Another alternative would be for the State to create an arm within the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, or a quasi-private corporation, to marshal available Federal funds. Although there would be little cost to the state, there would also be little usefulness of such a program, as Federal housing funds have been severely curtailed. Furthermore, Federal aid has consistently been difficult for the low-income elderly homeowner to obtain, since the emphasis of Federal programs has generally been an aid for younger families. It should also be noted that Federal programs are limited to people living in specified urban renewal areas. Another possibility would be the development of neighborhood rehabilitation projects. Such a program would have one major advantage-it would aid the entire community, providing training and employment, while helping the lowincome elderly homeowner. The disadvantages of such a program are obvious; it would be extremely expensive, both in capital expenditure and administrative costs, and would be unpopular with suburban taxpayers and others not directly benefited by it. A fourth alternative would be for the State to provide rehabilitation grants. This would be attractive to program beneficiaries because there would be no cost to low-income elderly homeowners. However, the program would be expensive for the State, in funds granted and in administrative costs of preventing fund misuse. Furthermore, such a program would parallel Section 115 of the Federal Urban Renewal Rehabilitation program, a program that though authorized is not presently funded. Another approach that the State could take would be to fund a program similar to the Office of Economic Opportunity's "Operation Handyman." This program could provide home maintenance and repair services to elderly, lowincome homeowners with fees based on a sliding scale keyed to income. The program could also use the services of older persons themselves, thereby providing part-time employment to some older persons. However, such a program would not reach the lowest income elderly homeowners, as there would always be some charge for services. Each of the above programs has various advantages and disadvantages. Some of the programs fail to reach those in greatest need; others are ineffective because they incorrectly assume availability of Federal funds; some would simply be too costly to implement on a large scale. Therefore, a solution is needed that will aid those in greatest need, without dependency on Federal funds, and without high cost to the State. Suggested solution The fundamental problem of the low-income elderly homeowner is that his assets are not liquid. He has spent his economically productive years paying the mortgage on his home, thereby accumulating assets in an illiquid form. The problem is not that he is poor, in consideration of the value of his property; rather, the problem is that his wealth is consolidated in illiquid property. When in retirement and no longer economically productive, elderly persons should be enabled, if they desire, to reconvert their assets, or a part of their assets, to a liquid form. This would enable them to have the financial solvency necessary to maintain an adequate standard of living. The chief concern is environment-maintenance of a pleasant and comfortable residence is the most significant factor in insuring contentment and emotional well-being. Because existing mechanisms are not adequate, New York State should facilitate the asset conversion process by creating its own mechanism to provide for deferred repayment loans for home maintenance and repair for low-income elderly homeowners. The program could work as follows: Rehabilitation loans would be granted to homeowners who met certain qualifications, e.g., age, income, and assets. The loans would differ from conventional loans, insofar as the State would pay the interest on the loan until the property was sold, transferred, or devolved. At that time, the new owner would repay the principal and any additional interest on a prepayment schedule, or the loan would be repayed from funds generated through the sale of the property. The loans could have a belowmarket interest rate, as they would be guaranteed by the State. This program would require that liens be placed on the properties. To this end, the Private Housing Finance Law should be amended by adding a new article, creating an Elderly Home Owners Maintenance and Repair Assistance Corporation. The corporation should be governed, and its corporate powers exercised, by a board of directors, to include the State Commissioner of Health, the State Commissioner of Housing and Community Renewal, the Director of the State Office for the Aging, and members appointed by the Governor, the President pro tem of the Senate, and the Speaker of the Assembly. The board of directors should have the powers to lend money to low-income elderly homeowners, to guarantee the loan of money, to establish loan amounts and limits, and to determine eligibility for loans. The board should also have powers to require that loans made or guaranteed be secured by first liens upon the improved property, to take, hold, and administer real property, personal property, and monies, and to sue and be sued in the name of the Corporation. Also, the board should have the power to enter into contracts, adopt rules and regulations, and perform other acts necessary and appropriate to effectuate the purposes of the