252 20 10383 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ec3eb44802d5e862ee387d8893f2b5a2.pdf b40c5789602094e006e35500b6201072 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 293-7625 Chairman John W . Gardner Co-chairman Andrew Heiskell A. Philip Randolph II December 2, 1969 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mqyor of the City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Ivan: At the dinner following the Steering Committee Meeting of December 10, we plan to give special recognition to those members who will be leaving public office after the first of the year. I hope very much that you will be with us to receive a token of our appreciation for your service to the Urban Coalition since its inception. I'll be grateful if you will be willing to serve as an honorary member of the Urban Coalition and continue to be active in its work. The meeting is sche duled to begin at 4 p.m. at the Sta tl e r Hilton Hote l, with the reception- dinner at 6 p .m. P l eas e l e t us know if your sche dule will allow you to be with us. Sincer ~ l ~ '_,, / /~ Ch'a i r ma:n I / � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 293-7625 Chairman John W. Gardner Co-chairman Andrew Heiskell A. Philip Randolph December 2, 1969 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of the City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Ivan: At the dinner following the Steering Committee Meeting of December 10, we plan to give special recognition to those members who will be leaving public office after the first of the year. I hope very much that you will be with us to receive a token of our appreciation for your service to the Urban Coalition since its inception. I'll be grateful if you will be willing to serve as an honorary member of the Urban Coalition and continue to be active in its work. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 4 p.m. at the Statler Hilton Hotel, with the reception-dinner at 6 p.m. Please let us know if your schedule will allow you to be with us. Sincerely, a rr My J Chairman  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 22, Document 3 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 22 Folder topic: Urban Coalition Steering Committee meeting | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/d69cfc39c6b1df734e384858608d21b3.pdf 649c22ce27ee72b1ce36e2c996470b8c Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. December 4, 1969 Mr. John W. Gardner, Chairman The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N . W . Washington, D . C . 2.003 7 Dear John: Thank you very much for your kind letter. and I will be delighted to serve as an honorary meniber of the Urban Coalition. I regret very mueh that I will not be able to be with you on the 10th, but I have asked Mayor-Elect Massell to continue th City' a sociation with your ry fine U rb n Coaltion. iV'itb gr te£ul appr ciation, I am Sincerely your • Ivan Allen, Jr. IAJr:lp � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document December 4, 1969 Mr. John W. Gardner, Chairman The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20037 Dear John: Thank you very much for your kind letter, and I will be delighted to serve as an honorary member of the Urban Coalition. I regret very much that I will not be able to be with you on the 10th, but I have asked Mayor-Elect Massell to continue the City's association with your very fine Urban Coaltion. With grateful appreciation, I am Sincerely yours, Ivan Allen, Jr. IAJr:ip  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 22, Document 2 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 22 Folder topic: Urban Coalition Steering Committee meeting | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/be046f91b944e54ffd630a96e624cf51.pdf 288920b50c9d0c3da0f331f8ee38d178 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. \\ 1;;-4A tST ~ ' 19 68 A£108 c1·13111,1 TX1~ PDB TX WASH.~CTON DC 19 HTf W Tn016 IT22 HO }'t lVAN Atl.!.N R YOR O)i-' THE CITY or ATLANTA CITY HALL Ail.A TRLR.E \'IU. M A l<!TITIWC Ot TH£ STttRlNC CO'*ITTTI Of TRE URBAN COALITION AT -400 PM ON AJ>Rlt. gi"H IN TME STArE ~COiii Of Tift fiA n.o\!ER \tOTt} . t i.'ASRtNG'TON nc. PLYAFI: ADVISE BY APR!L 3RD \iHtT'Kn YOU WILL ATTEND. RSV'PY J'rRS MA'RCU ~£.ENE 202-~:3-1,~0 _ JOl<N W CARDHER CltA!RMAN' 1270 '1-511 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ie 3NESTERN UNION _ f_ 4 2 AST ae lt i 1344 EST MARIS 68 AELOS CTBial @ TKYOI6 Tx22 TXZ22 PDE TX WASHINGTON DC $9 NFT te 4 HON IVAN ALLEN JE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ATLANTA CITY HALL ATLA THERE WILL BE A MEETING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF TRE URBAN «ss QOALITION AT 200 PM ON APRIL STH IN TRE STATE RGOM OF THE MAYFLOWER WOTHT., WASHINGTON DC. PLEASE ADVISE BY APRIL 3RD WHETHER YOU WILL ATTEND. RSVP? MRS MARCIA GREENE 202-253-1530 seta de _ JOKN W GARDNER CHATRMAN 400 STH BRD 202-295-2530 ARLE $270 (1-51)  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 22, Document 1 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 22 Folder topic: Urban Coalition Steering Committee meeting | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/1e3017c68c3a1808dc907c5bb903e5a2.pdf feed37b1c254857c5452f3eb6fb4d213 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. \\ 1;;-4A tST ~ ' 19 68 A£108 c1·13111,1 TX1~ PDB TX WASH.~CTON DC 19 HTf W Tn016 IT22 HO }'t lVAN Atl.!.N R YOR O)i-' THE CITY or ATLANTA CITY HALL Ail.A TRLR.E \'IU. M A l<!TITIWC Ot TH£ STttRlNC CO'*ITTTI Of TRE URBAN COALITION AT -400 PM ON AJ>Rlt. gi"H IN TME STArE ~COiii Of Tift fiA n.o\!ER \tOTt} . t i.'ASRtNG'TON nc. PLYAFI: ADVISE BY APR!L 3RD \iHtT'Kn YOU WILL ATTEND. RSV'PY J'rRS MA'RCU ~£.ENE 202-~:3-1,~0 _ JOl<N W CARDHER CltA!RMAN' 1270 '1-511 �December 4, 1969 Mr. John W. Gardner, Chairman The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N . W . Washington, D . C . 2.003 7 Dear John: Thank you very much for your kind letter. and I will be delighted to serve as an honorary meniber of the Urban Coalition. I regret very mueh that I will not be able to be with you on the 10th, but I have asked Mayor-Elect Massell to continue th City' a sociation with your ry fine U rb n Coaltion. iV'itb gr te£ul appr ciation, I am Sincerely your • Ivan Allen, Jr. IAJr:lp �The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 293-7625 Chairman John W . Gardner Co-chairman Andrew Heiskell A. Philip Randolph II December 2, 1969 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mqyor of the City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Ivan: At the dinner following the Steering Committee Meeting of December 10, we plan to give special recognition to those members who will be leaving public office after the first of the year. I hope very much that you will be with us to receive a token of our appreciation for your service to the Urban Coalition since its inception. I'll be grateful if you will be willing to serve as an honorary member of the Urban Coalition and continue to be active in its work. The meeting is sche duled to begin at 4 p.m. at the Sta tl e r Hilton Hote l, with the reception- dinner at 6 p .m. P l eas e l e t us know if your sche dule will allow you to be with us. Sincer ~ l ~ '_,, / /~ Ch'a i r ma:n I / �" STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING 4 P.M., STATE ROOM, MAYFLOWER HOTEL WASHINGTON, D. C. April 8, 1968 The scheduled April meeting will be the first opportunity for the Steering Committee to meet with Chairman John W. Gardner. Mr. Gardner will discuss with the Steering Committee his thinking as to the organization and program of the Coalition. Recommendations of the Ex ecutive Committee will be presented pertaining to expansion of the Executive and Steering Committees, the structure of the Coalition and urgent matters before the Congress. �- " April 2, 1968 MEMORANDUM TO: The Steering Committee FROM: John W. Gardner SUBJECT: Cooperation with the National Alliance of Businessmen I am enclosing, for your information, a copy of a letter that I have sent to the Chairmen of local coalitions indicating that the Urban Coalition is cooperating fully with the National Alliance of Businessmen, and encouraging local coalitions to do the same. �• The Urban Coalition I Federal Bar Building West/ 1819 H Street, N. w. Washington , D. C. / 20006 Steering Committee Co-chairmen: Andrew Heiskell/ A. Philip Randolph \1 March 22, 1968 Mr. Stephen F. Keaiing Honeywell, Incorporated 2701 4th Avenue, South Minneapolis, Minnesota Dear Mr. Keating: A good many people ask me what the difference is between the Urban Coalition and the new National Alliance of Businessmen, recently e stablished under the leadership of Henry Ford II. I usually r e spond by emphasizing the two most obvious differences: 1. The Alliance is concerned solely with jobs while the Coalition is concerned with the whole range of urban problems. 2. The Alli a nc e i s strictly a bu s ine ssma n's venture while we include mayors, union leaders, religious and minority group leaders. But more important than the diff e r e nces are the ways the Alli a nc e a nd Coa lition c a n work tog e th er . I h a v e discu ssed th a t qu e stion with He n ry Ford II, a nd with Mr . Leo Beeb e who i s on l e ave fr om the Ford Motor Company to give full time direction to the Alliance . Mr. Gerard Phillippe, Cha irman of th e Board of Ge neral Electric a nd Co-Cha irma n of the Coalition's Ta sk Force on Priva t e Emp loyme nt, joine d me for th e t a lk with Mr. Beebe . We a rrive d a t f ull a gre eme nt c oncerning t h e re lation ship b e t ween the Alliance and the Coa lition . All parties to the c onvers a t i on a gr eed that th e r e is a great er pot ent ial for meeting ou r common obj e c tives i n th e employment s phe r e i f our re s pective pro grams are carried ou t in a c omp l ementary fashion. We pl e dged full suppo rt to th e NAB effo r t . National Coordinators : J ohn Feild / Ron M. Linton Telephone 293 -1530 �- 2 - It is through local community leadership that both the NAB and the Urban Coalition see their respective objectives being accomplished. The NAB has designated a local chairman in each of fifty urban areas. It is possible that the local NAB chairman for y our city is already a member of your group. If not, I urge that you invite his active participation in .your efforts, and explore with him ways in which the Coalition can be suppo~tive of his efforts on behalf of the Alliance. The NAB cha irma n in y our community is Mr. Dona ld C. Day ton, Chairman of the Board, The Dayton Corporation, 700 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. I look forward to our working together. Since r e ly, John W. Gardn e r Cha irma n �March 29, 1968 Mr. John W. Gardner Chairman The Urban Coalition 1819 H Street, N. W . Washington, D. C. 20006 Dear Mr. Gardner: Th nk you for your letter explaining the relation hip between the Urban Coalition and the National Allianc - of Bu ineesmen. It was my privil ge to ttend the NAB ti' ining conf w n ee in Washington on Febr~:ry 29 and M rch 1 t the request of Mayor Allen nd Billy St rne. M yor Allen has pledged .full coop r tion to the NAB effort and we ar - working v ry closely with th metropolit n NAB org nl .. zation s w 11 a with Mr. J. P - ul A ugtin, M r. B oief uill t Jon , Mr. G n Boyd nd oth r Atlantan involv d with NAB on the region l ov n tion l lev 1. Pl as be s ut d that we will give NAB the full cooperation of 'th Mayor's Office and the Atl nta Urban Co lition. W also pl dg our support and coop r tion to you nd th Urb n Co lition. Pl as · c 11 on u wh · n v i" w ,· c n be of h lp. Sine r ly your , D nSw DS:fy t �The Urban Coalition I Federal Bar Building West/ 1819 Ii Street, N. w. Washington, D. C. / 20006 Steering Committee Co-chairmen: Andrew Heiskell/ A. Philip Randolph March 21, 1968 Mr. Dan Sweat Mayor's Office City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mr. Sweat: A good many people ask me what the difference is between the Urban Coalition and the new National Alliance of Businessmen, recently established under the leadership of Henry Ford II. I usually respond by emphasizing the two most obvious differences: 1. The Alliance is concerned solely with jobs while the Coalition is concerned with the whole range of urban problems. 2. The Alliance is strictly a businessman's venture while we include mayors, union leaders, religious and minority group leaders. But more important than the differences are the ways the Alliance and Coalition can work together. I have discussed that question with Henry Ford II, and with Mr. Leo Beebe who is on leave from the Ford Motor Company to give full time direction to the Alliance. Mr. Gerard Phillippe, Chairman of the Board of Gener al Electric and co-chairman of the Coalition's Task Force on Private Employment, joined me for the talk with Mr. Beebe . We arrived at full agreement concerning the relationship between the Alliance and the Coalition . All parties to the conversation agreed that there is a greater potential for meeting our common objectives in the employment sphere if our respective programs are carried out in a complementary fashion . We pledged full support to the NAB effort. National Coordinators : John Feild/ Ron M. Linton Telephone 293-1530 �- 2 - It is through local community leadership that both the NAB and the Urban Coalition see their respective obje~tives being accomplished. The NAB has designated a local chairman in each of fifty urban areas. It is possible that the local NAB chairman for your city is already working with you in your efforts to form a local coalition. If not, I urge that you invite his active participation in your efforts and explore with him ways in which the potential local coalition can be supportive of his efforts on behalf of the Alliance. The NAB chairman in your community is Mr. A.H. Sterne, President, Trust Company of Georgia, P.O. Box 4418, Atlanta, Georgia 30302. I look forward to our working together. Chairman � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ie 3NESTERN UNION _ f_ 4 2 AST ae lt i 1344 EST MARIS 68 AELOS CTBial @ TKYOI6 Tx22 TXZ22 PDE TX WASHINGTON DC $9 NFT te 4 HON IVAN ALLEN JE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ATLANTA CITY HALL ATLA THERE WILL BE A MEETING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF TRE URBAN «ss QOALITION AT 200 PM ON APRIL STH IN TRE STATE RGOM OF THE MAYFLOWER WOTHT., WASHINGTON DC. PLEASE ADVISE BY APRIL 3RD WHETHER YOU WILL ATTEND. RSVP? MRS MARCIA GREENE 202-253-1530 seta de _ JOKN W GARDNER CHATRMAN 400 STH BRD 202-295-2530 ARLE $270 (1-51) December 4, 1969 Mr. John W. Gardner, Chairman The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20037 Dear John: Thank you very much for your kind letter, and I will be delighted to serve as an honorary member of the Urban Coalition. I regret very much that I will not be able to be with you on the 10th, but I have asked Mayor-Elect Massell to continue the City's association with your very fine Urban Coaltion. With grateful appreciation, I am Sincerely yours, Ivan Allen, Jr. IAJr:ip The Urban Coalition 2100 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 293-7625 Chairman John W. Gardner Co-chairman Andrew Heiskell A. Philip Randolph December 2, 1969 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of the City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Ivan: At the dinner following the Steering Committee Meeting of December 10, we plan to give special recognition to those members who will be leaving public office after the first of the year. I hope very much that you will be with us to receive a token of our appreciation for your service to the Urban Coalition since its inception. I'll be grateful if you will be willing to serve as an honorary member of the Urban Coalition and continue to be active in its work. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 4 p.m. at the Statler Hilton Hotel, with the reception-dinner at 6 p.m. Please let us know if your schedule will allow you to be with us. Sincerely, a rr My J Chairman  STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING 4 P.M., STATE ROOM, MAYFLOWER HOTEL WASHINGTON, D. C. April 8, 1968 The scheduled April meeting will be the first opportunity for the Steering Committee to meet with Chairman John W. Gardner. Mr. Gardner will discuss with the Steering Committee his thinking as to the organization and program of the Coalition. Recommendations of the Executive Committee will be presented pertaining to expansion of the Executive and Steering Committees, the struc- ture of the Coalition and urgent matters before the Congress. April 2, 1968 MEMORANDUM TO: The Steering Committee FROM: John W. Gardner SUBJECT: Cooperation with the National Alliance of Businessmen I am enclosing, for your information, a copy of a letter that I have sent to the Chairmen of local coalitions indicating that the Urban Coalition is cooperating fully with the National Alliance of Businessmen, and encouraging local coalitions to do the same. The Urban Coalition / Federal Bar Building West [71879 H Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. | 20006 Steering Committee Co-chairmen: Andrew Heiskell JA Philip Randolph March 22, 1968 Mr. Stephen F. Keating Honeywell, Incorporated 2701 4th Avenue, South Minneapolis, Minnesota Dear Mr. Keating: A good many people ask me what the difference is between the Urban Coalition and the new National Alliance of Businessmen, recently established under the leadership of Henry Ford II. I usually respond by emphasizing the two most obvious differences: 1. The Alliance is concerned solely with jobs while the Coalition is concerned with the whole range of urban problems. 2. The Alliance is strictly a businessman's venture while we include mayors, union leaders, religious and minority group leaders. But more important than the differences are the ways the Alliance and Coalition can work together. I have discussed that question with Henry Ford II, and with Mr. Leo Beebe who is on leave from the Ford Motor Company to give full time direction to the Alliance. Mr. Gerard Phillippe, Chairman of the Board of General Electric and Co-Chairman of the Coalition's Task Force on Private Employ- ment, joined me for the talk with Mr. Beebe. We arrived at full agreement concerning the relationship between the Alliance and the Coalition. All parties to the conversation agreed that there is a greater potential for meeting our common objectives in the employment sphere if our respective programs are carried out in a complementary fashion. We pledged full support to the NAB effort. National Coordinators: John Feild | Ron M. Linton Telephone 293-7530 It is through local community leadership that both the NAB and the Urban Coalition see their respective objectives being accomplished. The NAB has designated a local chair- man in each of fifty urban areas. It is possible that the local NAB chairman for your city is already a member of your group. If not, I urge that you invite his active participation in.your efforts, and explore with him ways in which the Coalition can be supportive of his efforts on behalf of the Alliance. The NAB chairman in your community is Mr. Donald C. Dayton, Chairman of the Board, The Dayton Corporation, 700 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. I look forward to our working together. Sincerely, John W. Gardner Chairman March 29, 1968 Mr. John W. Gardner Chairman The Urban Coalition 1819 H Street, N. W. Washington, D. C. 20006 Dear Mr. Gardner: Thank you for your letter explaining the relationship between the Urban Coalition and the National Alliance of Businessmen, It was my privilege to attend the NAB training conference in Washington on February 29 and March 1 at the request of Mayor Allen and Billy Sterne. Mayor Allen has pledged full cooperation to the NAB effort and we are working very closely with the metropolitan NAB organi- zation as well as with Mr. J. Paul Augtin, Mr. Boisfeuillet Jones, Mr. Gene Boyd and other Atlantans involved with NAB on the regional or national level, Please be assured that we will give NAB the full cooperation of the Mayor's Office and the Atlanta Urban Coalition. We also pledge our support and cooperation to you and the Urban Coalition. Please call on us whenever we can be of help. Sincerely yours, Dan Sweat DS:fy li he Ur ban Coalition / Federal Bar Building West [ 1819 H Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. [ 20006 Steering Committee Co-chairmen: Andrew Heiskell / A. Philip Randolph March 21, 1968 Mr. Dan Sweat Mayor's Office City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mr. Sweat: A good many people ask me what the difference is between the Urban Coalition and the new National Alliance of Businessmen, recently established under the leadership of Henry Ford II. I usually respond by emphasizing the two most obvious differences: 1. The Alliance is concerned solely with jobs while the Coalition is concerned with the whole range of urban problems. 2. The Alliance is strictly a businessman's venture while we include mayors, union leaders, religious and minority group leaders. But more important than the differences are the ways the Alliance and Coalition can work together. I have discussed that question with Henry Ford II, and with Mr. Leo Beebe who is on leave from the Ford Motor Company to give full time direction to the Alliance. Mr. Gerard Phillippe, Chairman of the Board of General Electric and co-chairman of the Coalition's Task Force on Private Employment, joined me for the talk with Mr. Beebe. We arrived at full agreement concerning the relationship between the Alliance and the Coalition. All parties to the conversation agreed that there is a greater potential for meeting our common objectives in the employment sphere if our respective programs are carried out in a complementary fashion. We pledged full support to the NAB effort. National Coordinators; John Feild | Ron M. Linton Telephone 293-7530 It is through local community leadership that both the NAB and the Urban Coalition see their respective objectives being accomplished. The NAB has designated a local chairman in each of fifty urban areas. It is possible that the local NAB chairman for your city is already working with you in your efforts to form a local coalition. If not, I urge that you invite his active parti- cipation in your efforts and explore with him ways in which the potential local coalition can be supportive of his efforts on behalf of the Alliance. The NAB chairman in your community is Mr. A. H. Sterne, President, Trust Company of Georgia, P. O. Box 4418, Atlanta, Georgia 30302. I look forward to our working together. Sincerel LIL ook Chairman ~~  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 22, Complete Folder Box 14 Box 14 Folder 22 Folder topic: Urban Coalition Steering Committee meeting | 1968-1969 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/8777dddb7c112c77c76d96de367121ed.pdf 2ad14ebf17f1bf58a965ea21a334e362 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. DRA F T M EMO RA NDUM URB A N P OL I CY COUN CI L �MEMORANDUM URBAN POLICY COUNCIL The purpose of this memorandum is to present a statement of the need for establishing a steering committee or Council on Urban Policy in this state to consider formulation of policy recommendations with regard to local government involvement in the development of federal grant-in-aid legislation as affecting urban program development in Georgia . As a bas i c premise it is felt that local government off icials and administrators should play an active part in the initial formulation of federal grant-in-aid legislation that affects the growth, development, administration, and operation of local gover nment in Georg i a. Local govern- ment off icial s and administrator s should also b e cons u lted in the dev e lopment of implementing administrative regulations for such l e gislation . Many fe deral grant- in- aid programs app ear to be f ounded to a l a r ge degree upon criter i a or standards of app lication as de t e r mined almost ent i rely a t the federal leve l . An example is curr ent leg islation in Congress to es t ablish communi ty development dis tr i c ts, the make up and c omposit ion of which is proposed to be approv ed by a cabinet officer based upon prede t ermined criter ia . Intergovernmen tal Cooperation There is strong proba bility that future urban programs, of even our larger c ities , wil l as a p rerequisi t e to fe deral a pp rova l , have t o be reviewed by regional organizations or area p fanning and development commissions. The Intergovernmental Coop eration Act of 1965 (S . 561) which passed the Senate and not the Hou se would have required review by a metropolitan planning agency before the federal government would act. �-2- Regional organizations composed of public officials are now recognized by federal law. These organizations have come into being to meet the need for dealing with problems of urban develop~ent that transcend established political and jurisdictional boundaries and cut across entire regions. These organizations will play a vital role in total coordinated urban development. Only recently were these organizations recognized by the federal government to be more than mere planning agencies. Future federal policy con- templates grants to these agencies conditioned upon mandatory not voluntary membership. Also being considered in some quarters is the evolvement of this regional voluntary association of local governments into an instrumentality, either operating regional type functions or serving as the control center over other regional, functional units. Thus, our traditional gen- eral purpose cities and counties of today may be defining tomorrow's regional general purpose network of government. It should be apparent that these developments are restructuring our intergovernmental relationships in the urban area. Workable Program Part of the problem of local inflexibility and lack of administrative coordination perhaps lies with the over involvement of federal staff personnel in the development and implementation of federal grant-in-aid programs. There has not been enough involvement by local administrators and decision-makers in federal aid program development and implementation . There are many examples of past legislative grant-in-aid enactments by the Congress that often hamstring local government administrative machinery because of the inflexibility of black and white implementing �-3- federal rules and regulations which apply to all units of government regardless of size. development. A good example is the workable program for community This program as a prerequisite to involvement in certain federal programs is lacking in flexibility, in its application, and imposes standards laid down without regard to the fact that local ability to implement and execute programs varies between large and small cities . The requirement of a long range capjtal improvements budget is certainly desirable as a basis for scheduling of projects. However, many local units of government do not even have annual operating budgets. Con- sequently, the reality of a blanket requirement of a long range capital improvements program without requiring operating budgets is open toquestion. The arbitrary requirement that the workable program be recertified each year regardless of size of city results in local administrative falsifying each year. There is a real question of whether the large city should be required to recertify the workable program each year -- why not every five years or every ten years? One large city produced a model workable program and was so claimed by the federal administrator to be one of the best workable programs in the nation. The next year the workable program of that city was not recerti- fied because the federal administrator had said that it had not changed enough over the previous year as reflected by the city's progress reports . Another city was refused recertification because the administrator said the city needed four additional housing inspectors over the previo us year's commitment . Yet no standards or