs have proven themselves vital engines for fueling the growth of healthy, vibrant Native economies and 

communities. In the CDFI Fund’s own words, Native CDFIs are ‘‘an important part 

of the CDFI Fund’s mission to expand the capacity of financial institutions to pro-
32 

7 CDFI Fund, ‘‘Financing Native Leaders for Tomorrow: Native Initiatives Strategic Plan FY 

2009–2014’’, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 2009, p. 3 (https://www.cdfifund.gov/sites/cdfi/ 

files/documents/native-american-strategic-plan.pdf). 8Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, ‘‘Native CDFIs: Stepping Up To Serve Indian Country 

Through the Pandemic and Beyond’’, Native CDFI Network, July 2021, p. 1 (https:// 

nativecdfi.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/NCN-Pandemic-Report.pdf). 9South Dakota Native Homeownership Coalition, ‘‘Our Collective Path to Native Homeownership’’ (January 2022–April 2023), Data Infographic, April 2023. 

vide credit, capital, and financial services to underserved populations and communities in the United States,’’ and they are making a ‘‘considerable impact’’ by ‘‘helping to transform their communities. They are creating businesses and jobs in places 

that desperately need them. They are providing personal financial education and 

business training to persons who have been excluded from our Nation’s economic 

mainstream. They are helping to change the lives of the people they serve.’’ 7 According to the Treasury Department, investments made in CDFIs produce an eightfold return, with each $1 creating $8 in private sector investments. 8

Nowhere is Native CDFIs’ impact more profound than with Native home ownership. A growing number of Native CDFIs across the country offer home ownership 

loans, downpayment assistance, and homebuyer training to Native people who have 

been and continue to be purposefully ignored by mainstream lending institutions. 

Simply put, without Native CDFIs, these people would have no path to becoming 

homeowners and building a solid financial foundation and source of intergenerational wealth for their families. For example, in South Dakota over a recent 15- 

month period, 85 percent of the total home loans made to Native people across the 

State were financed by Native CDFIs. 9

Native CDFIs exemplify and advance the mission of the CDFI Fund by enabling 

home ownership for Native people who have never owned a home through HUD opportunities such as Section 184 Loan Guarantees, HUD housing counseling, and 

other existing Federal programs such as the USDA 502 Direct Loan program, the 

Veterans Affairs Native American Direct Home Loan program, and the Federal 

Home Loan Bank system. These various Federal tools are helpful, but they are universally underfunded and need to be enhanced and expanded to address the immense scope of the home ownership challenges that Native communities continue 

to face. 

It is worth noting that each Native CDFI crafts and implements its own innovative, customized solutions to these challenges based on its intimate understanding 

of the Native community or communities it serves. NCN works to uplift and enhance the ability of each Native CDFI to do so. Geographic location plays a significant role in shaping the challenges these institutions work to address. While some 

NCDFIs exclusively serve reservations, others cater to federally designated service 

counties. Some serve exclusively rural Native communities, and others serve both 

urban and rural Native communities. Some serve a single Native community in a 

concentrated geography, while others serve multiple communities across an expansive region. This diversity highlights the need for thoughtful, self-determined approaches and solutions tailored to the specific missions and service areas of each 

Native CDFI and the particular needs and cultures of the distinct Native community or communities they serve. 

The challenges encountered by Native CDFIs are multifaceted, requiring a holistic 

approach to problem solving. They include limited access to low-cost lending capital 

as well as financial resources supporting organizational capacity building, overly 

rigid Federal programs, non-Native predatory lenders, and low financial literacy 

among existing and potential Native CDFI clients. Addressing these challenges requires precise, localized solutions that can be likened to puzzle pieces that need to 

come together to form a complete picture. It also requires effective collaboration and 

coordination between Native CDFIs and various stakeholders, including Congress, 

Federal agencies, and the Native CDFI Network. 

By recognizing the distinctiveness of each Native CDFI and the range of obstacles 

they face, stakeholders can work together to support the development of comprehensive strategies. A holistic approach that combines increased funding, streamlined 

processes, and enhanced collaboration will empower Native CDFIs to overcome their 

unique challenges and fulfill their crucial role in addressing housing and home ownership needs across American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian communities. 

