trained to get involved in weatherization, which can create jobs in low-income communities for people who do weatherization. We are fighting inflation in food by helping small grocery stores get in touch with Pennsylvania farmers who right now can give them agricultural products more cheaply, and build community co-ops and food markets. I could go on this, and often do. But I think it is an important step that we have to take in beginning to respond to what most people will say this is the No. 1 problem-whatever Reagan does, if he lowers the inflation in this country, it will be worth it. He is not going to lower inflation in this country. It is very clear. An economist has written a very interesting article in the New York review of the books recently talking about what the military expenditures alone are going to do to the inflation rate, pointing out that the Indochina war escalated inflation geometrically in the late 1960's and 1970's, starting with an inflation rate of 1 or 2 percent. We are starting with a base rate of 8 or 9 percent, and adding $2.5 trillion.

So he not going to solve this problem unless he has a miracle in Saudi Arabia, and we start getting free oil. But if we are going to be able to take advantage of that, we cannot sit on our hands and wait for the thing to crash. It could even go further to the right. It has in other countries. If we are going to respond to that problem, we have to find ways to persuade citizens that we know what we are doing and citizens know what they are doing. And it is the Reagan approach that is not working. It is not some automatic natural law that dictates that we have to pay these prices. It is my belief that empowering communities to be able to be effective in fighting the market, using government and private help and citizen help, is the route of the future that this country will understand. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Mr. Hamid, can you tell me what has your experience in Philadelphia with respect to condominium development been? Can you comment on the impact of condominium development on the movement of low-income and poor residents of the city of Philadelphia? And finally, if they are displaced, where do they go?

Mr. HAMID. Congressman Dellums-my expertise is presently as a housing planning consultant. So I am still very much in the field. As a result of that, I have firsthand-how can I say-involvement in condominium conversion as well as co-op housing conversion— because I am contacted by various clients, individuals who in some cases as a result of being displaced, as a result of condominium conversion, are looking to purchase a house, and are seeking housing consultation as a result of that to get a good buy.

The first part of that question, the important part, is what effect does it have on low-income people and the movement of people.

When a building is converted at this point to condominium, we have a high rent at that point. The individuals may very well be in the moderate to slightly higher income level. As a result of that conversion, if they are not able to purchase their unit, their apartment unit, then they seek lodging elsewhere. In most cases they take a slight step down in the housing scale, to the next available lodging as it is-moving away from center city, they are moving

out.

The city in terms of planning has more or less given sanction to that center city corridor-now is no longer to Vine Street and South Street. It is now extended to Washington Avenue and Girard north to the river. So anything that falls inside of that, the notion is to developers that they will prosper, the city will give the nod forward, the redevelopment authority will help them acquire the property through condemnation procedures.

So those individuals who have been displaced move out and eventually push those low-income individuals who are living in apartments which are relatively nice, but the rents are not quite $300 a month, they are again displaced by another developer who sees that the first developer converted to condo, now this is an opportunity for a cooperative or just for him to make a dollar. And that apartment rates go beyond $300 to $500, $600, $700. Those individuals who live there originally have to find lodging elsewhere. So the movement is from the center of the city out. In city planning that is generally how it works. The government structure is located, those individuals who are high on the income level are located in the central part of a city. The African, the Asian structure, city planning, you will find is basically that way. And the people of lower income are out on the outskirts. We look at regional mobility as an example of that. And in turn, as they move out, the housing, the speculators are there. They see the problem. They capitalize on the problem. Those individuals who were displaced by condo_must live somewhere. So the next developer jumps in and says I will make a profit off of them. Those displaced by him need somewhere else to go. So another speculator jumps in. And knowing this, it is a big dollar involved here. There is money to be made as a result of it. And those poor people who are finally pushed to the farthest outskirts of the city, and sometimes outside of the city, are put in a situation where they eventually become suburbanites. And there is an area I would say between inner city and suburbia which is probably where they should live, but because of the dollars and the increase in the displacement, they are not able to live. So again they are put in the suburbs, in an area which they also cannot afford, because of transportation costs, heating and energy costs, and the like.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Perhaps Ms. Pittman can best answer this question.