justification were stated as to why these requirements were imposed . �-4- In large cities, specific programs do not necessarily reflect dramatic changes on a yearly basis . Thus, recertification of the workable program for many cities is certainly jeopardized unless that city can "pad" its progress reports in order to convince the federal administrator of progress (not given units of progress but progress) and thus secure recertification. There is involvement in the initial drafting and development of federal legislation because of NLC, USCM, and NACO activities, committee hearings, etc. Yet it appears that broad discretion is given to federal administra- tors with regard to program implementation of legislation . This can be seen in the writing and drafting of agency regulations for implementation. The preparation of such regulations should involve the local public official or administrator in order to bridge the gulf between policy makers and practitioners. Quite often the administrative regulations seem to go much further than the intent of legislation. Urban Renewal In the case of urban renewal, real estate acquisition is supposed to be based upon a program of local determination. The criteria on rehabili- tation are extremely rigid on what a city is allowed to do . The same cri- teria apply to a large agency with large projects as we ll as to a small agency working on a single project. The large agency with the larger pro- jects need more flexibility in the planning, direction , and execution of such projects than would be the case of a small agency . Urban renewal regulations make reference to specific noncash credit items such as a 100% credit for a street serving the project, 50% for a boundary street, 25% for sewer line, etc. However, specific noncash items cannot always be apportioned in specific terms to a given urban renewal �-5- project . As an al t ernative, why not allow an over all total grant with credit given fo r noncash items i n a prog r am sense rathe r t han i n specifics so that the local credit items could be reflected in an overall urban renewal plan, as opposed to spe cific items on a project basis . Specific criteria and prerequisite standards are a pplied in the development of urban renewal projects . Yet similar requirements for streets, highways, and other physical facilities _may be programmed with a total disregard for city 's master plan . Economic Opportunity Program The followi ng is a discussion of areas where cit i es (particularly, mayors) have encountered local problems i n a dmin is t r a tion of the Economic Opportunity Program . Ma ny ma yors would have l iked to have ha d some say in t he initial developme nt of VI STA (Vo lunteers In Se rvic e To Ame rica ), or dome st ic peace corp s program. Apparent ly, many mayor s we r e not i nvolved in the i n i t i al devel op- ment of t his p r ogram , a nd consequent l y, fo und i t ne ces s a ry to refuse part i cipat i on in the VISTA program or were re quired t o use their influence to cancel VISTA pr ograms op erating within t h eir communities . An understanding of the extent of the role of VISTA with in the political area is a demand the mayors could assert . However, this would be in opposition t o the philosophy of VI STA in gra nt ing great flexib ility and freed om. Thu s, EOA, b earing in mind th e problems wh ich could be created for the mayor and the city council by completely unhindered volunteers, has had to demand that VISTA volunte e r s be tie d down to s pec i f i c a ssignments . This has been par ticularly true of the program in Atlanta . �-6- The question of the mayors veto of OEO projects is continuously raised. Certainly obstructionist politicians should not be able to deny necessary and reasonable prog r ams for their citizens o Yet, neither the federal gov- ernment nor any other agency should be in a position to institute programs utilizing tax resources in a political subdivision with complete disregard of the elected leaders of that subdivision . The OEO philosophy demands involv~ment of the poor at the local level by CAP agencies in planning and in conducting CAP programs o However, this philosophy of involvement does not apparently apply at the Washington level. Many programs have originated from Washington with fairly stringent guidelines in which there have been no participation by municipal officials or other interested gro ups at the local level . Many of these programs are under the guise of demonstration programs such as the Foster Grandparents Demonstration project (as conducted in Atlanta) and many of them are actually designed to be on-going projects . Recent changes in the requ irements of the Small Business Development Center program under Ti tle IV of the Economic Opportunity Act is an indication of lack of consideration on the part of local officials in making sweeping changes in the intent and content of a prog r am . The or iginal Title IV p r ovis i on was des i gned to help increase employment by p roviding low inter est loans to small businessmen who would gua r an t ee creation of additional jobs wh i ch co ul d be filled by the poor as well as the creation of new entrepreneurs under low i ncome groups o The initial guidelines have now been so changed that the program simply i s be ing conducted to see how many loans can be g r an ted t o persons who are no t now in business and who are in poverty o The SBA makes it clea r that it is inter ested in making a s many loans as poss i ble to Negroes t o start small businesses . �-7- Recreat i on Rec ent Congre ss e s of t h e Uni ted States, recogn i z i ng the growing demand by citizens for recreation and parks, have passed considerable legislation affecting these movements . The recreation profess i on, although pleased to see the vast interest in recreation and parks on the Federal level of government, does hold some reservations about it . Specifically, the Federal governm~nt has classified all recreation and parks under one heading -- "Outdoor Recreation" . tributes to a narrow view of recreation . This fact alone con- Recreation, as it is conducted in Georgia cities, includes every facet of leisure pursuits for the development of the citizenry . The area of "Outdoor" recreation is only one com- ponent of the field of recreation . It is the feeling of many persons in the field that future wording in Federal legislation should state plainly -- "Recreation" in its broadest sense and not "Outdoor Recreation" . Current Federal laws , such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund Bi ll, th e Housing and Ur ba n Dev e lopment Act of 1965, t he Older Ame r i cans Act , the Economic Oppo r tun ity Ac t of 1965, and many o the r s hav e aff ec ted the gr owth and development of r e c rea tion i n the nation . Bas i c ally sound legislation h a s los t t he ma i n emphas i s on t he p ro gr ams t h r ough gui delines e stabl i shed by t he various Fede ral de partmen t s admini s tering t he p ro g r ams < Bas ic p r og r ams orig i n a l ly i n c l ude d in t h e leg i sla tio n have be en g iven s uch low prior ity t h a t app r oval of a n a ppl ic a t ion i s almo s t i mp oss i bl e . Rec ent Fede r al legis l ation re lating t o recrea t i on and pa r ks wi l l have a g re a t i mpact upo n the r e c r ea tion an d pa r ks moveme n t in t h e Uni t e d States . The r e a r e, however, many a r eas of t h e pr esent l egi slat i on which cou ld be i mp r oved t o b etter s erve t h e communit i e s . �-8- These are : 1. The Feder al government or t he Federal departments administer i ng the legislation has plac ed guidelines on the prog r ams which mak e them quite diffi cult fo r many communi t i e s to take advantage . (a) Practically all the curr ent programs require deta i led communitywide planni ng o Although this requirement is bas ically good, it makes many of our smaller communities inelig i ble from lack of proper finances fo r planning . Federal agencies admi n i stering the programs should be giv en leadway in approving applications from small communities who do not fully meet the guideli nes established by the Federal departme nt . (b) The community leader shi p should be permitted to bes t determine the mo r e sui table locat i on fo r a ny program or facil i ty . It should not be r est ric ted en t ire l y to poverty areas . (c) St ate governments s hould be given the authority to r enew, recomme nd, and approv e appl i cations pr i or to submiss i on t o the Fe deral government . St ate ag en cies are awa r e of th e needs of commun i t ies in t heir res pective s tate s and wi ll a c t wi th sp e e d and e f fi ciency . Cur rently many pr ograms by-pass the stat e al t og e ther . I n suc h i n- s tance s th i s rend er s the a r ea planning and dev elopme n t commi ss i ons and similar groups less effective in guid ing orderly planning a nd deve l opment . By t h e same token, s t a te agencie s c ap a b le of a ssis t - i ng communities with v arious deve lopme n ts, are seldom consul t ed. ( d) Pr e sent p rogr am app lications are by far too difficul t for t he a verage community t o comp l ete and fi le with the proper agency . Pres ent methods almost requ i re the full-time services of a person trained for this pur pose . Many of our smal ler communities cannot aff ord to employ such a person . �-9- (e) Guidelines should be set forth in common terms understandable by all communities o Presently, it is the case where some of the fed- eral employees with the a dministering department s do not agree on t he requirements o This simply causes confusion and misunderstand- ing on the part of local gov e r nments o (f) Federal employees should be qualified to interpret and supervise Federal programs in which they work o It is inconceivable that a person trained in forestry, agriculture, and hort iculture can do the total job necessary for recreation and parks o Recreation is a new profession with personnel trained in this field . Personnel possessing the b ro ad concept of recreation and parks should administer Federal programs o The Land and Water Conser v ation Fund Bill is designed to provide matching funds up to 50 % to states and their political subd ivisions for planning, acquisition and deve lopment of out door recreation areas o State pla nn i ng is essential . Each state, in order to be eligible (Georgia could receive up t o $2 million annually in th i s 25-year program) must prepare a state plan wh i c h must be approved by t he Bureau of Outdoor Recreation " As of May 1 , 1966, comprehensive statewide out doo r re reation plans have been a pp r ov ed exc ept Georg i a, Iowa, North Caro lina, Ut ah , and Wyoming . Proje c ts will no t be approv ed unt i l the s t a t e plan i s app r oved . This law stat es spec if ically that matching funds "may be made available to political subdivi s i ons" o Upon maki ng furth er inquiries as to how the communities a c tually fit int o the plan and how t hey will parti cipa t e in the prog r am , no clear cut answers were a vailable o Actually, local communities do no t now know t o �-10- what ex tent they will be i ncluded in the program . The contention of ma ny i s t hat a state plan canno t be a comprehensive one unless it i nclude s the needs and capabil i t i es of communitie s . After all, the masses of the people are loc ated largely in the urban areas . Al- though the Georgia plan now being developed might include the communities, this does not seem to be the case since inquiries point to the fact that no community has been requested to participate in the planning . It seems, in this light, plans cannot be made for communities without the communities' assistanc e . This piec e of legislat i on is vital to all c i ties and consequently, they should hav e a v o ice i n the make-up of the program in Georgia . In other s t a t es a tt emp t s hav e been made to remove the L&WFB from politics and t o i nsure that project s are considered on the basis of need . In one st_a te, fo r ex ample, ov e r 100 car efully selected leaders were b r ought t og ethe r i n t he form i ng of a c ouncil fo r th e purpose of es tabl i shi ng guidelines fo r t h e prog r am . It wa s t heir r esponsib i l i ty to determ i ne a r eal basi c point -- what percent a ge of the funds would be al l o ca t ed t o l ocal communit i e s, s tate parks, and f ed eral agenci e s wi t hin the s tate . A l ay group , rep resent i ng v a r i ou s i n teres ts, should b e a pp oin ted f o r t he pur pos e of maki ng t h ese s ame deci s i on s i n Ge or g i a . Additionally, t h i s same gr oup or a similar one should b e app oint ed and authorized to rev iew e a ch p iece of fed era l leg islation p ri or t o its i mp l eme n tation i n Ge or g i a, and make certa in procedural recommenda tions . Without positive action t he r e is a po s sib i l ity that Land a nd Water funds will comp letely elude the c ities of Georgia . immediate positive s teps . This situation r e quires �-11- Conclusion The broad shopp i ng market of federal programs portrays a gross amount of money for use locally as the federal government sees fit, and according to its program emphasis o In many cases, the emphas i s on specific prog r ams and projects is determi ned nationally not locally o However, it is believed that many of our cities , large and small, do have the capability of making such determinations and should be allowed the administrative flexibility to determine the level of emphasis that should be placed on specific local programs o If such were the case, a city could submit a comprehensive state- ment of its needs in terms of pri ority and emphasis on local programs and be given a grant with the nec essary flexibility for implementation in accordance to priorities as determi ned locally by that city o Urban Policy Council In conclusion it is fe l t t ha t this state could take a very pos i tive step toward harmonious coord i nation of federal grant-in-aid p r ograms and urban development by e s tab lish ing a s t eering committee or council on urban policy char