Native CDFIs are uniquely positioned to understand the specific needs, cultural 

context, and financial circumstances of Native communities. They have a deep understanding of the challenges faced by individuals and families seeking home ownership and work tirelessly to develop solutions that meet their demonstrated and un-
33 

derstood needs. Through tailored financial products, technical assistance, and community outreach, Native CDFIs have proven to be pivotal in increasing access to affordable housing and home ownership opportunities. 

However, despite their significant progress, Native CDFIs need support from Congress to grow that progress to meet the moment. One critical step Congress can take 

is to provide increased funding for programs that support Native CDFIs. This includes allocating resources to strengthen the capacity of Native CDFIs, enabling 

them to expand their reach, develop new impactful programs, and meet the unique 

challenges faced by their communities. We ask Congress to recognize Native CDFIs 

as an irreplaceable tool to deploy affordable capital to Indian Country. 

Requests of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and 

Community Development and Congress as a Whole 

NCN and the Native CDFIs we serve have collectively identified the following six 

key ways that Congress can strengthen Native home ownership across the country 

and specifically the vital role of Native CDFIs in that endeavor: 

Support Native CDFIs’ efforts to ensure Treasury’s reforms to CDFI Certification 

strengthen—and not harm—Native CDFIs across the country: As you know, the 

Treasury Department and CDFI Fund are close to completing their process to reform the CDFI Certification Application and related regulations. Unfortunately, 

their proposed reforms threaten to hamper Native CDFIs’ ability to sustain and 

grow economic progress and specifically home ownership in Indian Country by needlessly placing them in a no-win position: either (1) drastically change the way they 

operate and the types of needs-based programs and products they offer simply to 

conform to the CDFI Fund’s proposed rigid certification requirements, or (2) forego 

attaining or retaining certification, which will result in significantly reduced access 

to the capital and credit they need to serve their clients (see multiple comment letters attached for more details). 

Particularly troubling among the CDFI Fund’s proposed reforms are its prohibitions of interest-only mortgage loans, mortgage loans with balloon payments, and 

mortgage loans with terms longer than 30 years. Many Native CDFIs currently offer 

interest-only loans and loans with balloon payments to provide affordable home 

ownership opportunities to Native clients that otherwise would not have access to 

mortgage loans. For example, one Native CDFI offers a 30-year amortized mortgage 

loan product that features a 5-year balloon payment. The CDFI works with borrowers to help ensure they can refinance their loans with the local credit union before the balloon payment is due. This prepares and incentivizes borrowers to enter 

the financial mainstream, as well as allowing the CDFI to turn over capital more 

quickly to serve a much larger number of home buyers. Other innovative interestonly and/or balloon loan products offered by Native CDFIs that help Native people 

access affordable and flexible capital to meet their needs include home equity lines 

of credit, construction loans, housing development loans, and downpayment assistance loans. Many of these would no longer be allowed under the proposed new limitations. Some Native CDFIs also offer terms on mortgage loans longer than 30 years 

to make them affordable, including USDA loans they deploy featuring terms of 38 

years. Although longer-term mortgage loans could lead to a slower accumulation of 

equity, they provide families with housing security through fixed housing payments—not to mention the pride of home ownership. Altogether, according to two 

recent NCN surveys, roughly 40 percent of Native CDFIs currently provide at least 

one of these types of loans to their clients. 

NCN and the Native CDFIs we represent and serve call upon Congress and specifically this Subcommittee to help us elevate our concerns with Treasury and the 

CDFI Fund, and also support our recent request of Treasury and the CDFI Fund 

to hold a formal listening session with Native CDFIs regarding the proposed reforms to the CDFI Certification Application and related regulations before those reforms are finalized so Native CDFIs’ concerns can be directly heard and addressed 

(see attached request letter). 

