them out as they came in and as they fitted the specification. So, I think at one time we had almost $85 million worth when we said, don't take any more applications. And so that is about it.

The actual number of applications we have is a figure we can supply. But in dollars incidentally, these turned out to be rather small projects. We couldn't spend everybody wants to build a dome stadium. And what I said, Mr. Chairman, to one guy, I said, "I have got 16 tickets to the Chicago Bears, and if we are going to build a dome stadium you know where I am going to build it."

But we couldn't respond to a dome stadium with that amount of money. That would take over $50 million. But I think the average project turned out to be under $300,000. We put a limit of $600.000 because we didn't have very much money and we wanted to spread it out.

Mr. BERGLAND. Did you get the instant results you were after?

Mr. PODESTA. We are measuring that now. Our target was to break ground by February 15 with the first $27 million that we had. We actually broke ground on the first project on January 6. But some projects and one in the District which we are very anxious to do over at Anacostia, and which the Mayor is very anxious to do, has been on the planning shelf for 6 years, and he has never been able to get the money. It is in an area of very high unemployment where all the public housing is. It is a recreation center. And he wants to break ground and I want to break ground. But it includes a gymnasium, and it is too small. The kids say, why can't we have a regular gymnasium? I was a basketball player one time when you didn't have to be 6 feet 9 to play and I can understand why they want a big one. Who wants to play on a small floor when you can build a bigger one?

We are investigating the job, and we expect to be able to report to the Office of Management and Budget and to the Congress exactly what happened. But it is too early in the ball game to say now.

Mr. BERGLAND. One last question. And that has to do wtih your regular EDA grants for public facilities.

Is it necessary that a community be within one of the economic development regions before you can approve such a request? Not all States have these economic development districts.

Mr. PODESTA. Economic development regions.

The District thing says, you can put counties together, but at least two of them must be eligible areas. And then you can put a growth center outside of there, and we can put our money in the growth center or in the growth spots. And if it should be someplace else, we can't do it. We have suggested to the legislative people that maybe we ought be able to put a project 5 miles down the road where there may be a railroad or something else that will have the same thing. The result of this restriction is that we have got some very funny-looking growth centers, because obviously you have got to put a project over there, and we extend the boundaries if we are convinced that it is a good project, but that is a bad way to run a railroad.

So, the answer is that, with everything but our title III money, which is the technical assistance money, you actually have to be eligible. With the title III money there is a clause which says, "Whereas the Secretary decides." That is how we get into the cities.

Secretary Jackson will tell his problems as compared to ours. We work very closely toegther, as I am sure he will tell you, in something they would love to do and we are able to respond to.

Mr. BERGLAND. I would like the record to show that as a consequence of the programs of the Economic Development Administration no less than 5,000 new jobs have been created in my district within the last 10 years. Without these services there would have been 5,000 more families crowded into the cities against their will. I commend the Secretary and the agency. And I only wish they had 10 times

Mr. Lujan?

Mr. LUJAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am sorry that I don't have figures to give as to how many jobs have been created, but I can tell you that there have been plenty.

One of the areas that I thought was excellent for aiding small businesses was mineral resources. You mention that at page 3 of your statement.

Can you give me some examples of what you might have found or what we can do? We have a lot of public land that I think could be used to the advantage of small business.

Mr. PODESTA. Mr. Lujan, I wish I was more of an expert on that. And I also wish I had with me my public works chief, George Karras, who would know about that, who was here when I got there, and I am glad he stayed.

Of course, it is a romantic business, the mineral business. Some people coming in are going to discover uranium and titanium. We have to sort it out to find the immediate impact. What I would like to do to answer your question exactly is to come up with some examples as to what we have done and what we have been frustrated in trying to do.

Mr. LUJAN. Would you have George do that?

Mr. PODESTA. Sure.