ged with t he res ponsibility of dev eloping a statement of pol icy for coord i nat i on, dev elopment and administration prog r ams deal ing wit h the total grow t h and development of our communities o be composed of the f ollowing : Such a commi t tee should r e p resentatives of municipal gov ernment t hrough t he Georg i a Municipal Association; r ep r esentatives of county government t h r ough the As so c iation of County Commissioners of Geor gia, rep r e sentatives of stat e gov ernment t h r ough the Executive Off ic e; and r ep r es ent atives of Georgia ' s Congressional Delegation o This commi ttee could hav e t he g iven responsibility for the performance of the fol lowing basic functions: �-12- 1. To analyz e the t r ends , condi tions , needs, and problems affecting local government in Geo r gia ' s rapidly urbaniz i ng s t ate; 2. To def i ne the compl i mentary and cooperative roles of local, state, and federal agenc ies with respe c t to the development and implementation of urban programs; 3. To re commend appropriate policies that would govern the working relationsh i ps bet ween local, state and federal agenc ies in the development, implementation, and coordination of programs to cope with urban growth . � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document DRAFT say ofS EIR MEMORANDUM URBAN PO sbol.G-Y, COUNCIL MEMORANDUM URBAN POLICY COUNCIL The purpose of this memorandum is to present a statement of the need for establishing a steering committee or Council on Urban Policy in this state to consider formulation of policy recommendations with regard to local government involvement in the development of federal grant-in-aid legislation as affecting urban program development in Georgia. As a basic premise it is felt that local government officials and ad- ministrators should play an active part in the initial formulation of federal grant-in-aid legislation that affects the growth, development, ad- ministration, and operation of local government in Georgia. Local govern- ment officials and administrators should also be consulted in the develop- ment of implementing administrative regulations for such legislation. Many federal grant-in-aid programs appear to be founded to a large degree upon criteria or standards of application as determined almost en- tirely at the federal level. An example is current legislation in Congress to establish community development districts, the makeup and composition of which is proposed to be approved by a cabinet officer based upon predeter- mined criteria. Intergovernmental Cooperation There is strong probability that future urban programs, of even our larger cities, will as a prerequisite to federal approval, have to be re- viewed by regional organizations or area planning and development commis-— sions. The Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1965 (S. 561) which passed the Senate and not the House would have required review by a metropolitan planning agency before the federal government would act. Regional organizations composed of public officials are now recognized by federal law. These organizations have come into being to meet the need for dealing with problems of urban development that transcend established political and jurisdictional boundaries and cut across entire regions. These organizations will play a vital role in total coordinated urban devel- opment. Only recently were these organizations recognized by the federal gov- ernment to be more than mere planning agencies. Future federal policy con- templates grants to these agencies conditioned upon mandatory not voluntary membership. Also being considered in some quarters is the evolvement of this regional voluntary association of local governments into an instrumen- tality, either operating regional type functions or serving as the control center over other regional, functional units. Thus, our traditional gen- eral purpose cities and counties of today may be defining tomorrow's re- gional general purpose network of government. It should be apparent that these developments are restructuring our intergovernmental relationships in the urban area. Workable Program Part of the problem of local inflexibility and lack of administrative coordination perhaps lies with the over involvement of federal staff per- sonnel in the development and implementation of federal grant-in-aid pro- grams. There has not been enough involvement by local administrators and decision-makers in federal aid program development and implementation. There are many examples of past legislative grant-in-aid enactments by the Congress that often hamstring local government administrative machinery because of the inflexibility of black and white implementing federal rules and regulations which apply to all units of government re- gardless of size. A good example is the workable program for community development. This program as a prerequisite to involvement in certain federal programs is lacking in flexibility, in its application, and im- poses standards laid down without regard to the fact that local ability to implement and execute programs varies between large and small cities. The requirement of a long range capital improvements budget is cer- tainly desirable as a basis for scheduling of projects. However, many local units of government do not even have annual operating budgets. Con- sequently, the reality of a blanket requirement of a long range capital improvements program without requiring operating budgets is open to ques-— tion. The arbitrary requirement that the workable program be recertified each year regardless of size of city results in local administrative falsi- fying each year. There is a real question of whether the large city should be required to recertify the workable program each year -- why not every five years or every ten years? One large city produced a model workable program and was so claimed by the federal administrator to be one of the best workable programs in the nation. The next year the workable program of that city was not recerti- fied because the federal administrator had said that it had not changed enough over the previous year as reflected by the city's progress reports. Another city was refused recertification because the administrator said the city needed four additional housing inspectors over the previous year's commitment. Yet no standards or justification were stated as to why these requirements were imposed. In large cities, specific programs do not necessarily reflect dramatic changes on a yearly basis. Thus, recertification of the workable program for many cities is certainly jeopardized unless that city can "pad" its progress reports in order to convince the federal administrator of progress (not given units of progress but progress) and thus secure recertification. There is involvement in the initial drafting and development of federal legislation because of NLC, USCM, and NACO activities, committee hearings, etc. Yet it appears that broad discretion is given to federal administra- tors with regard to program implementation of legislation. This can be seen in the writing and drafting of agency regulations for implementation. The preparation of such regulations should involve the local public official or administrator in order to bridge the gulf between policy makers and practi- tioners. Quite often the administrative regulations seem to go much further than the intent of legislation. Urban Renewal In the case of urban renewal, real estate acquisition is supposed to be based upon a program of local determination. The criteria on rehabili- tation are extremely rigid on what a city is allowed to do. The same cri- teria apply to a large agency with large projects as well as to a small agency working on a single project. The large agency with the larger pro- jects need more flexibility in the planning, direction, and execution of such projects than would be the case of a small agency. Urban renewal regulations make reference to specific noncash credit items such as a 100% credit for a street serving the project, 50% for a boundary street, 25% for sewer line, etc. However, specific noncash items cannot always be apportioned in specific terms to a given urban renewal project. As an alternative, why not allow an overall total grant with credit given for noncash items in a program sense rather than in specifics so that the local credit items could be reflected in an overali urban renewal plan, as opposed to specific items on a project basis. Specific criteria and prerequisite standards are applied in the devel- opment of urban renewal projects. Yet similar requirements for streets, highways, and other physical facilities may be programmed with a total dis- regard for city's master plan. Economic Opportunity Program The following is a discussion of areas where cities (particularly, mayors) have encountered local problems in administration of the Economic Opportunity Program. Many mayors would have liked to have had some say in the initial devel- opment of VISTA (Volunteers In Service To America), or domestic peace corps program. Apparently, many mayors were not involved in the initial develop- ment of this program, and consequently, found it necessary to refuse parti- cipation in the VISTA program or were required to use their influence to cancel VISTA programs operating within their communities. An understanding of the extent of the role of VISTA within the politi- cal area is a demand the mayors could assert. However, this would be in opposition to the philosophy of VISTA in granting great flexibility and freedom. Thus, EOA, bearing in mind the problems which could be created for the mayor and the city council by completely unhindered volunteers, has had to demand that VISTA volunteers be tied down to specific assignments. This has been particularly true of the program in Atlanta. The question of the mayors veto of OEO projects is continuously raised. Certainly obstructionist politicians should not be able to deny necessary and reasonable programs for their citizens, Yet, neither the federal gov- ernment nor any other agency should be in a position to institute programs utilizing tax resources in a political subdivision with complete disregard of the elected leaders of that subdivision. The OEO philosophy demands involvement of the poor at the local level by CAP agencies in planning and in conducting CAP programs. However, this philosophy of involvement does not apparently apply at the Washington level. Many programs have originated from Washington with fairly stringent guidelines in which there have been no participation by municipal officials or other interested groups at the local level. Many of these programs are under the guise of demonstration programs such as the Foster Grandparents Demonstration project (as conducted in Atlanta) and many of them are actu- ally designed to be on-going projects. Recent changes in the requirements of the Small Business Development Center program under Title IV of the Economic Opportunity Act is an indi- cation of lack of consideration on the part of local officials in making sweeping changes in the intent and content of a program. The original Title IV provision was designed to help increase employment by providing low interest loans to small businessmen who would guarantee creation of additional jobs which could be filled by the poor as well as the creation of new entrepreneurs under low income groups. The initial guidelines have now been so changed that the program simply is being conducted to see how many loans can be granted to persons who are not now in business and who are in poverty. The SBA makes it clear that it is interested in making as many loans as possible to Negroes to start small businesses. Recreation Recent Congresses of the United States, recognizing the growing demand by citizens for recreation and parks, have passed considerable legislation affecting these movements. The recreation profession, although pleased to see the vast interest in recreation and parks on the Federal level of gov- ernment, does hold some reservations about it. Specifically, the Federal government has classified all recreation and parks under one heading -- "Outdoor Recreation". This fact alone con- tributes to a narrow view of recreation. Recreation, as it is conducted in Georgia cities, includes every facet of leisure pursuits for the devel- opment of the citizenry. The area of "Outdoor" recreation is only one com- ponent of the field of recreation. It is the feeling of many persons in the field that future wording in Federal legislation should state plainly - "Recreation" in its broadest sense and not "Outdoor Recreation". Current Federal laws, such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund Bill, the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965, the Older Americans Act, the Economic Opportunity Act of 1965, and many others have affected the growth and development of recreation in the nation. Basically sound legislation has lost the main emphasis on the programs through guidelines established by the various Federal departments administering the programs. Basic programs originally included in the legislation have been given such low priority that approval of an application is almost impossible. Recent Federal legislation relating to recreation and parks will have a great impact upon the recreation and parks movement in the United States. There are, however, many areas of the present legislation which could be improved to better serve the communities, ae These are: Ll. The Federal government or the Federal departments administering the legislation has placed guidelines on the programs which make them quite difficult for many communities to take advantage. (a) (b) (c) (d) Practically all the current programs require detailed community-— wide planning. Although this requirement is basically good, it makes many of our smaller communities ineligible from lack of proper finances for planning. Federal agencies administering the programs should be given leadway in approving applications from small communities who do not fully meet the guidelines established by the Federal department. The community leadership should be permitted to best determine the more suitable location for any program or facility. It should not be restricted entirely to poverty areas. State governments should be given the authority to renew, recommend, and approve applications prior to submission to the Federal govern- ment. State agencies are aware of the needs of communities in their respective states and will act with speed and efficiency, Currently many programs by-pass the state altogether. In such in- stances this renders the area planning and development commissions and similar groups less effective in guiding orderly planning and development. By the same token, state agencies capable of assist- ing communities with various developments, are seldom consulted. Present program applications are by far too difficult for the aver- age community to complete and file with the proper agency. Present methods almost require the full-time services of a person trained for this purpose. Many of our smaller communities cannot afford to employ such a person.  (e) Guidelines should be set forth in common terms understandable by all communities, Presently, it is the case where some of the fed- eral employees with the administering departments do not agree on the requirements. This simply causes confusion and misunderstand- ing on the part of local governments. (f£) Federal employees should be qualified to interpret and supervise Federal programs in which they work. It is inconceivable that a person trained in forestry, agriculture, and horticulture can do the total job necessary for recreation and parks. Recreation is a new profession with personnel trained in this field. Personnel possessing the broad concept of recreation and parks should admin- ister Federal programs. The Land and Water Conservation Fund Bill is designed to provide match- ing funds up to 504 to states and their political subdivisions for planning, acquisition and development of outdoor recreation areas. State planning is essential. Each state, in order to be eligible (Georgia could receive up to $2 million annually in this 25-year program) must prepare a state plan which must be approved by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. As of May 1, 1966, comprehensive statewide outdoor recreation plans have been approved except Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming. Projects will not be approved until the state plan is approved. This law states specifically that matching funds "may be made avail- able to political subdivisions". Upon making further inquiries as to how the communities actually fit into the plan and how they will participate in the program, no clear cut answers were available. Actually, local communities do not now know to -10- what extent they will be included in the program. The contention of many is that a state plan cannot be a comprehensive one unless it includes the needs and capabilities of communities. After all, the masses of the people are located largely in the urban areas. Al- though the Georgia plan now being developed might include the communities, this does not seem to be the case since inquiries point to the fact that no community has been requested to participate in the planning. It seems, ' in this light, plans cannot be made for communities without the communities assistance. This piece of legislation is vital to all cities and consequently, they should have a voice in the make-up of the program in Georgia, In other states attempts have been made to remove the L&WFB from poli- tics and to insure that projects are considered on the basis of need. In one state, for example, over 100 carefully selected leaders were brought together in the forming of a council for the purpose of establishing guide- lines for the program. It was their responsibility to determine a real basic point -- what percentage of the funds would be allocated to local communities, state parks, and federal agencies within the state. A lay group, representing various interests, should be appointed for the purpose of making these same decisions in Georgia. Additionally, this same group or a similar one should be appointed and authorized to review each piece of federal legislation prior to its implementation in Georgia, and make certain procedural recommendations. Without positive action there is a possibility that Land and Water funds will completely elude the cities of Georgia. This situation requires immediate positive steps. -ll- Conclusion The broad shopping market of federal programs portrays a gross amount of money for use locally as the federal government sees fit, and according to its program emphasis. In many cases, the emphasis on specific programs and projects is determined nationally not locally, However, it is believed that many of our cities, large and small, do have the capability of making such determinations and should be allowed the administrative flexibility to determine the level of emphasis that should be placed on specific local programs. If such were the case, a city could submit a comprehensive state- ment of its needs in terms of priority and emphasis on local programs and be given a grant with the necessary flexibility for implementation in accord- ance to priorities as determined locally by that city. Urban Policy Council In conclusion it is felt that this state could take a very positive step toward harmonious coordination of federal grant-in-aid programs and urban development by establishing a steering committee or council on urban policy charged with the responsibility of developing a statement of policy for coordination, development and administration programs dealing with the total growth and development of our communities. Such a committee should be composed of the following: representatives of municipal government through the Georgia Municipal Association; representatives of county gov- ernment through the Association of County Commissioners of Georgia, repre- sentatives of state government through the Executive Office; and represent- atives of Georgia's Congressional Delegation. This committee could have the given responsibility for the performance of the following basic functions: =j2= To analyze the trends, conditions, needs, and problems affecting local government in Georgia's rapidly urbanizing state; To define the complimentary and cooperative roles of local, state, and federal agencies with respect to the development and implemen- tation of urban programs; To recommend appropriate policies that would govern the working relationships between local, state and federal agencies in the development, implementation, and coordination of programs to cope with urban growth.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Document 6 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/b9321ce672919b6a46606eecaaf148aa.pdf 80626ede21f046bd087c586dcc78fdf5 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. J. CITY C o:vtM ISSI ONER C OLU?lo·£DU S MAY O R MA L COLM R. S TEVE KNIG H T, MACLEA N , President Fi rst V ice President SAVANNAH MAYO R J mrn L. CROMARTm , GAINESVIL L E W. 406 FULTON FEDER A L BUIL D ING• / AT L AN TA. GEO R GIA 30303 / Second Vice President E xecut ive D irector E LM ER G EORGE , TELEPHONE 2 5 5 -0 4 24 May 17, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS C I TY CO MM I SS I ONER JOH N E . YARBROUGH I MM EDI A T E PAST PRES I DE N T RO M E , GA . MAY O R R ANDO LPH ME DLOCK S TONE MO U NTA I N , G A . MAYOR W . B . W I THERS MOULTRIE , GA . CITY COMM IS S IO NER C AR L E . PRUEl"r GR I FF I N , GA . MAYOR B . F. MERR IT T , J R . MA C ON , GA . FIRST DISTRICT Mr. Dan Sweat Coordinator of Governmental Liaison City Hall Atlanta, Georgia PR E S I D EN T M AYOR J ACK A . L ERO Y A ILE Y Dear Dan : DIRE CTOR MAYO R J . W . SNELL WR I GHT S V I LL E SECOND DISTRICT PRES I DENT MAYOR W . P . H ENRY PELH A M DI R EC TOR M AYOR M A C K E . W I LLIS BA I N BR I DGE THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDE N T R I CH A RD 8 . RAY PERR Y D I REC T OR MA Y OR 0 . E . WHI TE PI N E MOUNTAIN FOURTH Enclosed are copies of a draft memorandum on the urban pol:icy council. I have included in the memorandum the statements and thoughts that you had on the Economic Opportunity Program . I would appreciate your review of the memorandum and any suggestions that you may have for its improvement . Any other ideas or changes that you feel should be covered in a memorandum of this nature would be most welcome . DISTRICT PRE SI D EN T COUN C IL M A N L I N TO N BROOM E DORAVILLE DIRECTO R I look forward to hearing from you . Please do not hesitate to call on us whenever we can be of service or assistance. COUNCIL M AN CLYDE J . HIC KS CONYERS FIFTH Sincerely yours , DISTRICT P RE S I DENT M AYO R A U B REY E . GREENWAY RO SWE LL DI RE C TO R A L DERMAN E . GREGORY GR I GGS ATLAN TA SIXTH Jr. D I STRICT PR E SIDE N T MAYOR J . GARDNER NEWMAN L AGRA N GE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERBERT H . JONES JVBJr/ rs McDO N O UGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRES I DENT enclosures MA Y OR J. C . WOODS TRI O N D I RECTOR MAYOR RA L PH R . CLAR K, JR . R I NGGOLD EI GH TH D I S TRICT PRES I DENT M A YOR ELTON D . BROOKS DOU G L A S D I RE C TO R MAYOR J AME S T . WI NDSOR , JR . MC RAE NINTH D I S T R ICT PRESID ENT MA Y OR DU A R D B . WH I TLOW CARNE S VI L LE DIRECTOR MA Y OR M R S . J ESSIE L . GA R N E R COUNCILMAN G EOR G E H . B U LLO CK DAH LO NE GA T E NTH AT H ENS DI S TRICT PRESIDENT M AYOR JULIU S F. B I S H OP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORG E A. S ANCK E N. J R . AUGUSTA DI R ECTO R S STATE M A YOR WI L L IAM J ACK H AM ILTON DECATU R AL DERMAN J . J . S HOOS SA VANNA H A LDERMAN CECIL T U R NER AT L AN T A AT LARGE MAYOR JOHN C . E DENF IEL D T HOMAST ON M AYOR L EE E . CARTER HARTWEL L CI T Y MANA G ER JOHN H. MAR K LAND PRES I DE NT . C IT Y M ANAGER S' SECTION DECAT UR AOMIN A SSIS T . R . TR AVIS HI G GINBOTHAM PRES I D E NT , C I TY CLERK S ' S EC TION ALBANY C I TY ATTORNEY WIL L IAM E SM I TH PRESIDENT. CIT Y A T T OR NEY S ' S E C TION AMER I CUS � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Gre OUERGrLUAA IV EGUS IN PICO CE AGIE! KS SOCIAL OI 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING: / ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303 May 17, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS City COMMISSIONER JOHN E. YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROME, GA. MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK STONE MOUNTAIN, GA. Mayor W. B. WITHERS MOULTRIE, GA. City COMMISSIONER CARL E. PRUETT GRIFFIN, GA. Mayor B. F. MERRITT, JR. MACON, GA. FIRST DISTRICT PRESIDENT MaAYorR Jack A. LEROY AILEY DIRECTOR Mayor J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE SECOND DISTRICT PRESIDENT MaYoR W. P. HENRY PELHAM DIRECTOR Mayor Mack E. WILLIS BAINBRIDGE THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDENT RICHARD B. RAY PERRY DIRECTOR Mayor QO. E. WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNCILMAN LINTON BROOME DORAVILLE DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN CLYDE J. Hicks CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR AUBREY E. GREENWAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E. GREGORY GRIGGS ATLANTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR J. GARDNER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERBERT H. JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J. C. Woops TRION DIRECTOR MAYOR RALPH R. CLARK, JR. RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR ELTON D. BROOKS DOUGLAS DIRECTOR MAYOR JAMES T. WINDSOR, JR. MCRAE NINTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR DUARD B. WHITLOW CARNESVILLE DIRECTOR Mayor Mrs. JESSIE L. GARNER DAHLONEGA TENTH DISTRICT PRES|DENT Mayor JULIUS F. BISHOP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A. SANCKEN, JR. AUGUSTA Mr. Dan Sweat Coordinator of Governmental Liaison City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Dan: Crry Commissioner J. Steve Kyicut, President COLUMBUS Mayor Matcotm R. Macuean, First Vice President SAVANNAH Mayor Joun L. Cnomantie, Second Vice President GAINESVILLE W. Eimer Geonce, Executive Director / TELEPHONE 255-0424 Enclosed are copies of a draft memorandum on the urban policy council. I have included in the memorandum the statements and thoughts that you had on the Economic Opportunity Program. I would ap- preciate your review of the memorandum and any suggestions that you may have for its improvement. Any other ideas or changes that you feel should be covered in a memorandum of this nature would be most welcome. I look forward to hearing from you. Please do not hesitate to call on us whenever we can be of service or assistance. JVBJr/rs enclosures DIRECTORS STATE AT LARGE COUNCILMAN GEORGE H. BULLOCK ATHENS MAYOR WILLIAM JACK HAMILTON DECATUR MAYOR JOHN C, EDENFIELD THOMASTON ee. i ———— Sincerely yours, ALDERMAN J. J. SHOOB SAVANNAH ALDERMAN CECIL TURNER ATLANTA MAYOR LEE E. CARTER HARTWELL V. Burgess, Jr. ciate Director City MANAGER JOHN H. MARKLAND PRESIDENT, CITY MANAGERS’ SECTION DECATUR ADMIN. Assist, R. TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM: PRESIDENT, CITY CLERKS’ SECTION ALBANY CITY ATTORNEY WILLIAM E. SMITH PRESIDENT, CITY ATTORNEYS SECTION AMERICUS  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Document 5 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/d11f5a99838a10974fe04a73def7f07a.pdf 6cac58f94463c0a4dcadf2063f55d820 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ce~®~®rr£. ~'(QJ~Il©Il~£& ~~©©Il£.~Il©~ CITY CO MM IS SIONER J . STE VE KNIGHT, C OLUMBUS MAYOR MALCOLM SAVANNAH MACLEAN, MAY OR J OHN L. CROMARTIE, GAINESVll.LE W. 