Establish a Native Advisory Committee within Treasury and the CDFI Fund: The 

current CDFI Certification reform process has illustrated to Native CDFI leaders 

(yet again) the dire need for the voices of American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian community and economic development practitioners (including Native 

CDFI leaders) to directly and substantively inform the design and implementation 

of Treasury and CDFI Fund programs and policies—notably the NACA program— 

that impact Indian Country, the flow of capital to Native communities, and the ability of Native CDFIs to foster community development and asset building in those 

communities. Congress should mandate that Treasury establish this Committee, 

which should meet at least annually with the Secretary of the Treasury and the 
34 

10 NCN, ‘‘NCN Market Demand Study’’, New England Market Research, Inc., October 2022. 11For the FY 2022 funding round of the NACA Program, the CDFI Fund received Base-FA 

applications from 29 organizations that requested $25.5 million in Base-FA awards. It awarded 

$17.1 million to 19 of those 29 organizations (https://www.cdfifund.gov/sites/cdfi/files/2023- 

02/2022-NACA-Award-Book.pdf). The CDFI Fund also received TA applications from 19 organizations requesting $2.7 million in TA awards, and it awarded $2.35 million (https:// 

www.cdfifund.gov/news/481). 

U.S. Treasurer, and more frequently with Treasury’s newly established Office of 

Tribal and Native Affairs. 

Increase the annual Congressional appropriation for the CDFI Fund’s Native American CDFI Assistance (NACA) Program to $50 million: As NCN indicated in 

our recent letter (cosigned by 65 other organizations, see attached) to the Senate 

and House Appropriations Committees, a sizeable increase in annual NACA program funding is desperately needed to address the significant unmet needs of Native CDFIs for lending capital, particularly when it comes to home construction and 

home ownership. For example, a 2022 NCN survey of 16 Native CDFIs (just one 

quarter of the country’s 64 Treasury-certified Native CDFIs) found their projected 

3-year unmet loan capital needs collectively totaled $166 million. 10 Meanwhile, for 

FY 2022, funding requests made by applicant Native CDFIs for the NACA Base-Financial Assistance (FA) funding exceeded the amount awarded by the CDFI Fund 

by 49 percent, and their requests for NACA Technical Assistance (TA) funding exceeded the amount awarded by the CDFI Fund by 15 percent. 11

Strengthen the HUD Section 4 Program by increasing its annual appropriation to 

$50 million and establishing a 10 percent set-aside for Native communities for FY 

2024: The HUD Section 4 Capacity Building for Community Development and Affordable Housing Program is the only Federal program explicitly designed to increase and enhance the capacity of community-based nonprofit organizations to effectively serve the affordable housing and community development needs of low-income communities. In real dollars, Congressional funding for the Section 4 Program 

has decreased by more than 25 percent since 2004, despite the fact the low-income 

population served by Section 4 dollars has grown considerably. In addition, low-income families are disproportionately bearing the brunt of surging housing, transportation, and food costs related to rising inflation. A significant increase to $50 million 

is justified for these reasons, but also because the Section 4 Program works. Over 

the past 5 years, Section 4 dollars have been deployed to construct and rehabilitate 

more than 40,000 affordable homes for low-income households. Critically, every $1 

in Section 4 funding leverages more than $20 in additional public and private investments, which vastly exceeds the 3-to-1 match the law requires. Meanwhile, a 

10 percent set-aside for Native communities is needed because Section 4 dollars 

have largely bypassed Indian Country since the program’s inception, based on extensive anecdotal evidence provided by Native nonprofit organizations dedicated to addressing the affordable housing and community development needs of Tribal communities. A 10 percent set-aside for Tribal communities ($5 million total) will ensure that Section 4 funding equitably serves low-income communities across the 

country based on the relative breadth and severity of their documented needs for 

affordable housing and community development resources (see attached NCN’s letter to Congress featuring these requests). 

Pass the Rural Housing Service Reform Act of 2023: Title III of this legislation 

(S. 1389) makes the extraordinarily successful USDA Section 502 relending demonstration program permanent and extends it to all of Indian Country. S. 1389 authorizes the USDA Secretary to use $50 million of the existing 502 Direct Loan appropriations for a national relending program specifically for Native communities. 

The demonstration project—implemented in 2018—made two Native CDFIs eligible 

borrowers under the 502 Program and enabled them to relend to qualified families 

for the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable housing on Tribal 

trust land, and resulted in those CDFIs doubling in 1 year the number of home 

loans that USDA had provided on two Indian reservations in South Dakota during 

the previous decade. The project demonstrated that Native CDFIs are uniquely 

equipped to deploy mortgage capital efficiently and effectively in Tribal communities, in part because of the supportive services they provide their clients, including 

homebuyer education, post-purchase and foreclosure prevention counseling, and 

other technical assistance. By collaborating with USDA, Native CDFIs can efficiently deploy mortgage capital to eligible Native families seeking to become homeowners. This legislation should be passed by the Senate with all due haste. 