Mr. LUJAN. Getting back on the question of economic growth centers, the 250,000 population figure seems to cause us some problems around the country. Specifically let me ask you if it would be possible, in a county with disadvantaged areas and a city, which may not qualify as a disadvantaged area-is that a proper term?

Mr. PODESTA. It is as good as any other.

Mr. LUJAN (continuing). Is it possible, then, to create an economic district, say, of surrounding three counties plus the part of this particular county in question outside of the city limits designating only the city as the growth center and the outlying areas as underdeveloped? Mr. PODESTA. Let me give you some background comments, and then I will ask Jerry Conroy to talk about what is possible.

Under the legislation as amended a year ago there is a special impact program, so that we can go in and carve out places within a city. For example, the Stockyards has long been an area that originally was under something called a sudden and abrupt rise in unemployment, when the packing industry just picked up and went someplace. The Brooklyn Navy Yard is another classic one when the Navy closed it up. But now in the lower East Side of New York, and what we call the Mid-west impact area in Chicago, which is the place where the burnings took place after the unfortunate event of Dr. King's death, we have carved out a place within a city. And one of the things-the first district that we have ever had with a big city that has just been

designated is Seattle. Seattle itself is a major disaster area employmentwise. But there are counties around there, and it is the only district that we have got with a big city in it. That has only been designated for a year, and we were watching it with interest.

Jerry, would you say that is possible?

Mr. CONROY. Yes, that is possible. But you have to recall that the economic development districts-we only work in two areas. One is the redevelopment area inside the district. And the second is the growth center, which is the economic development center, in the language of our act, outside the redevelopment area.

So, we would be, of course, empowered to work inside any redevelopment area in any city in there regardless of its size, or regardless of its relative impoverishment if the statistics for the whole redevelopment areas show that we ought to be there.

The incentive, you see, is to designate growth centers outside of the impoverished county, so that we are empowered to work both in the impoverished country and in a neighboring relatively healthy area.

Mr. LUJAN. The only thing that causes the problem with this growth center is that if you were to put the whole county into the economic development district, the entire county would exceed the 250,000 limit. The city is just a hair below 250,000. We are looking for a plan, frankly, to get the entire county into the economic development district. Maybe we ought to pursue it a little further. The specific example that I am referring to, of course, is Albuquerque, which is just below 250,000. But Bernalillo County is somewhere around a third of a million. So, we have three counties around it, with perhaps 230,000 to 250,000 in each one of the counties. And we are now trying to make an EDA district.

Mr. PODESTA. One of our problems that is constantly on the table is that everyone wants their place designated as eligible for our aid. One congressional friend of ours is constantly keeping up with new formulas. It is very clear that the result of each of them is to make the whole State eligible. I will suggest that the more places that become eligible and the more we fight for our fair share of the allocation, the less effect we can have. And especially in the growth center, that is a very difficult-everyone wants to be known as a growth center. If I ran a city I would want my city to be known as a growth center.

And the designation of growth centers to keep them within a limit that we can really do anything with is a very important thing. We don't think we are very good at it, although our evaluation shows that even without the scientific analysis we did pretty good at picking them. Some of our growth centers, however, did not grow in the last census, between 1960 and 1970. And maybe a growth center is only a place that doesn't go down as fast as someplace else.

Where you think they are supposed to increase in population, some of our growth centers went down, not very many of them, but some did.

Mr. LUJAN. It would seem that we would want just the opposite. I would think that from this central city we would want to expand the economic opportunities out into these counties that don't have those opportunities, rather than have those people come into the growth

center.

Maybe we are approaching it on the wrong basis.

Mr. PODESTA. You also have to find out what would work, what makes business, what turns business on, would they in fact go into areas that have so little natural resources that you can pour money in there and still nothing will happen. This is a worrisome thing for us, because those people are still in trouble and we still want to address them, but it is no use pouring your money into someplace where you can't see any visible result. And we are struggling with that problem

all the time.

Mr. LUJAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. Mr. Roe.