corporation. Loans made or guaranteed by the Corporation should not bear interest at a rate in excess of one percent per annum less than the rate of interest charged by New York State commercial banking establishments for home repair loans. The terms and conditions of any loan made or guaranteed by the Corporation should not require the repayment of the loan and interest to commence until such, time as the improved property is transferred, or leased, or upon the settlement of the estate of a deceased borrower, which ever occurs first. If the borrower dies prior to a transfer, assignment or lease of the improved property, the beneficiary of the improved property should at such time as the borrower's estate is settled assume the obligation for the repayment of the loan and any interest which may accrue during the repayment period. At such time as the borrower transfers, or leases the improved property he should commence repayment of the loan and any interest which may accrue during the repayment period. If husband and wife borrow jointly, the surviving spouse should assume the obligation for the repayment of the loan and any interest which may accrue during the repayment period upon settlement of the estate of the deceased spouse provided that there has not been a prior transfer or lease of the property. The person obligated to commence repayment of the loan and interest should not be required to repay in full the loan or interest earlier than within three years from the improved property is transferred, leased, or the borrower's estate is settled, where the principal amount of the loan does not exceed the sum of fifteen hundred dollars. There should be a period of six years, where the principal amount is between fifteen hundred and three thousand dollars; eight years, where the principal amount is between three thousand dollars and five thousand dollars; and twelve years where the principal amount is five thousand dollars or more. In no case should there be any penalty for the repayment of any loan and interest prior to the time for which the payment is due. The corporation should be tax-exempt, and contributions to the corporation, should be tax-deductible. This program would have numerous advantages for the low-income elderly homeowner. For example, he would not be required to make any cash expenditures at the time the loan is granted; neither would he make monthly payments while residing in and maintaining ownership of his home. A large number of this State's low-income elderly homeowners simply cannot afford any cash, expenditures for maintenance and repair of their homes. Since these loans would be granted with deferred repayment, many elderly persons could repair homes, who, under more demanding circumstances, would be unable to make necessary repairs. The ability of the suggested corporation to set limits on loans would allow homeowners to obtain loans large enough to maket substantial repairs, some of which would decrease home operating expenses (e.g. storm windows, insulation, roofing). This would free some money from these persons' limited budgets to improve their living standard in other respects. This program would require a first lien on the homeowner's property. Older persons generally dislike lien provisions, such as are found in traditional welfare programs, because the home may be attached and sold subsequent to the owner's death. The proposed program would allow heirs to repay the loan and keep the home; the elderly person's desire to pass it on is not thwarted. Also, heirs could repay the loan on a lenient repayment schedule, thus avoiding foreclosure and forced sale. Moreover, loans with deferred repayments avoid association with welfare, since they imply no dependency on the part of the recipient to the State. The connotation of "welfare" has been a problem with many programs developed to aid the eldrely. Older people often attach a moral stigma to handouts and do not take advantage of programs designed without their feelings on this subject taken into account. The program maximizes the availability of the State's resources while minimizing the cost. Because it is guaranteeing loans made by private capital, the State will have a lower initial capital expenditure and can reach a greater number of people than would be possible through direct loans. Also, the use of below market interest rates for loans guaranteed by the State would save the State money during the deferred repayment period. It might be argued that loans granted under this program would not be profitable to a lending institution, because it would not receive a prompt return of principal, thus restricting capital investment opportunities. However, as the outstanding principal of a conventional loan decreases with repayment the amount of interest earned on the loan gradually decreases. This gradual decrease in interest earnings will not occur in the attached bill since the outstanding principal will remain constant. Furthermore, the constant principal and interest would continue to be paid by the State if the estate of a deceased homeowner was not immediately settled. Thus, lending institutions would continue to be paid by the State even if an estate remained unsettled for an extended period of time. Finally, it might be argued that the cost of this program would be prohibitive. However, all houing programs are costly. If low-income older persons are forced to leave their homes due to deterioration of the structures, they must seek