Pass the Native American Direct Loan (NADL) Improvement Act of 2023: S. 185 

was part of a package of five veterans bills that went to the Senate floor on April 

26, 2023. Unfortunately, the cloture vote failed, so the bill did not move forward. 
35 

Among its many critical provisions in support of Native veterans, the legislation: (1) 

creates a $5 million NADL relending program that would allow Native CDFIs, who 

intimately understand Native communities and the mortgage lending process on 

Tribal trust land, to obtain a loan through the Native American Direct Loan program at a 1 percent interest rate and relend those funds to qualified Native veteran 

borrowers (the CDFI would repay the loan to the VA Department); (2) allow veterans to use NADL to refinance non-VA mortgages so that Native veterans have the 

same opportunity as non-Native veterans to use their VA loan benefit to refinance 

any existing mortgage loan; and (3) expand VA’s NADL outreach program by 

partnering with Tribes, tribally designated housing entities, Native CFDIs, and local 

nonprofits to conduct outreach, homebuyer education, housing counseling, post-purchase education, and other technical assistance as needed (see attached NCN letter 

to U.S. Senators for more details). Native veterans deserve access to these muchneeded home loan benefits. 

Conclusion 

In closing, NCN and Native CDFIs urge Congress and this Subcommittee to build 

upon the focus of this hearing by continuing to collaborate with Native CDFIs and 

their leaders to devise and fund creative policy solutions that recognize and address 

the significant and uniquely complex capital access needs facing Indian Country, 

and the unique ability of Native CDFIs to deploy capital effectively for Native home 

ownership and other community development and asset building purposes that meet 

the distinct needs of each and every Native community. Native CDFIs stand ready 

to work with you to advance this goal. 
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 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TAMMY MORELAND 

CHAIRPERSON, MINNESOTA TRIBAL COLLABORATIVE TO PREVENT AND END

HOMELESSNESS

JUNE 13, 2023 

Aanii Boozhoo, Niigaanii Animikii Benesi Ikwe ninidizhizikaaz, 

Migizi nindoodem, 

Odawa Anishinaabe Kwe ndawaa, Wiikwewang nindonjiibaa. 

Hello, my name is She Leads in Front Thunderbird Woman, I am Bald Eagle 

Clan, an Ottawa woman from the place by the big bay. 

My Government name is Tammy Moreland, I am a Tribal member of Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. 

I have the honor and responsibility of chairing the ‘‘Minnesota Tribal Collaborative to Prevent and End Homelessness’’, which is a tribally initiated and innovative approach to addressing housing and homelessness of American Indians in Minnesota. I am honored to appear before you today to talk about the Minnesota Tribal 

Collaborative’s work toward ending homelessness through State and Federal 

change. 

Thank you, Senator Smith for calling this hearing and for inviting me to testify 

on behalf of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative. 

The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative was formed in 2014 when a group of Tribal 

housing and human services staff in northern and central Minnesota began meeting 

together with some other supporting organizations to learn from each other about 

new resources and ideas for promising practices that help meet the unique needs 

of American Indians experiencing homelessness in Minnesota. 

While American Indians are about 1 percent of the general population in Minnesota, American Indians are 12 percent of the homeless population in Minnesota. 

We gave shape to the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative to ensure that the voices of 

the disproportionately large number of American Indians in Minnesota who are experiencing homelessness is heard. 

The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative developed a Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) which was signed in 2014 by five Tribal governments: Bois Forte Band of 

Chippewa, Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, Red Lake Nation, and White Earth Nation. The Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa 

signed the MOU in 2018. The MOU provides a framework for us to plan and problem-solve together. It structures our efforts around our common purpose as we collaborate on actions that ‘‘address historical barriers and unique needs’’ of Tribal 

members experiencing housing instability and homelessness in the Reservation and 

urban communities where our Tribal members live. 