Mr. ROE. I will be very brief.

One question, Mr. Secretary. As you mentioned in answering Mr. Lujan, every Congressman would like to have part of his area decleared a district so he can receive assistance. I wonder if some of the other agencies of the Government also are relying primarily on EDA assistance? I am especially referring to the recent GAO report which indicated that more effective use could be made of program resources to alleviate unemployment. I was wondering if you might have some comments, sir, on how you feel about the findings of GAO-that the interdepartmental agreements between Agriculture, Commerce, and HUD are perhaps not insuring the legislative intent of avoiding EDA's putting money in before other agencies should.

Mr. PODESTA. Mr. Roe, I wonder if in satisfaction of that question I could insert in the record the reply to Mr. Staats in that area, which is rather complete and gives it chapter and verse on our response to those comments?

Mr. ROE. Fine. Basically does EDA feel that it is without legislative authority to do what GAO recommends, is that the implication? Mr. PODESTA. I am going to ask Jerry to answer that.

But in general what they said was that people were playing games with us, since they knew they had the money but they wouldn't put that money in it. We don't really think that is happening.

Jerry?

Mr. CONROY. Mr. Roe, we have taken the position-and I think it is a correct one-that the legislative admonishment is rather to the other agencies not to pull out, because EDA is authorized to go in, rather than, as might be suggested by some others, that we could not go in where someone else could. So we have checked, and if we find someone else that will do the project, we would be very glad to spend our money elsewhere. But if we have a situation where someone has the power to do the project, but for some reason is not going to do it, and we feel that the economic development of this particular area requires that expenditure right now, we would go ahead and make it. And that has been the interpretation

Mr. ROE. You feel the responsibility should be on the other agencies rather than EDA?

Mr. CONROY. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROE. You don't want to abandon an area simply because someone else can do it?

Mr. CONROY. Exactly.

Mr. PODESTA. I say can, but may not be able to, because they have run out of money.

Right here in the district, for example, we are mixed up with a mentally retarded children's center. We broke ground on it recently.

HEW has money for mentally retarded, but they only have $100,000 for the whole District. And furthermore, they couldn't put the brick and mortar in. We could. And it has been not only providing jobs for people, but also helping retarded children and training people to become experts in that area. And we were able to justify it on economic grounds.

Mr. ROE. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

Mr. Chairman, may we insert that reply in the record where he explains fully their position on this matter?

Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. Yes. I am sure that some of the members who planned to be here this morning and could not make it on account of other pressing commitments, would like to have the information you can give us. We have some questions we would like to send to you, and we would appreciate it if you would provide the answers. And they will be made a part of the record.

Mr. Podesta, thanks for being here. We appreciate your testimony this morning and I know it will be very helpful to the committee when we sit in executive session.

(The questions and answers referred to may be found in the committee files.)

Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. The next witness is the Honorable Samuel C. Jackson, Assistant Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

I want to thank you, Mr. Jackson, for being with us again, and for yielding your time to our good friend, Mr. Podesta, who has to get out of town.

So, it is a pleasure to have you before this committee again. And I know you are going to continue to do the splendid job that you have been doing and that you will give us the wonderful testimony that we are expecting.

So you may proceed as you desire.

TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL C. JACKSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ACCOMPANIED BY ROBERT PAUL, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF URBAN GROWTH; CLIFFORD GRAVES, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT GRANTS; AND ART TROILO, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS

Mr. JACKSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to introduce the people I have with me this morning. Mr. Robert Paul on my immediate right, who is the director of our Division of Urban Growth. And I also have Mr. Clifford Graves, who is director of our office of Planning and Management Grants. And Mr. Art Troilo, who is our director of the Office of Environmental Standards. Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. It is nice to have you with us.

You may proceed.

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, we appreciate the opportunity to meet with you again and present some of our ideas and views on the future of Small Town America and how the Department of Housing and Urban Development can best help meet the particular problems of small business in rural areas.