public assisted housing. Building new housing would be even more costly at more than $15,000 per unit-the current cost of such housing in this State.13 In addition, one must consider the deleterious impact of deteriorated housing upon the neighborhood and community. Through the establishment of such a corporation, the housing problems of all the State's residents, and especially of low-income elderly homeowners, can be somewhat ameliorated. Although this will not solve all of the state's housing problems, it is a greately needed element of what should be a comprehensive campaign to ensure the availability of adequate housing for New York State's residents. Hon. BARBER CONABLE, COUNTY OF MONROE, OFFICE FOR THE AGING/AREA AGENCY ON AGING, DEAR CONGRESSMAN CONABLE: We understand that House Hearings are being conducted pursuant to the renewal and amendment of the Older Americans Act. One possibility for amendment would be the positioning of the Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) from ACTION into Title III of the Office for the Aging or into Title VI of the OAA as it was when it was introduced by the New York State Delegation in 1969. Such a step would link the RSVP program and its participants into the federal aging service system which is centered in the Titles of OAA and administered by OAA. At present, there are no direct linkages with Title III programs. The resources of the Area Agencies on Aging could thus be available. The RSVP volunteers, over 120,000 Americans over age 60 nation-wide and over 500 in Monroe County, would then be tied in to the nation's aging program. As the average volunteer is 70 years of age, the chances that he or she will need other services that could be provided by the Area Agency are quite predictable. ACTION has no specialist in aging and no designated commitment to the aging. The Administrator on Aging is the federal agency for senior citizens. An important coordination and incorporation of services at the federal level would thus be accomplished. As an Area Agency for the Aging, we would welcome an official linkage with RSVP nationally, state-wide and locally. Very truly yours, BEATRICE MONTGOMERY, Director. Mr. DOUGLAS BEALS, Bristol, Conn. QUINEBAUG VALLEY SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER, DEAR MR. BEALS: We, the Board of Directors of the Quinebaug Valley Senior Citizens Center, Inc., Grantee Agency, have been informed that on Wednesday 13 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD Statistical Yearbook, 1971 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972), pp. 155–6. January 22nd, on invitation of the executive secretary of the Department on Aging, our director, Mrs. Pitschmann was requested to present the history of our center to their Technical Review Committee. As a member of this committee you attended the meeting and advised her that you would be more than willing to lend your support to the very pressing and distressing plight facing our Regionalized Elderly Programs in Northeastern Connecticut. You have heard our plea emanating from a very depressed area where financial depression has been in effect for many years prior to our present economic situation and where our senior, hidden in the beautiful Northeastern Hills of Connecticut have suffered for a long time. The Quinebaug Valley Senior Citizens Center operating under a Title III Grant is the hub and the parent of the Title VII Federal Grant and Meals-On-Wheels State Grant. The kitchen at the center is presently preparing, serving and distributing over 2,000 meals weekly, 500 to the Center's Meals Program, 750 weekly to the Title VII Program and 700 weekly to the Meals-On-Wheels Program. In addition to the center's Meals Program, the Center's Program provides for all the supportive Social Services mandated by the Title VII Program: The recently approved Area Agency on Aging, Region III, Plan makes no provision for re-funding of our Title III Grant. Under Title III of the Older Americans Act, as allowed in Section 903.84 (C) of the Rules and Regulations for State and Community Programs on Aging it states there will we three years funding, with exceptions. It was with this exception that we petitioned the Department on Aging and received our present funding which expires September 30, 1975. If our Title III Grant cannot be renewed or our center supported, then the Regionalization of our Elderly Programs, which we have accomplished these past years, with no over lapping of Social Service agencies in our area, will be eliminated. Our director and assistant, together with the seniors have petitioned and received, over our 32 years of operation, increased financial support from 0 towns to six small towns out of ten for a total of $10,600, in an area where some of the smaller towns, almost 100% of their town budgets are utilized in the support of their schools. We should like to point out to you that our director a member of the CAMPS Committee in the Danielson labor market, on implementation of the Federal Comprehensive Employment Training Act of the Connecticut State Department of Labor applied for a Grant for our center under the Work Experience Title I Program of said act. We were awarded a contract that allowed our center to give employment to eight seniors in our programs. This accomplished two important needs in our center namely one, allowed for assistance to seniors below poverty level income by part time gainful employment and secondly, assistance to