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING• / R. ATLANTA . GEORGIA 30303 ELMER GEORGE, President First Vice President Second Vice President Executive Director / TELEPHONE 255-0424 May 31, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS CITY COMMISSIONER JOHN E . YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROM E, GA . MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK S TO NE MO U NTA IN , GA . MAYOR W . B . WITHERS MO ULTRIE , GA . CITY COMMISSIONER C ARL E . PRUEl"r GRIFFIN, GA . MAYOR B . F. MERRITT, JR. MACON, GA . FIRST Mr . Dan Sweat Federal Programs Coordinator City Hall Atlanta, Georgia DISTRICT PRE SIDENT MA YOR JACK A . L E RO Y AILE Y DIRE CTOR MAYOR J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE SECOND DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR W. P . HENRY PELHAM DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN J. C , MINTER CAIRO THIRD DISTRICT Dear Dan : I appointed a committee during the l ast board meeting in At lanta for the purpose of evaluating the role of the Georgia Munic ipal Association as relates to the part the Association should pl ay in relation to the metropolitan local councils of government and to area planning and development commissions . PRESIDENT RICHARD B . RAY PERRY DIRECTOR MAYOR 0 . E . WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNC IL MAN LINTON BROOME DORA VI LLE DI RECTOR C OUNCILMAN CLYDE J . HICKS CON YE RS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR AUBREY E. GREEN WAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E . GREGORY GRIGGS ATLA NTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYO R J . GARONER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR H ERBERT H . JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR J . C . WOODS TRION DIRECTOR MAYOR R ALP H R . CLARK, JR . RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT Under Section 701- G of the 1965 Housing Act , certain grants may be made to metropolitan loca l councils of government for studies and data collection, etc . It has occurred to the GMA. staff that a relationship might be developed between the local council s and the Association which would have the eff ect of (1) providing the already existing resources of the Association to local councils, thereby avoiding unnecessary duplication and competition of GMA. programs which have been over 33 years in the making and (2) providing a strong liaison between the larger urban a reas in the evaluation of programs which are directed, or should be directed, toward our large cities and/ or their respective metropolitan areas . Since counties are involved in the metropolitan loc al councils of government , it might be of benefit to work with the Assoc iation of County Commissioners in developing joint policy in support of our l arge urban areas, recognizing at the same time , that local decision-making mus t not be interfered with, nor any joint programs pursued, except with the consent of l ocal officials. PRESIDENT MAYOR ELTON D . BROO K S DOUGLAS D I REC T OR MA YO R J AMES T . WINDSOR , JR . MCRAE NINTH Another area for possible considerati on by the committ ee is the problems of the local community out side the metropolitan areas . DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR OUARD 8 CARNESV ILLE . WHITLOW DIRECTOR MAYOR MRS . JESSIE L . GARNER DAHLONEGA TENTH COUNCILMAN GEORGE H . BULLO CK ATH E NS ALDERMAN J . J . S H OOS S A VAN NA H MAYOR WILLIAM JAC K H AM ILTON DE C ATUR ALDERMAN C EC IL T UR NER ATLA N TA MAYOR JOHN C . EDENFIELD THOMASTON MAYOR LE E E . CAR T E R HARTWE LL DI STR ICT PRES I DEN T MAYOR JULIUS F . BISHOP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A . SANC K EN , JR . AUGUSTA DIR ECTORS STATE AT L A RGE CITY MANAG E R JOH N H . MAR K LAND P RE S IDE N T , C I T Y MA NA G E RS ' SE C TION D E C AT U R A D MI N . AS SI ST . R . TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PR E S IDEN T . CI T Y C L E R KS· SEC TION ALB A NY CI T Y ATT OR N E Y W I LLI AM E . S MI TH PRESIDENT , C IT Y ATTOR N EYS ' S EC TION A M E RI C US �Mr. Dan Sweat - 2- May 3l, l 966 There are some problems developing in relation to programs of area planning and development commissions whi ch serve communities outside metropolitan areas. There are federal programs being developed for municipalities under 5,500 population, administered by the Farmers Home Administration and other agencies of the Federal Department of Agriculture. These deserve serious review. For the citie s of over 5,500 population outside standard metropolitan statistical areas, there are other problems, or opportunities . In addition, there are other problems in relation to new and/ or changing federal grant and loan programs which need t o be studied. It has t aken the Georgia Municipal Associ ation 33 years to devel op a coordinated program to assist our cities and towns at the political l evel, as well as at the servic e level. We need to evaluate the role of the Association with the new metropolitan local councils of government, the area commissions and our total membership. The committee, as appointed, is as follows: Mayor John Cromartie, Gainesville, Chairman Mayor Howard Atherton, Marietta, Vice- Chairman Mayo r J ack LeRoy, Ailey J ames B. Blackburn, City Attorney Savannah Dan Sweat , Federal Programs Coordinator, Atlanta Pl ease r eturn the attached card, advising of your acceptance . Sincerely, J. Steve Knight President JSK/ r s cc: Malcolm Maclean enclosure � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document GreiOlvuRGHUAR IMOOIS UCI PANIC, RKSSOCILATIUORY Crry Comaiussionen J. Sreve Kwicnt, President COLUMBUS Mayor Marcotm R. MAciean, First Vice President SAVANNAH Mayon Jonn L, Cromantie, Second Vice President GAINESVILLE W. Extmen Georce, Executive Director 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING: / ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / TELEPHONE 255-0424 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS Cit¥Y COMMISSIONER JOHN E, YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROME, GA. MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK STONE MOUNTAIN, GA. MAYOR W. B. WITHERS MOULTRIE, GA. CiTY COMMISSIONER CARL E. PRUETT GRIFFIN, GA. MAYOR B, F. MERRITT, JR. MACON, GA. FIRST DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR Jack A. LEROY AILEY DIRECTOR Mayor J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE SECOND DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor W. PF. HENRY PELHAM DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN J. C, MINTER CAIRO THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDENT RICHARD B. RAY PERRY DIRECTOR MAYOR O. E. WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNCILMAN LINTON BROOME DORAVILLE DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN CLYDE J. Hicks CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR AUBREY E. GREENWAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E. GREGORY GRIGGS ATLANTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J. GARONER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERSERT H. JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J.C. Woops TRION DIRECTOR MAYOR RALPH R, CLARK, JR. RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR ELTON D. BROOKS DOUGLAS DIRECTOR MAYOR JAMES T. WINDSOR, JR. MCRAE NINTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MayorR DUARD B. WHITLOW CARNESVILLE DIRECTOR MAYOR Mrs. JeEssi— L. GARNER DAHLONEGA TENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR JULiUS F, BIsHOP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A. SANCKEN, JR, AUGUSTA May 31, 1966 Mr. Dan Sweat Federal Programs Coordinator City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Dan: I appointed a committee during the last board meeting in Atlanta for the purpose of evaluating the role of the Georgia Municipal Association as relates to the part the Association should play in relation to the metropolitan local councils of government and to area planning and development commissions. Under Section 701-G of the 1965 Housing Act, certain grants may be made to metropolitan local councils of government for studies and data collection, etc. It has occurred to the GMA staff that a relationship might be developed between the local councils and the Association which would have the effect of (1) providing the already existing resources of the Associa~ tion to local councils, thereby avoiding unnecessary duplication and competition of GMA programs which have been over 33 years in the making and (2) providing a strong liaison between the larger urban areas in the evaluation of programs which are directed, or should be directed, toward our large cities and/or their respective metropolitan areas. Since counties are involved in the metropolitan local councils of government, it might be of benefit to work with the Assoc- iation of County Commissioners in developing joint policy in support of our large urban areas, recognizing at the same time, that local decision-making must not be interfered with, nor any joint programs pursued, except with the consent of local officials. Another area for possible consideration by the committee is the problems of the local community outside the metropolitan areas. ALDERMAN J. J: SHOOB en GEORGE H. BULLOCK CITY MANAGER JOHN H. MARKLAND: ATHEN SAVANNAH BRE IBENT: cITY MANAGERS’ SECTION SIERCTONS, ene wits WILLIAM JACK HAMILTON ALDERMAN CECIL TURNER: BEATE ‘sane Canoe ATLANTA ADMIN. Mags R. SENS Mest NBOTHAM MAYOR: Jou eo coesris MAYOR LEE E. Carter finan oY ee aatek THOMAST HARTWELL CiTyY ATTORNEY WILLIAM E. resiorar iT, Cl Nee | = a i Mr. Dan Sweat is May 31, 1966 There are some problems developing in relation to programs of area planning and development commissions which serve com— Munities outside metropolitan areas. There are federal programs being developed for municipalities under 5,500 population, administered by the Farmers Home Administration and other agencies of the Federal Department of Agriculture. These deserve serious review. For the cities of over 5,500 population outside standard metropolitan statistical areas, there are other problems, or opportunities. In addition, there are other problems in relation to new and/or changing federal grant and loan programs which need to be studied. It has taken the Georgia Municipal Association 33 years to develop a coordinated program to assist our cities and towns at the political level, as well as at the service level. We need to evaluate the role of the Association with the new metropolitan local councils of government, the area commissions and our total membership. The committee, as appointed, is as follows: Mayor John Cromartie, Gainesville, Chairman Mayor Howard Atherton, Marietta, Vice-Chairman Mayor Jack LeRoy, Ailey James B. Blackburn, City Attorney Savannah Dan Sweat, Federal Programs Coordinator, Atlanta Please return the attached card, advising of your acceptance. Sincerely, A lar J. Steve Knight President JSK/rs ec: Malcolm Maclean enclosure  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Document 4 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ff47ed72698b3b4606320c2178abe4e3.pdf cc613026e58573f6a6f70bed7c2f221e Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. ~ /V&k ~ ·~:c:. ,~~2~ @}~@~®~ ~'CQJ~IT©IT~£& COLUMBUS M A YOR MA LCOL M // R. MAC L EA N, ,u .A A First Vi ce President ~-L// SAVANNAH MAYOR J o H N L. C ROMARTIE, GA IN ESVILLE ~ ~ © © ~~ IT©~ VV . EL~·t E R GEORGE, 4 06 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING• / ATL A NTA . GEORGIA 30303 / Second V ice President Executive Director TELEPHONE 255-0424 June 3, 1966 ACT I V E PAST PR E SID E NT S C I T Y COMM I SS I ONER J O H N E . YA RB R OUGH I MMED I ATE P AST P R ES I D E N T ROME , GA . MA Y OR R ANDO L P H M EDL OCK S T ONE M O UNTAIN , G A . MAYOR W . 8. W ITHE R S M OULT RI E , GA . Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Associate Administrato :ti EOA, Inc. /__ 101 Marietta Street Building, Room 400 ( _ _ Atlanta, Georgia 30303 CIT Y CO MM I S SIONER C A RL E . PRU E TT GR I F FIN , GA . Dear Dan: M AY OR 8 . F. ME RRITT , JR . MAC O N , GA . FIRST DISTR I CT PRES I DENT MAYOR J AC K A . LER O Y AILEY I am calling a meeting of the GMA Services Evaluation Committee for Thursday, June 9, 1966. The meeting will begin at 12:00 Noon in Elmer George's office, and after luncheon together, we will wind up at approximately 3:00 P. M. D I R ECTOR MAYOR J . W . SNE L L WRIGHTS V I L L E S E CO ND P RES I DENT MAYOR W . PE LH AM DIST RI CT P. H EN R Y D I REC T OR M AY O R MACK E . W ILLI S B A I N B R I DGE THI RD Elmer and Jim Burgees have been working up several important items for consideration by the committee and these have been documented, to save time. D I ST RI CT PRESIDENT R ICHARD 8 . RAY PERR Y DIRE C TOR MA Y OR 0 . E . WH I T E P I NE MOUNTA I N F O URTH I do not believe there will be a more important GMA program this year than the one being undertaken by our committee and it will be appreciated if you will be pre sent. Before it is over, we may have to involve Federal agencies, the National League of Cities, our Congressional delegation, the Governor, State Legislature and county officials. DISTR IC T PRES I DEN T C O U NCILMAN LI NT O N BROOME DO RAV ILLE DI R ECTOR CO U NCILMAN C L Y DE J. H IC KS CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PR ES I DEN T MAYOR A U BRE Y E . GREENW A Y ROSWE LL D I RECT O R ALDERMAN E . GR E GOR Y GR I G GS AT LANTA SIXTH Please advise on the attached postal card if you can attend this first meeting of our committee. DISTRICT PRES I DEN T MA Y OR J . GARD N ER NE W MA N L AG RAN G E D I R E CTOR MA Y OR HE R BERT H . JONES Sinc e r e l y, Mc DONO UGH SEVENTH ~ DISTRICT PRE S I DEN T MAYO R J . C . WOODS TR I ON D I RE C T O R MA Y O R R A L P H R . C LA R K, JR . John Cromartie, Chairman GMA E valuation C ommittee R I NGGO LD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRE S I DE N T MAYOR E LT ON D . B ROO K S DOU GL A S J C:rg Enclo s u r e D I R ECTOR MA YOR JAM ES T . WI ND S OR , JR . McRA E NINTH DISTRICT PAES I OE N M A.YO R 0U A R D B. W H ITL OW C_A Rf"ESVl l,.L E D I RE C T O R MA YOR MR6 . JE SS I E L . GA R NES COUNC IL MAN GEORGE D A HLON E GA T l! N T H D I ST RI CT PRES I DE NT MA YO R JULIU S ATHENS F. B I SHOP D I RECTOR