The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative has two classes of members—voting members 

and nonvoting members. Voting members are appointed by the Tribal Councils of 

their Tribal governments, and are either Band members or descendants of Federally 

recognized Tribal nations. Many of the voting members have lived experience with 

being homeless. The nonvoting members provide technical assistance and support 

to the Collaborative, such as grant writing, reporting, and program implementation. 

American Indian culture and traditions are the foundation of the work done by the 

Minnesota Tribal Collaborative. Culturally relevant approaches have proven to be 

effective in addressing historical trauma and the trauma of experiencing homelessness. 

In addition to the direct services that it provides, the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative has been a strong advocate for reforming State and Federal law. We have 

been successful lobbying for changes to State and Federal law because of our firsthand experience with homelessness and its root causes and because we never give 

up. The reforms to Federal law that the Collaborative has accomplished with Senator Tina Smith and other allies on Capitol Hill means that not only Minnesota 

Tribes will have access to increased Federal funding support but hundreds of other 

Tribes throughout the United States will also be able to access those increased resources in our shared mission to reduce homelessness in Indian communities. 

The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative is a true collaboration—it is rare to have a 

meeting where a Tribe hasn’t sent its representative. Our meetings have full agendas and rotate among our different reservations. The host Tribe provides a meal to 

everyone and at times takes the other members on tours of housing or emergency 

shelters in its communities. Members regularly rely on each other to help if a Band 

member in need of assistance is located in a different part of Minnesota. The Collaborative pushes to be part of meetings at the State and Federal level and holds 

lawmakers accountable when they ‘‘forget’’ to include Tribes. The informal motto of 

the Collaborative could be, ‘‘Nothing about us—without us.’’ 
70 

The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative has a formal charter and policies and procedures that describe its decision-making process. Many decisions are made by consensus. When a vote is taken, it is very rare to have a vote that isn’t unanimous. 

All members work to serve American Indians who are experiencing homelessness 

in Minnesota. The issue of—whose client it is—never affects this collaboration. Currently the Collaborative is meeting more frequently to budget for an increase in 

State funds and to explore how to improve reporting. Training and support are provided to members who might be understaffed or need extra help. 

One of the reasons the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative was formed was to maximize resources for American Indians who are at risk of or experiencing homelessness. In Minnesota, American Indians are more than 12 times more likely to experience homelessness and to be homeless longer than the white population. The most 

recent reservation homeless survey (conducted in October 2018) found that half of 

the people homeless on reservations were children, youth, and elders. Most people 

(77 percent) met the definition of chronic or long term homeless—homeless for over 

a year or having multiple episodes of homelessness over 3 years. Nearly half of the 

people surveyed (47 percent) had a chronic health condition that impacted their ability to work and find housing. 

Homelessness looks different in reservation communities; it looks like 16 people 

living in a two-bedroom house that might not have running water or someone living 

in an ice house or camper year around. Before the reservation homeless survey was 

done in 2006, the belief was that Indians like to double up, that it was cultural preference. Yet the reservation homeless survey showed that 99 percent of the people 

surveyed who were doubled up in overcrowded households would take separate 

housing if it was affordable, safe and made available. 

Applying for State funding as a collaborative increases the likelihood of getting 

funding and an adequate amount of funding. The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative 

has been able to streamline the application process by submitting one funding application for six Tribes. The Collaborative has just contracted with a White Earth 

Band member to have a data coordinator to improve our data collection, reporting 

and financial reconciliation. The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative is working with 

State agencies on honoring data sovereignty. For centuries data on American Indians has been misused to blame Tribes for the poor outcomes of their Tribal members. It is imperative that entities that want data on homelessness and American 

Indians be taught how to respect Tribal sovereignty. This is a complex task topic 

that usually requires some hard conversations. The members of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative have presented on this topic at a national level and are in the middle of ongoing conversations with State staff. 

Our collaboration is successful because the members of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative are fearless. We usually take the hard way, not the easy way to accomplish our goals. And the goals aren’t just for us but we think forward several generations. The Minnesota Tribal Collaborative wants future generations to know that 

we came together with leaders to rewrite new rules for society about how to thrive 

together. We experienced immense challenges but, in the end, we succeeded. We 

want future generations to know this was a powerful generation that rose from adversities and we gave them legacies and resources to take inspiration from. We 

want them to look at us with awe and courage, as we went through a difficult period 

of struggle and triumph. We hope they talk about us as examples to emulate, as 

something to be, and to go onward to the future with. We want to end homelessness 

for our communities. The members of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative always 

show up, challenge the status quo, and hold ourselves and others accountable for 

change. We have made changes; significant changes and we intend to make more. 

