This has been an active year in the area of housing and community development, with many of the recent changes oriented toward coping with a fluctuating housing finance market or assessing the effect of increased governmental activity in many sectors upon private rights and causes of action. The first section by the members of the Committee on Housing and Community Development focuses upon recent changes in federal regulations dealing with the private sector, more specifically the fundamental change in enforcement of "due-on-sale" clauses. The second section in this article examines new policies relating to transfers of the ownership of housing projects encumbered by mortgage loans insured or held by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The third section analyzes a new trend in the eminent domain powers of community redevelopment agencies: the ability to choose between competing proposals of owner participants notwithstanding one owner's right to participation. The final section briefly reports on the progress of the Governmental Leasing Act of 1983 in the House and Senate.
By and large, the nation's banks have not publicized the story of their significant, sometimes crucial, role in community development. For this low-profile approach, they have paid a high price in lack of public understanding and legislative empathy. Their record,however, is impressive, particularly if "community development" is broadly defined to include the various forms of assistance that banks render to state and local governments that sponsor or finance community development projects.
An overview of the very complex aspects of community development as they relate to financial institutions may be put into context with a reiteration of one of the basic tenets of American philosophy as stated in the Housing Act of 1949; that it be the policy of the United States Government to provide every American family "a decent home and a suitable living environment." As we narrow our focus to the more specific problem of decaying urban neighborhoods, we are faced immediately with the question of responsibility.
Three interrelated projects in training for local government employees were completed under this project. Project One consisted of two parts, first, a series of Community Development Workshops at various locations around the State arranged by the ten sub-State district offices to get discussion between expert speakers, consultants, and professors and local government employees on topics of significance to community development, and, second, a series of Management Workshops emphasizing improvements in administrative management in the ten sub-State district offices.
"MP 183, May 1972/5M" ; "This brief report of community development work highlights accomplishments of typical Missouri connnunities which have undertaken self-help efforts with the assistance of the University of Missouri Extension Division. The report is by no means a complete record of all that has been accomplished in these communities nor of the accomplishments of many other communities which are not mentioned. The University's role in these accomplishments has been that of education for improved community decision making and action. Many other organizations, agencies, and individuals contributed to the success of the efforts described. These include civic groups, business interests, local and regional community development groups, local, state, and federal government agencies, other educational institutions, and dedicated individuals. Without their assistance, many of these accomplishments would not have been possible."--Cover verso. ; Prepared by University of Missouri--Columbia, School of Social and Community Services, Department of Regional and Communities Affairs, Arthur W. Nebel (Dean) and the UMC Extension Division, John F. McGowan (Dean)
Prepared for Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development under contract H-2535. ; Bibliography : p. 231-252. ; Mode of access: Internet.
Rural citizens in developing countries are becoming the focal point of social, economic and political development efforts. These people traditionally have been left out of the developmental process. National leaders have now realized that the citizens of rural areas have the potential to contribute significantly to developmental efforts of their nations. One important part of most developing nations' strategies for social and economic development is education. The principal form of education has been that of formal education, the trappings of which were borrowed from the nations' former colonial masters. The education systems increasingly have been seen as working against national development objectives, particularly in rural areas. Educational planners and policymakers have found an alternative in non-formal education, whereby rural people theoretically obtain the skills, knowledge, and attitudes necessary to initiate their own development projects. However, developing nations lack the human, financial, and material resources needed to concurrently offer both formal and non-formal education programs. Outside funding sources have been sought pursuant to United States foreign policy. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has given impetus to experiments in non-formal education in some 60 countries of Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. The purpose of this dissertation is to examine relationships between education and rural community development, particularly as these relationships have been reported in underdeveloped nations. The methods of inquiry involved: 1. a substantive analysis and synthesis of the development literature, and 2. a detailed case study of non-formal education and rural development in Jamaica. The dissertation develops a thesis, namely that three general relationships may be observed between education and rural development. They are: 1. Formal education is intended to raise rural children to literacy and productivity in the development of their native areas. Instead, it tends to raise students' expectations towards employment in urban centers, thus bleeding rural areas of trained skills. Formal education has become an entrenched system both as a monopoly of central government bureaucracy, and as the one road recognized by rural adults as leading to a better life. There is a conflict between expectation and delivery, complicated by lack of realistic means for appraisal and change. 2. Alternatively, certain forms of non-formal education may hold promise for improving the quality of living in the rural areas of developing nations; however, the conditions necessary for a definitive test of non-formal education in rural community development are not likely to be developed under the sponsorship of the education establishment of the developing nations, even when such test is stimulated and heavily supported by outside agencies such as the United States Agency for International Development. 3. Moreover, the idiosyncratic policies, organization, and funding practices of USAID, the principal source of financial aid for development projects among developing nations, themselves influence the design and outcome of development projects in ways that mitigate against successful development. Clearly, this poses a dilemma for those governments that seek to develop their rural areas. Traditional institutions and programs have been used to improve conditions in rural areas. Yet these very institutions and programs may be part of the development problems. International development literature is replete with theoretical and promising new programs that cannot be fairly tested. There is no indication that national governments could or would assimilate these programs into standard practice, moreover, the status quo is supported by rural populations. ; Ed. D.
Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; Includes index. ; At head of title: Committee print. ; CIS Microfiche Accession Numbers: CIS 75 H242-15 ; Microfiche. ; Mode of access: Internet.
Pt. 3: "Housing in the seventies," report of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. ; Hearings held Oct. 9-Nov. 1, 1973, on H.R. 7277, 10036, and 10688-10689. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; pt.1 October 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, and 17, 1973--pt.2 October 18, 23, 24, 25; and November 1, 1973, and Appendix--pt. 3: "Housing in the seventies," Report of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. ; Mode of access: Internet.
Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; Pt. 3: "Housing in the seventies," report of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. ; Hearings held Oct. 9-Nov. 1, 1973, on H.R. 7277, 10036, and 10688-10689. ; CIS Microfiche Accession Numbers: CIS 74 H241-4 (pt. l), CIS 74 H241-5 (pt. 2), CIS 74 H241-6 (pt. 3) ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Microfiche. ; Mode of access: Internet.