GEORGE: A . SANCKEN. J R . A U G USTA H. BULL O CK ATHENS D IR E C T OR S STATE AT LARGE M ,,,.YO R W I LLIAM JA C K DE C ATUR ALPERMAN ,J , J , S HOOS SAVANNAII H A M I LTO N MAYOR JOHN C . E DENFIELD THOMASTON AL OC RM AN CCIL. T U R N Crt ATLANTA MAYOR LEE E . CARTER HARTW E LL C ITY M A NAGER -'OHN H , MA R K l AND PRFSIDE'NT, CITY MA.NAGFRS ' SECTION DECA TU R ADMIN ASSIST R TRAVIS HIGGIN80THAM PRE SI DENT . C I TY CLERKS ' SECTION ALBANY CITY ATTORN E Y WILLIAM E SMITH PRESIDENT , CITY ATTORN EYS' SECTION AMERIC U S � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Gam OURGrUsK I~OOIT UCI PAN, AS SBOCUIATOUOIW 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING: / ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 June 3, 1966 ACTIVE PRES City COMMISSIONER JOHN E. YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROME, GA. MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK STONE MOUNTAIN, GA. Mayor W. B. WITHERS MOULTRIE, GA. City COMMISSIONER CARL E. PRUETT GRIFFIN, GA. Mayor B. F. MERRITT, JR. MACON, GA. FIRST DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR JACK A. LEROY AILEY DIRECTOR Mayor J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE SECOND DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR W. P. HENRY PELHAM DIRECTOR MAYOR MAcK E. WILLIS BAINBRIDGE THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDENT RIcHARD B. RAY PERRY DIRECTOR Mayor O, E. WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNCILMAN LINTON BROOME DORAVILLE DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN CLYDE J. Hicks CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MaYoR AUBREY E. GREENWAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E. GREGORY GRIGGS ATLANTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J. GARDNER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERBERT H. JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J. C. Woops TRION DIRECTOR MavOR RALPH R. CLARK, JR RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR ELTON D. BrRroOoKS DOUGLAS DIRECTOR MAYOR JAMES T. WINDSOR, JR McRAE NINTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MavYor DUARD B. WHITLOW CARNESYILLE DIRECTOR MAYOR MAG. JESSIE L. GARHER BAHLONEGA TENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR JULIUS F. BISHOP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A, SANCKEN, JR AUGUSTA DIRECTORS STATE AT LARGE f EL ft, “shin ¥ Poca yin err Crry Com»ussronen J. Steve Knicnr,’ President- yy) COLUMBUS e Mayor Matcorm R. Macuean, First Vice President SAVANNAH Mayor Joun L. Cromantre, Second Vice President GAINESVILLE W. Etmen Geonce, Executive Director wey fos futon é oar, / a / TELEPHONE 255-0424 / / Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Associate Administrator EOA, Inc. 101 Marietta Street Building, Room 400( Atlanta, Georgia a0208 Dear Dan: Iam calling a meeting of the GMA Services Evaluation Committee for Thursday, June 9, 1966. The meeting will begin at 12:00 Noon in Elmer George's office, and after luncheon together, we will wind up at approximately 3:00 P. M. Elmer and Jim Burgess have been working up several important items for consideration by the committee and these have been documented, to save time. I do not believe there will be a more important GMA program this year than the one being undertaken by our committee and it will be appreciated if you will be present. Before it is over, we may have to involve Federal agencies, the National League of Cities, our Congressional delegation, the Governor, State Legislature and county officials. Please advise on the attached postal card if you can attend this first meeting of our committee. IC:rg Enclosure COUNCILMAN GEORGE H, BULLOCK ATHENS MavToR eA Jack HAMILTON DEGATU Mayor JOHN C. EDENFIELD THOMASTON Sincerely, John Cromartie, Chairman GMA Evaluation Committee ALPERMAN J, J. SHOOB SAVANNAH MAYOR LEE E, CARTER City MANAGER JOH NH, MARKLAND | T, GITY MANAGERS’ BEGTION poate ALDERMAN CEEIL TURNER ATLANTA nee Neate R, TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PRES|DENT. CITY CLERKS" 1ON ALBANY SMITH HARTWELL civ AIF ORNEH eS PRES/DENT, CI AMERICUS: INEVS! SECTION aa  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Document 3 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/ff2443751ddecb30d45c93ab03aadba0.pdf 9c9b4fc5428565a8d9b5434cc539297c Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. United States of America Vol. 112 <to grcssi n tRecord PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89 th CONGRES S 1 SECOND 11 SESSION WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 1966 F ederal aid to State and local governments will have more than quadrupledrising from $3.1 billion in 1955 to an estimated $14.6 billion in 1967. And in number, these programs have reached the 170 mark. In relative terms, this growth has been fairly modest. Witness the fact that Federal a id as a percentage of State and local revenue during this 13-year period increased by only appi·oximately 5 percent. But this gradual growth highlights indirectly the extraorTHE STATE AND LOCAL MANPO\VER CRISIS For over three and a half years the dinary effort that State and local govSubcommittee on Intergovernmental Re- ernments have made to resolve their fislations of the Committee on Government cal crisis. During this same 13-year peOperations, which I am priviJeged to riod, State and loca l expenditures will chair, has been examining the critical, h r.ve more than d oubled-rising from but largely misunderstood, topic of Fed- $34.5 billion in 1055 to approximately eral-State-local relations. On the basis $84 billion for fiscal 1967. The increase of the subcommittee's diverse legislative in the number and amount of- Federal and research undertakings, I am now aid available to State and local govconvinced that the success of the Great ernments, then, is not the most signifiSociety programs-and indeed, perhaps cant factor in the total State-local fiscal the future of American federalism- picture, but it has thrust greater burdens largely depends on whether or not we on a n already strained intergovernmenrecognize and overcome the crisis in gov- tal system. State and local employment, for exernmental m anpower, especially as it involves State and local governments. In ample, reached the 8 million mark last his May 11 address at Princeton Univer- year. This represented a half million sity, President Johnson took note of this increase over the 19'64 fi gure, a 2.2 milcrisis and called for a joint effort to sur- lion rise from the 1961 fi gme, and a 4.7 million hike from the 1946 employment mount it. But to date, we at the national level level. By way of contrast, the Federal h ave acted largely as though the crisis Government employed 2.6 million workdoes not exist. During the past five ses- ers in 1965, or 60 ,000 more than in sions of Congress we have developed the 1964. This figure-was 200,000 above that most impressive package of Federal of· 1961, but 100,000 less than in 1946 . legislation since the New Deal to attack These comp&.risons dramatically high.: poverty, ignorance, uneven economic de- light the strenuous efforts State and velopment, discrimination, and urban local governments have made in the blight and sprawl. For the most part past two decades to meet the demand we have utilized the categorical grant- for more public services. A breakdown of the 8 million Statein-aid device as the basic weapon in this many-faceted attempt to achieve a social local employees, by jurisdictional cateand economic betterment of all our peo- gories, is equally striking. State govple. But the grant-in-aid involves joint vernments now account for over oneefforts, not simply Federal efforts. It fourth of the State and local total. involves joint action, not just Federal Counties have one-eighth of all such action. It involves the utilization of employees, while municipalities engage governmental manpower at all levels, nearly one-fourth, and school districts a little less than a third. Townships not merely the F ederal. The grant-in-aid today is the most employ 3.5 percent, and other special striking symbol of cooperative federal- districts, 2 perce1,t of the total. From ism. Yet its effective use constitutes one 1961 to 1965, the States, other special of the greatest challenges to creative districts, townships, school districts, and federalism. And in the final analysis, counties--in that order-experienced our heavy reliance on the grant mech- the greatest increase in employment. Changes in · occupational categories anism has made the gover~ental manpower crisis a crisis of contemporary further highlight the impact of public demand for new or improved·State and federalism. governmental services. From April Most of us are unaware of the extent local 1957 to October 1965, the number of fullto which we have turned to the grant- time State and local highway workers in-aid in our efforts to implement the rose by 24 percent. Employment in poEisenhower program, to chart the New lice protection increased by 30 percent, Frontier, and to establish the Great Society. From 1955 through 1967, total and in public health and hospitals by 41 THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF 1966 Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to enable greater colla boration in personnel matters between and among the levels of government in order to improve t he administration of Federal grant-in-aid programs and to strengthen the public service of the States and their localities. No. 86 percent. The number of full-time public employees in education soared by 60 percent, and those in public welfare, by 62 percent. Much of this massive growth in State and local employment can be attributed to the population explosion and the demand for expanded services generated by it. The physical and social problems stemming from urbanization and suburbanization, however, have been other key factors in developing greater needs for police, fire, housing, sanitation, welfare, and other public services. In addition, one of the byproducts of our a ffluent society is the rise in popular expectations with respect to governmental services. To put it more bluntly, the American citizem-y is not willing to settle for the level and quality of services that were provided three, or even two, decades ago. THE FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY The c1isis in State and local employment, however, also bears a close relationship to expanded Federal programs and activity. Federal programs in highway construction, education, urban ren ewal, housing, water pollution control, and poverty-to mention only a fewh ave produced new and urgent personnel needs at the . State and local levels. Moreover, other new legislation in the fields of primary and secondary education, the aged, and medical assistance-if inadequately planned for-will only aggravate this manpower crisis. Much of the recent Federal aid legislation sets only general goals and provides the funds necessary to achieve them. The job of implementation falls to the States, the counties, and the cities, which then have to "staff up" to accomplish the objectives of this legislation. Further, some Federal aid programs simply make .money available to the States and municipalities for developing their own plans for use of such funds . In these instances, Federal agencies merely play the role of disbursing agent to underwrite plans and projects Initiated and developed at the State and local levels. Finally, many of these Federal efforts generate counterpart efforts at other levels of gove1nment, with many States and localities enacting legislation in program areas similar to those covered in Federal legislation. In these various ways, congressional action directly or indirectly has contributed to the extraordinary growth of public employment at the State and local levels. So, the States now employ more than 2 million workers with a monthly payroll of $850 million, and �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - local governments employ nearly 6 million workers with a monthly payroll of $2.5 billion. We have reached the point where, on a day-to-day basis, intergovernmental relations are primarily administrative rela,tions. As the recent subcommittee survey, "The Federal.System as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," pointed out, the authorizing statutes, the funds, and the legislative oversight which affect Federal-State-local relations come from legislative bodies. Policy directives, budgetary review and control, and administrative rules and regulations come from top management policymakers. Advice, assistance, and support, as well as complaints, criticism, and censure, come from officeholders, individual citizens, and interest groups at all levels. These basic forc es in our pluralistic political system shape and sustain the intricate pattern of today's intergovernmental relations. But the "wheelhorses of federalism" are administrative, professional , and t echnical personnel-the Federal middle-managem ent aid offi. cials, their fieldmen, and their functional counterparts at the State and local levels . We must focus our attention, then , on the largely unexplored topic of intergovernmental m anpower if our eff01ts to achieve a creative f ederalism are to succeed. The various growth figur es I have cited indicate that State and local governments are vigorously attempting to provide the m anpower needed to administer the new joint-action programs as well as their own . They suggest that present Federal efforts in this area are inadequate, since they are geared largely to the needs of certain grant progr ams and to certain categories of specialized personnel administering them. They indicate that the Federal Government has a greater responsibility to provide financial, technical, and other forms of assistance to the States and localities to h elp them mount a broad attack on this manpower crisis. And they indicate the critica l need for the legislation I am introducing today. Economy and efficiency compel our