We also believe that nothing about us should happen without us and we push to 

be part of meetings, funding, and trainings, always insisting that our voice be 

heard. 

During the worst of the COVID–19 pandemic, the Tribes that are part of the Minnesota Tribal Collaborative accessed State and Federal resources to keep people 

housed and to quickly rehouse people who were homeless. We helped people stay 

safe and healthy from COVID–19. The six Tribes that are part of the Minnesota 

Tribal Collaborative used nearly $20 million in COVID relief funding from the Federal Government to keep 6,761 households in housing. Now we are working to address the opioid crisis and continue our work to end homelessness. We envision a 

future where everyone thrives not just survives. 

Federal Requests 

For Tribes to successfully end homelessness both on and off reservations, we ask 

for the following assistance from Congress: 
71 

1. Authorize Tribal Access to the Emergency Solutions Grant. Tribes and Tribal 

organizations should have an equitable opportunity to benefit from this funding source so we can better provide a broader continuum of housing assistance 

and services to our homelessness populations both on and off the reservation. 

2. Change the HUD Continuum of Care Definition. HUD’s continuum of care definition of homelessness does not include severe overcrowding and substandard 

housing conditions to be considered when determining whether a person is 

homeless. In much of Indian Country, harsh winter conditions in isolated and 

rural areas mean homeless people have no options other than doubling up in 

already overcrowded homes or seeking shelter in flimsy, temporary structures 

like fish shacks. 

3. Include Tribes in a Formula for Pro Rata Distribution Like Territories Are Provided. Federal assistance rarely trickles down to Indian communities when it 

is sent through State governments. Provide Tribes with greater access to more 

money for community planning and development purposes and Continuum of 

Care projects so Tribes can meaningfully address the root causes of homelessness. 

4. Support Tribal Efforts To Address Homelessness Among Tribal Members as 

They Move Between Reservation and Urban Communities. Mercurial Federal 

policies have pushed American Indians into and out of reservation communities 

for decades. This disruption of community life is one of the root causes of 

homelessness. Today, the Federal Government should support Tribal efforts to 

meet the needs of Tribal members where they are today. This is a Federal Government problem that can be solved by Tribes and the Federal Government 

working together. 

5. Congress Should Push CMS To Approve a New Medicaid Encounter Rate Category of Housing Services. A comprehensive approach to continuum of care 

services relevant to people who are homeless, reflected in a daily encounter 

rate, would allow Tribal providers to have enough funding to pay for the interrelated services that are needed to help move clients from homelessness to 

housed and remaining housed. 

Miigwetch! And thank you for your time and attention. By partnering together 

and sharing resources we can end homelessness for America’s first people. 
72 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF 

SENATOR CORTEZ MASTO FROM CHELSEA FISH 

Q.1. What investment—grants, low-interest loans, CDFI investments, etc.—does your organization or member Tribes receive from 

our Nation’s 11 Federal Home Loan Banks? 

A.1. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.2. Do you think Federal Home Loan Banks meet the housing and 

community economic development investment needs of Tribes? 

A.2. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.3. Do Federal Home Loan Banks provide Tribes with low-cost financing to leverage the housing grant funds Congress provided to 

Tribes? 

A.3. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.4. Do you think the Federal Home Loan Banks should provide 

more support for affordable housing, such as downpayment assistance, low-cost financing, credit enhancement, or providing a secondary market for special purpose credit programs for Tribes? 

A.4. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.5. Why are manufactured homes a popular housing choice on 

Tribal lands? 

A.5. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.6. For manufactured home buyers on Tribal lands, what financing options are available to them? 

A.6. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.7. Are there Federal housing programs including CDFI Funds 

that help homebuyers finance a manufactured home purchase with 

affordable loans? Are there affordable private sector financing options? 

A.7. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.8. Do you feel a permanent chassis is necessary for manufactured homes in your communities? Or do you feel the definition of 

manufactured home, which is limited to structures that are built 

on a permanent chassis, should be changed? 

