42 U.S.C. § 1441a

National housing goals

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Congressional findings and reaffirmation of goals

The Congress finds that the supply of the Nation’s housing is not increasing rapidly enough to meet the national housing goal, established in the Housing Act of 1949 [42 U.S.C. 1441 et seq.], of the “realization as soon as feasible of the goal of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family”. The Congress reaffirms this national housing goal and determines that it can be substantially achieved within the next decade by the construction or rehabilitation of twenty-six million housing units, six million of these for low and moderate income families.

(b) Additional Congressional findings

The Congress further finds that policies designed to contribute to the achievement of the national housing goal have not directed sufficient attention and resources to the preservation of existing housing and neighborhoods, that the deterioration and abandonment of housing for the Nation’s lower income families has accelerated over the last decade, and that this acceleration has contributed to neighborhood disintegration and has partially negated the progress toward achieving the national housing goal which has been made primarily through new housing construction.

The Congress declares that if the national housing goal is to be achieved, a greater effort must be made to encourage the preservation of existing housing and neighborhoods through such measures as housing preservation, moderate rehabilitation, and improvements in housing management and maintenance, in conjunction with the provision of adequate municipal services. Such an effort should concentrate, to a greater extent than it has in the past, on housing and neighborhoods where deterioration is evident but has not yet become acute.

(Pub. L. 90–448, title XVI, § 1601, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 601; Pub. L. 93–383, title VIII, § 801(1), (2), Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 721.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Housing Act of 1949, referred to in subsec. (a), is act July 15, 1949, ch. 338, 63 Stat. 413, which is classified principally to this chapter (§ 1441 et seq.). For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1441 of this title and Tables.

Codification

Section was not enacted as part of the Housing Act of 1949 which comprises this chapter.

Amendments

1974—Pub. L. 93–383 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsecs. (b) and (c).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 28 cases, 1971–2006 · leading case: Leo Burroughs, Jr., Cross-Appellees v. Carla Hills, Sec'y, Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., Cross-Appellants, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir. 1984).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Leo Burroughs, Jr., Cross-Appellees v. Carla Hills, Sec'y, Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., Cross-Appellants, 741 F.2d 1525 (7th Cir. 1984). · cites it 3× “*1533 The Department of Housing and Urban Development Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 1441a, provides: (a) The Congress finds that the supply of the Nation’s housing is not increasing rapidly enough to meet the national *1534 (b) The Congress further finds that policies designed to…”

United States v. Winthrop Towers, a Ltd. P'ship, & Metro. Bank & Trust Co. as Tr. Under Trust 1037, 628 F.2d 1028 (7th Cir. 1980). · cites it 2× “In this case the law to be applied includes § 2 of the National Housing Act, 42 U.”

Doris Holbrook v. Henry C. Pitt, & Third-Party v. Sec'y, United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., Third- Party, 643 F.2d 1261 (3rd Cir. 1981). “” 42 U.S.C. § 1441a (1976). 7 . Congress has described the Section 8 program as “the Nation’s major tool for assisting the construction of lower income housing.”

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. James T. Lynn, Sec'y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 501 F.2d 848 (D.C. Cir. 1974). · cites it 2× “” 42 U.S.C. § 1441a. In addition to enacting substantive programs in aid of this goal, it directed the President to develop and transmit a ten-year plan for achieving the goal, 42 U.”

Fed. Prop. Mgmt. Corp. v. Patricia Roberts Harris, 603 F.2d 1226 (6th Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “” 42 U.S.C. § 1441a (1976). Congress stressed the need to concentrate on preserving existing neighborhoods through rehabilitation and improvements in management and maintenance.”

James & Joyce Ferrell v. Samuel R. Pierce, Sec'y of Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 743 F.2d 454 (7th Cir. 1984). “721 (1974), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1441a. Section 1441a explicitly expresses dissatisfaction with the administration of the housing laws.”

Brenda Edwards v. Dist. of Columbia, a Mun. Corp., 821 F.2d 651 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “The provisions, 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(c) (1982), 42 U.S.C.S. § 5313 historical note (1982), and 42 U.”

Ferguson v. Metro. Dev. & Hous. Agency, 485 F. Supp. 517 (M.D. Tenn. 1980). “, and reaffirmed in the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. § 1441a. *520 Since 1934, Congress has enacted many programs to increase the supply of decent housing for low and moderate income families.”

Marie Conille v. Sec'y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 840 F.2d 105 (1st Cir. 1988). “See 42 U.S.C. § 1441a. These goals are incorporated directly into section 1701z-ll, which requires the Secretary to manage and dispose of multifamily housing projects owned by him, or under his control as MIP, “in a manner consistent with this chapter.”

Techer v. Roberts-Harris, 83 F.R.D. 124 (D. Conn. 1979). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 1441a reads in pertinent part: (a) The Congress finds that the supply of the Nation’s housing is not increasing rapidly enough to meet the national housing goal, established in the Housing Act of 1949, of the “realization as soon as feasible of the goal of a decent…”

Rental Hous. Ass'n of Greater Lynn, Inc. v. Carla A. Hills, 548 F.2d 388 (1st Cir. 1977). “Moreover, the legislative history lends support to plaintiff’s contention that utilization of existing housing is to be given priority — new construction or substantial rehabilitation is authorized if it “has [been] determined that there is not, and is not likely soon to be, an…”

Hernandez v. Pierce, 512 F. Supp. 1154 (S.D.N.Y. 1981). · cites it 2× “” The statutes allegedly violated are the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, § 801, 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(c) (“HCDA § 801”); Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, § 902, 42 U.”

Show all 28 citing cases →

— 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(a) — 3 cases

Techer v. Roberts-Harris, 83 F.R.D. 124 (D. Conn. 1979). “42 U.S.C. § 1441a reads in pertinent part: (a) The Congress finds that the supply of the Nation’s housing is not increasing rapidly enough to meet the national housing goal, established in the Housing Act of 1949, of the “realization as soon as feasible of the goal of a decent…”

Portela v. Pierce, 650 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1981).

Beck Park Apts. v. United States Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev., 695 F.2d 366 (9th Cir. 1982).

— 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(b) — 2 cases

Cole v. Hills, 396 F. Supp. 1235 (D.D.C. 1975).

— 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(c) — 3 cases

Brenda Edwards v. Dist. of Columbia, a Mun. Corp., 821 F.2d 651 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “The provisions, 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(c) (1982), 42 U.S.C.S. § 5313 historical note (1982), and 42 U.”

Hernandez v. Pierce, 512 F. Supp. 1154 (S.D.N.Y. 1981). “” The statutes allegedly violated are the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, § 801, 42 U.S.C. § 1441a(c) (“HCDA § 801”); Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, § 902, 42 U.”

Fed. Prop. Mgmt. Corp. v. Patricia Roberts Harris, 603 F.2d 1226 (6th Cir. 1979). “” 42 U.S.C. § 1441a (1976). Congress stressed the need to concentrate on preserving existing neighborhoods through rehabilitation and improvements in management and maintenance.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.