the limited and over worked staff of our center where most of our monies are in programs rather than in administration. It was our understanding that the concept of Area Agency on Aging was to effect regionalization of areas, no over lapping of existing Social Services and to assist and aid those programs where this type of co-ordination exists. We have also been told that the Area Agency on Aging were allowed the discretion to begin all Title III Programs at first year level. Their decision was negative. Wouldn't it have been more advisable as Planners to evaluate, at grass roots level, those programs in their respective area that were operating, functioning and reaching the needy elderly and to fund those that met this criteria? One of the first official actions of our Region III Area Agency on Aging was to send the Director of our center a letter informing her we would not be funded in October 1974, for our fourth year's Grant request. Is Northeastern Connecticuts regionalized Elderly Programs with an existing enrolled participation of over 2,000 elderly representing all the ten towns, with an average age of 74, and with 95% of those participants in the low-income and/or below poverty income level, about to be destroyed? You know of our difficulties and in view of the above, we urge you, as a member of the Governor's Advisory Council to the Department of Aging, to gain their support and leadership in our behalf. We are enclosing several copies of our Director's Presentation. If you have a need for more, we will forward them to you immediately on request. May we take this opportunity to express our deepest appreciation for your efforts on behalf of the Quinebaug Valley Senior Citizens Center, Title III, Program. Very truly yours, ELLSWORTH L. DAVIS, Chairperson, Board of Directors. ACTION, Hon. JOHN BRADEMAS, DEAR CONGRESSMAN BRADEMAS: I was delighted to read the Christian Science Monitor's article on the future of ACTION's programs for the elderly. You are to be congratulated on your astute handling of the figures which Director Balzano has been spreading across the news media in which he has endeavored to demonstrate the accomplishments under the direction he has given it. Regrettably, if the truth were known, ACTION will never recover from the unbelievable poor direction he has given it. It is understandable that the domino theory is about to set in, first the loss of SCORE/ACE, now hopefully the older American programs, and then VISTA, which certainly has outlived its purpose. With strong leadership at the head of VISTA, perhaps VISTA could have changed direction to some degree and been considered for it's extension, but it too has fallen on dark days. It is another layer in the welfare field where supposedly qualified-trained professionals are administering a complex program. I wish I could sign my name to this letter, however, Balzona has one quality that you perhaps did not detect, revenge, and if he found out the author of this letter I would become the center of his diabolical approach to rid the agency of all who do not support his very limited experience in government philosophy. Keep up your good work. [From the Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 2, 1975] "ACTION" MAY LOSE 3 PROGRAMS FOR ELDERLY-TRIO OF PROGRAMS MAY BE TRANSFERRED FROM VOLUNTEER UNIT BY A BRADEMAS AMENDMENT (By Louise Sweeney, Staff correspondent) Three major volunteer programs for the elderly may be moved out from under the wing of Action, the official United States agency for volunteers, this newspaper has learned. The programs, RSVP, Foster Grandparents, and Senior Companions, are cornerstones of the agency, constituting approximately half of Action's domestic budget. During House hearings, which ended Tuesday, on the extension of the Elderly Americans Act, Michael P. Balzano, director of Action, was questioned sharply about the effectiveness of his agency in representing the best interest of the elderly in the three programs. The questioning came from Rep. John Brademas (D) of Indiana, chairman of the House subcommittee with jurisdiction over programs for the elderly. AMENDMENT HINTED According to one source, Mr. Brademas will suggest amending the Older Americans Act to transfer the three programs to Administration on the Aging, under the department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Several experts on aging testifying at the hearings had recommended that move. Mr. Brademas' office said that he was unable to be reached to comment. The issue came to a head at the hearing when Mr. Brademas asked Mr. Balzano how many Action employees were working full time on the three programs dealing with older Americans and at first was told between 400 and 450. "My information is many times less than 400," contradicted Mr. Brademas. "You're telling me everybody cares about the old folks at Action," he said, and repeated this request for the number of persons working full time on RSVP, Senior Companions, and Foster Grandparents programs. FIGURES TALLIED "Sixteen," Mr. Balzano finally said, explaining that there was a total of 71 employees working in the domestic operation of Action at headquarters, and 321 in the field or a total of 392 (A check by this newspaper with other Action figures indicated 71 at headquarters, 372 in the field, or a total of 443.) Mr. Balzano then said, in relation to the figures he gave, that the 16 employees working full time on programs for the elderly were all at headquarters, 1 |