After the most recent Miami explosion, and people began to look back into that situation, to try to determine what conditions gave rise to it, other than the jury decision, they saw a pattern of lowincome people doubling and tripling, so that as a result of the housing pattern, people are moving from one low-income community to another community, and folks are starting to double and triple in one unit. Do you find that experience true in Philadelphia?

Ms. PITTMAN. Yes; in Raymond Rosen we have families there, we have 10 people in a two-bedroom apartment alone. In some, you have 15 people in a three-bedroom apartment. They tell you there is no room, they do not have an available unit. Where are people going to live. Some on floors, some on the couches, some sleep in beds together. It is terrible. The living conditions-there is supposed to be room enough for a family to live. You have houses that people live in in Raymond Rosen, one woman in a four-bedroom

house. They tell you they cannot put her in a unit, because she fixed up her house. It is not right. If she is the only one in that house, she should be made to be put into a senior citizen home somewhere, that she could live comfortable, and take a family that has 15 people in it out of the apartments in the buildings and put in a home.

The CHAIRMAN. What are the largest number of people living in a one- or two-bedroom unit in the project you are living in?

Ms. PITTMAN. You have about four people in a one-bedroom apartment-one family, about four, in a one-bedroom apartment. A mother who has a daughter, the daughter can live-sleep in the same bedroom-if she had a little boy, the little boy can sleep in there.

The CHAIRMAN. How many in a two-bedroom apartment?
Ms. PITTMAN. You have a family of five.

The CHAIRMAN. You mentioned there was as many as 10 people. Ms. PITTMAN. You have 10, 15, overcrowded. Say I have a sister. She cannot pay her rent or something happened to her, and she does not have a place to go. I am not going to let my sister sleep in the street. So you are doubling your family in. Trying to help your family. But as long as you tell them you are on DPA, they OK it for you.

The CHAIRMAN. You know

Ms. PITTMAN. It sounds horrible, but it is true.

The CHAIRMAN. You know, you ask people who have no understanding of what you are saying, how would you feel if you lived in a one-bedroom apartment with anywhere from 5 to 10, 12, sometimes 15 people, and their first response is, I would go absolutely insane. And then you begin to understand the violence that takes place, because when people do not have space, they explode upon themselves or they go outside of that unit and they explode in the community.

Ms. PITTMAN. True.

The CHAIRMAN. And I think that perhaps if you look at these various projects around the country, and the attending violence increasing, what I think we may be seeing, and that is why I ask you the question, and I think we have to try to find the answer-we are seeing people doubling and tripling up, which creates tremendous psychological violence, because when people have no space, no privacy-human beings need that. You get this explosion. Then it ends up in the kind of violence that takes place upon each other. People strike out at the closest thing to them. That is the experience that you have in that project. And that is similar in other projects.

Ms. PITTMAN. Yes, it is. I can take you to one family. She has her kids, daughter, and grandkids. And she is in a two-bedroom unit. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Coleman, how many people are there on the waiting list in Philadelphia to get into public housing?

Mr. COLEMAN. I would have to find out from my colleagues in public housing. My understanding is that there are at least hundreds, if not thousands of people on the waiting list.

The CHAIRMAN. Where do they go to live in Philadelphia, those who come into your office and say I need a place to live, I cannot afford the prevailing rents, I am being kicked out of my apartment,

it is going condo, I do not have any place to live. What happens if there are several thousand people?

Mr. COLEMAN. I am taking quite a few liberties here. These are my impressions. The Office of Housing and Community Development does not direct public housing, although we in fact cooperate with the Philadelphia Housing Authority to provide housing.

Many of the very low-income people in the city of Philadelphia live in private housing, not in public housing. When the private housing does not exist, I am certain that people in fact double up or find temporary housing wherever they can, it is in public housing or in private housing. One of the panelists earlier referred to many condo conversions for low-income people. While there have been condo conversions in Philadelphia, in the thousands of units, my understanding is that most of those conversions are occurring with middle or higher income units. I do not think they are occurring substantially for lower income people.