A.8. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.9. Are Tribal home builders considering extreme heat, floods, 

and drought in the design of their homes? If so, what are they considering? 

A.9. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.10. Are Tribal housing leaders considering preventative action to 

decrease the catastrophic impact of floods, drought, and fire? If so, 

what are they considering? 

A.10. Response not received in time for publication. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR LUMMIS 

FROM CHELSEA FISH 

Q.1. Are there updates to programs that support the construction 

and rehabilitation of Native American housing that could make it 
73 

faster and cheaper to provide additional affordable housing units 

on Tribal lands? 

A.1. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.2. Are there policy proposals you recommend to support Native 

American home ownership on Tribal lands? 

A.2. Response not received in time for publication. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF 

SENATOR CORTEZ MASTO FROM PATRICK GOGGLES 

Q.1. What investment—grants, low-interest loans, CDFI investments, etc.—does your Tribe receive from our Nation’s 11 Federal 

Home Loan Banks? 

A.1. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.2. Do you think Federal Home Loan Banks meet the housing and 

community economic development investment needs of Tribes? 

A.2. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.3. Do Federal Home Loan Banks provide Tribes with low-cost financing to leverage the housing grant funds Congress provided to 

Tribes? 

A.3. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.4. Do you think the Federal Home Loan Banks should provide 

more support for affordable housing, such as downpayment assistance, low-cost financing, credit enhancement, or providing a secondary market for special purpose credit programs? 

A.4. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.5. In your testimony, you mentioned difficulties with finding 

matching funds. Have you had discussions with the Federal Home 

Loan Bank of Des Moines to discuss possible investments that 

could match Indian Housing Block Grant funds or other programs? 

A.5. Response not received in time for publication. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR LUMMIS 

FROM PATRICK GOGGLES 

Q.1. Please list the various Federal agencies and programs you 

commonly work with when developing a typical housing project. 

A.1. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.2. Please identify common inefficiencies when working with 

these programs, such as overlapping or contradictory requirements, 

where changes to the programs and their requirements could make 

development faster or less expensive to accomplish. 

A.2. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.3. Please quantify the administrative burden of participating in 

these programs in terms of the number of people you employ and 

the portion of their work time spent on meeting administrative requirements such as reporting. 

A.3. Response not received in time for publication. 
74 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF 

SENATOR CORTEZ MASTO FROM PETE UPTON 

Q.1. What investment—grants, low-interest loans, CDFI investments, etc.—does your organization or members receive from our 

Nation’s 11 Federal Home Loan Banks? 

A.1. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.2. Do you think Federal Home Loan Banks meet the housing and 

community economic development investment needs of Tribes? 

A.2. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.3. Do Federal Home Loan Banks provide Tribes with low-cost financing to leverage the housing grant funds Congress provided to 

Tribes? 

A.3. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.4. Do you think the Federal Home Loan Banks should provide 

more support for affordable housing, such as downpayment assistance, low-cost financing, credit enhancement, or providing a secondary market for special purpose credit programs? 

A.4. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.5. How many Native American CDFis are (1) members of a Federal Home Loan Bank and (2) receive advances? 

A.5. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.6. Why are manufactured homes a popular housing choice on 

Tribal lands? 

A.6. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.7. For manufactured home buyers on Tribal lands, what financing options are available to them? Are there affordable private sector financing options? 

A.7. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.8. Are there Federal housing programs including CDFI Funds 

that help homebuyers finance a manufactured home purchase with 

affordable loans? 

A.8. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.9. Do you feel a permanent chassis is necessary for manufactured homes in your communities? Or do you feel the definition of 

manufactured home, which is limited to structures that are built 

on a permanent chassis, should be changed? 

A.9. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.10. Are Tribal home builders considering extreme heat, floods, 

and drought in the design of their homes? If so, what are they considering? 

A.10. Response not received in time for publication. 

Q.11. Are Tribal housing leaders considering preventative action to 

decrease the catastrophic impact of floods, drought, and fire? If so, 

what are they considering? 

A.11. Response not received in time for publication. 
75 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR LUMMIS 

FROM PETE UPTON 

Q.1. HUD’s Section 184 Indian Home Loan Guarantee Program 

was created to help increase Native access to home ownership by 

providing a guarantee to lenders on mortgage loans made to Native 

borrowers. Last December, HUD proposed a new rule that would 

make Native CDFIs as eligible lenders under the 184 program. 