Lower income people have another problem. They are invariably in restricted markets. And because those markets are restricted, or in fact controlled, they do not have the mobility that higher income people have. The charges that can be passed on to them can be artificially higher than it would be if there were a free marketplace. So whether or not there are other units in the neighborhood, the poor can in fact frequently be required to pay more, because they do not have the options that higher income people have.

One of the phenomena that is occurring currently, if pollsters are to be believed, is that doubling is occurring throughout many levels of our economic strata in this country. And one of the factors that at least Mr. Sindlinger attributes, a pollster in one of our nearby communities-one of the factors causing people to double up is the high cost of energy and maintaining the operating costs of housing. There are several dimensions to housing. But two of them, of course, are the basic one of acquiring or living in a unit, and a second day-to-day factor of life is the cost of being able to maintain that unit. And poor people with very limited incomes have difficulty meeting health needs, food needs, and housing needs, and also utility needs or costs which are experiencing a high increase.

The CHAIRMAN. A number of people in that category, are they increasing?

Mr. COLEMAN. Doubling up? An indication from at least one pollster in the area is yes, that doubling up is increasing. And it is increasing at every income level. I cannot give you the percentage.

The CHAIRMAN. We are seeing two different patterns of movement. I would like to get a feel from you as to what is the pattern of movement in Philadelphia. On the one hand, you are getting one pattern that says middle-class people, particularly middle-class people with children, irrespective of race, are moving out of the urban areas, into the suburban areas, for a variety of reasonsbetter schools, better security, et cetera-at least in peoples' minds. And that some people are predicting that if that outmigration of middle-class people with children takes place, that the cities of America can end up cities of the extremes, cities of the very young, cities of the very old, and cities of the very poor, because they are trapped and have no place to go.

We also have a second pattern. That is a pattern of middle-class people moving out of the suburbs, back into the cities because of energy cost, transportation, transit problems, displacing inner-city people, because they have the capacity to rehabilitate, et cetera. Displacing low-income people. So you have two different patternsone of middle-class people moving back in, and in another situation you have middle-class people with children moving out. Do you have one or both of these patterns working simultaneously in Philadelphia?

Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Congressman, you have both patterns occurring. A cursory review, however, of the 1980 census would suggest that by far the larger pattern is people moving out.

The CHAIRMAN. Middle-class people with children moving out? Mr. COLEMAN. You can guess that it is. But until the 1980 census figures are complete as to both income levels and housing stock you can only speculate.

One of the things we would of course urge is the more rapid making available by the U.S. Department of Commerce from the Bureau of the Census the detailed figures regarding income and housing. And the more rapidly that is made available the more accurately we will be able to answer your question. If you take Philadelphia proper, at least based on census figures, between 1970 and 1980 well over a couple of hundred thousand people moved out of the city of Philadelphia. We can only speculate those people who moved out were probably higher income people. The census information clearly indicates they were overwhelmingly members of the white community of Philadelphia. The number of minorities who moved out, particularly blacks, was according to the preliminary census figure relatively small, totaling about 14,000 people. And the Census Bureau simply put Hispanics under a different category. But the largest movement appears to have been that of a significant number of whites in the hundreds of thousands out of the city of Philadelphia. But again in the absence of figures it would be hard to tell the scale. Anyone familiar with the city however could point to several areas of the city where middle-income people are moving in or higher income people. My own guess is while that is occurring, it is not at the present moment occurring in numbers anywhere near the numbers of people who have moved out. So I think the dominant pattern is a larger number of probably better income people moving out. But all of that would again lead to the question of the two directions that you have raised-that you think Philadelphia and I might add other large cities would be takingwould lead to increasing gentrification or the extremes, my guess would be the extremes. That the new housing that would go up would tend to be, because of both the costs of construction and maintaining housing, for upper income people who would move in, and that the poorer people would be left in the city.

You have to remember in a city like Philadelphia, and I do not know what the percentages are now, but I think the pattern is true also in the city of Baltimore, as relates to the State of Maryland, but Philadelphia has had in recent years as much as 16 percent of its population on welfare. And that is without regard to elderly people with lower, who may be receiving other insurance programs such as social security. But it may well be that in a number of