What is your experience with this program and how can it be improved for more effective for lending on reservations? 

A.1. Response not received in time for publication. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF 

SENATOR CORTEZ MASTO FROM TAMMY MORELAND 

Q.1. What investment—grants, low-interest loans, CDFI investments, etc.—does your Tribe receive from our Nation’s 11 Federal 

Home Loan Banks? 

A.1. No. 

Q.2. Do you think Federal Home Loan Banks meet the housing and 

community economic development investment needs of Tribes? 

A.2. I do not have experience with Federal Home Loan Banks. 

Q.3. Do Federal Home Loan Banks provide Tribes with low-cost financing to leverage the housing grant funds Congress provided to 

Tribes? 

A.3. I do not have experience with Federal Home Loan Banks. 

Q.4. Do you think the Federal Home Loan Banks should provide 

more support for affordable housing, such as downpayment assistance, low-cost financing, credit enhancement, or providing a secondary market for special purpose credit programs? 

A.4. I do not have experience with Federal Home Loan Banks. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS OF SENATOR LUMMIS 

FROM TAMMY MORELAND 

Q.1. The 2020 Census revealed that 87 percent of people who identify as Native American live outside of Tribal areas. Given your experience, how do Tribes split their resources to meet the needs of 

their Tribal members living on and off the reservation? How does 

this vary and are there best practices that you have observed? 

A.1. We often hear about how housing is a ‘‘social determinant of 

health’’ which makes sense, as shelter is a core need of humans. 

Key findings from the Minnesota Homeless Mortality Report, 

2017–2021 that was published January 26, 2023. 

Researchers looked at data for 93,923 people experiencing homelessness who accessed services such as shelters or transitional 

housing. Key findings included: The rate of death is 3 times higher 

among people who experience homelessness People Experiencing 

Homelessness in Minnesota than the general population. 20-yearolds experiencing homelessness in Minnesota have the same rate of 

death as 50-year-olds in the general population. 

Mortality across each racial and ethnic group is higher among 

People Experiencing Homelessness than in the general Minnesota 
76 

population. American Indian People Experiencing Homelessness 

have 1.5 times higher rates of death than other People Experiencing Homelessness and 5 times higher rates of death than the 

general Minnesota population. 

Deaths from substance use are 10 times higher among People 

Experiencing Homelessness than the general Minnesota population. 1 in 10 substance use deaths in Minnesota are among People Experiencing Homelessness. 

One in 3 of all deaths among PEH are caused by substance use, 

especially opioids including fentanyl. 

Minnesota Tribal Collaborative has received a SAMHSA grant to 

address opioid issues. 

Initial funding for reservation focus and we asked to have that 

funding expanded to focus and include urban populations. By negotiating additional funding with this change in scope we are able to 

hire two outreach workers through the collaborative partners at 

White Earth to work with the Urban population. 

Minnesota Tribal Collaborative has received a SAMHSA grant to 

address opioid issues. 

Working as a collaborative makes us stronger. We learn from 

each other and support each other in the work that we do. Other 

community partners come to the table to learn from us and to support our work. With each success we have become more confident. 

Remembering that each member of the collaborative is an equal 

partner. We all worked on and agree to follow our mission ‘‘While 

honoring Tribal sovereignty, we will work together to maximize resources and obtain sustainable housing options through innovative 

efforts of our Tribal governments and communities.’’ 

Tribes have the knowledge and skills needed to effectively reduce 

disparities in homelessness faced by American Indian populations. 

• Investing in Tribal services leads to positive outcomes for 

American Indians. 

• Tribes’ ability to design and oversee their own programming. 

Serving as a member and leader on boards supports community and can expand opportunities to improve lives of Tribal 

members. ‘‘To make change, we must be at the right places at 

the right time.’’ 
77 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUPPLIED FOR THE RECORD

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY CEDAR BAND OF PAIUTE INDIANS, 

LOWER BRULE SIOUX TRIBE, ROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF 

MINNEAPOLIS 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY COOK INLET HOUSING AUTHORITY 
94 
95 
96 
97