concern, for the wisest use of the Federal grant-in-aid dollar depends upon how well we m eet this challenge. Improved public administration makes it necessary, since the success of these various programs depends on our ability and willingness to solve this crit ical problem. Improved intergovernmental cooperation requires it, for conflict between and among administrators is one of the major sources of friction in contemporary Federal-State-local r elations. Finally, manpower needs of State and local governments in the years immediately ahead clearly dictate that the Federal Government must join with the other levels of government in helping to surmount this crisis. Present estimates indicate that total governmental employment will reach the 13 million m ark by 1975. As in the past t wo decades, nearly all of the increase will be in State and local governmental agencies. Continued population growth and the ·migration of people from rural to urban areas, and from cities to sub- 10983 SENATE urbs, will raise the requirements for public health services, education, police and fire protection, sanitation, street and highway maintenance, welfare, and other services. Consequently, State and local government employment is expected to rise by more than 38 percent between now and 1975 , whereas little change is expected in Federal employment-barring, of course, major unemployment, big wars, or other national catastrophes. There already exists a shortage of welltrained and highly qualified administrative, professional, and technical personnel at all levels of government, and forecasts indicate this gap will grow. Many well-trained and well-qualified employees in State and local governments were hired during the depression years and are now approaching retirement age. More than one-third of all municipal executives fall in this category and will retire within the next decade. · In certain specialized categories, howeve1'., the proportion is even higher. Half of the Nation's municipal health directors, for example, will be eligible for retirement within the next 10 years. And a recent survey of New York City revealed that one out of every five budgeted positions of a professional, managerial, .or technical nature-excluding education-was vacant. Many others were filled with people not fully qualified . More or less similar conditions exist in many other of the Nation's cities. By 1980, local governments will have to recruit approximately 300,000 additional administrative employees to achieve their current program obj ectives. When the long-term implications of r ecently enacted programs are considered, this m anpower gap widens. Witness these facts: That, as of 1964, it was estimated that the Nation's counseling personnel would have to be increased during the subsequent 3 years by approximately 90 percent to m eet the new requirements for public schools, public employment offices, and other governm ental a gencies; that there will be an estimated 3,000 vacancies each year for trained, recreation workers, but only about 600 persons complete preparation for this occupation annually; that there will be 200 traffic engineer vacancies occurring annually, but there are only approximately 50 n ew gradu ates in this specialized area; that there will be at least 2 vacancies for every graduate of a university course in city management; and that between 1960 and 1970, accordIng to t h e Manpower Commission's report, the overall demand for professional and technical personnel at the local level will h ave increased by 40 p ercent. These current and projected estimates of governmental manpower sho1tages have implications extendin g far beyond the individual States, communities, and programs that are affected. They indicate that we can take no great comfort in the fact that State and local employment has reached the 8 million mark. They indicate that State and local governments generally-not just a few of these jurisdictions-are having difficulty in attracting and holding professional, managerial, and technical personnel, and that these levels will experience even greater difficulties in the future. They suggest that decisionmakers at all levels of Government are not yet fully aware of the c1itical nature of this manpower gap, and that long-range planning in this area is in its infancy. They further corroborate John W. Gardner's assessment-in his book on "Excellence"that: • • • The demand for hlg-h-talent manpower is firmly rooted In the level of technological complexity which characterizes modern life, and In the complexity of modern social organization. And more important than either of these is the r ate of Innovation and change In both technological a nd social spheres. In a world that Is rocking with change we n eed more than anything else a high capacity for adjustment to changed circumstances, a en.pa.city for innovation. And finally , these estimates document the need for a national policy on intergovernmental personnel. The legislation I introduce today provides such a policy. CHA RTING A COURSE The proposed Intergovernmental Personnel Act does not purport to solve all the manpower problems faced by State and local governments. There is, of course, no panacea for the absolute shortages in the country in certain prof essional fields. The Federal Government in a variety of ways is now assisting in the professional education of many in these fields. But these measures are geared to specific Federal program n eeds and specific types of personnel. They must be supplemented to meet the particular staffing requirements of State and local public agencies. Personnel administration in the S tates and localities must be equipped to deal with the whole range of State and local job needs. Practical m ethods must be devised for r ecruitment, selection, utilization, and development within the realities of current supply and demand. At the same time, a rational plan for meeting projected n eeds must be devised and initiated. This legislation will encourage the developm ent of such m ethods and plans. The ac t deals direct ly with three major hurdles confronting State and local governments in recruiting and holding qualified employees. A fourth-low salary schedules--is not so directly considered, but it is a topic that cannot be ignored. Generally, State and local salary schedules-though better today than they were a few years ago-are still lower t han those at both the Federal Government and private industry. The Municipal Manpower Commission r eport found: S ala ries are a major source of dissatisfaction among m ore than one-third of a ll mu nicipal executives- And thatnine out of ten believe that their salaries a re not as high as comparable posi tlons I carry I in private business, a nd 60 percent believe that Federal salaries would also be higher. Not so long ago, Clarence B. Randall, the distinguished Chairman of the Panel that President Kennedy appointed to 1·eview Federal salary policy, wrote: Inadequate Federa l pay poses two problems that seriously hamper Federal agencies' operation . It's a tossup in the Federal service whether getting the best people Is more difficult than keeping the good ones. • • • �10984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE The average salary of vocational rehabllltaInadequate compensation ls one of the principal reasons for reluctance to enter Fed- tlon counsellors ranges !rom an annual mln!eral service. In fact, it frequently eliminates mum of $6,051 to a maximum of $7,712. Such groups o! potential candidates !or Federal counsellors are responsible for ln!tlating and positions. On others it Imposes severe fi- carrying out rehabilitation processors for nancial sacrifices . First there are those who p ersons who are physically and mentally have not yet reached the top of their career h andicapped. The position usually requires ladders and who are still faced with such a college degree and some experience 1n the real problems as mortgages and their ch!l- field of vocational guidance, psychology, dren's education. • • • Not so generally social work, personnel work, or industrial known a.re the problems associated with rel ations. filling second echelon positions. • • • The average salary of an administrative I do not contend th at government salaries officer In a State's Civil Defense program should be Identical with those in Industry. ra nges from a minimum of $ 6,893 to a maxiOn the contrary, I never want to see the mum of $0 ,819. An employee In this posimoney seekers go Into government. • • • tion provides administrative assistance In But the present disparity between publlc pay the personn el, budgetary, and fi scal areas to and private pay In the leadership positions is Clvll Defense offices ; the position u sually a scandal. It must be corrected or the r equires a college degree and considerable United States will not be able to fulfill the experience In the fi eld of general adminhigh destiny to which It has bee n called In istration, office m anagement, or a combinathis difficult modern world. tion of both . While Mr. Randall was primarily conIn light of these and other findings , I cerned with Federal pay scales-and it am convinced that the President and the should be noted that his panel's recom- Advisory Commission on Intergovernmendations were ins"trumental in enact- mental Relations should join in launchment of the Federal Salary Refo1m Acts ing a national study of State and local of 1962 and 1964-his r emarks have no salary reform. The issue is that critical. less relevance to the States and their lo- Constitutional barriers and the dictates calities. The report of the Municipal of interlevel comity bar direct consideraManpower Commission and the survey tion of this question in the proposed legof Federal aid officials conducted by the islation. But certain of its provisions Intergovernmental Rela tions Subcom- b ea r indirectly on such reform-includmittee clearly indicate that low pay and ing those sections which seek respectively the resulting high personnel turnover to streng then the merit system , upgrade have served to put m any State a nd loca l classification and salary schedules, and governments at a competitive disadvan- improve training programs in these tage. And the lates t figures-July 1, jurisdictions . 1965-for specific State and loca l profes ! I) THE MERIT SYSTEM IN GRANT-IN-AID sional and technica l positions, indicate PROGRAMS that, despite some recent improvements, A basic problem in the intergovernsalary schedules are still a critica l problem. A few case studies will illustrate m ental p er sonnel field concerns the m erit principle, and particularly as it my point: The average a nnual sala ry of a State hea r- applies to Fede ral g rant-in-aid proings r efer ee ranges from $7,750 minimum t o g rams. The proposed Intergove rnmen$9,737 ma ximum. Such referee s are respon- t a l Personnel Act deals directly with sible for preparing, conducting, and deciding this controversial issue. My experie nce quasi-judicial h earings Involving questions ::i s a State legisla tor, as Governor of the of statutory compliance, claims, a nd viola State of M a ine. a nd as a U.S. Senator tions of regulations in Issu es between St ate convinces me of the validity of this prindepartments and other parties; they u sually ciple. I s trongly beli eve that an o pen must have an A.B. and a law degree. The average annual sala ry of a n unemploy- system of public empl oym ent, operating ment claims deputy ranges from a mini m um under public rul es and based , among or $5,237 to a maximum of $6 ,604 . This other factors, on competitive exa minatechnical position Involves non-moneta ry tions , equa l pay for equal work, tenure determinations on unemployment Insura nce contingent on successful perfor mance, claims, Includin g the adj udication of ques- and promotion on evalua ted capacity tionable or contested claims; successful ap- a nd se rvice , provides one of th e s urest pllcants must possess considerable prior ex- foundations for the development and perience or college training. The average salary for public ass istance m ai ntenance of a n efficient career civil case worker supervisors ranges from a mini- service based on excelle nce. Equally immum of $5,8 10 to a maximum of $ 7 ,762 . This portant, It m eet s the democratic objecpost involves professional social work a t the tive of equal opportunity. local level and Immediate supervision a nd deThe b eg innings of State a nd local civil velopment of a group Of case workers; It service, b ased on the merit pri nciple, first usuall y requires training In a grad uate appeared in the 1880's, followin g the enschool of social work . The an n u al pay of sanitarians ranges from a c tment of the Federal legislatio n . a mini mum of $5, 142 to a m aximum of $ 6,592. Thanks to the efforts of the National This professional position In environmen tal Civil S erv ice Leag ue and ot hers, addisanitation work Invol ves control of commu- tional jurisdictions subsequently adopted nicable diseases, promotion of health and the s ystem. But widespread acceptance safety, and the solution of environmental did not come until the 1930's. Beginhealth problems; It usually requires a col- n ing with an amendment to the Social lege degree with speclallzatlon In the physical Secu rity Act in 1939, the Federal Govand biological sciences . ernment contributed to this development The mean salary of a public h ealth nurse by specifying standa rds which would ranges from a mlnlmwn of $4 ,778 to a maxlmwn of $6,1 94. T h is position usually re- bind State and local agencies to such quires graduation from an accredited school requirements If ihey received Federal of nursing, State registration, and a program funds under certain grant programs. In spite of these advances and some reof stud y In publlc health nursing, or appropriate public health nursing experience. cent improvements in a fe w of the larger 3 May 25, 1966 States and in some municipalities, only 28 States and only our larger cities today have a merit system covering employees in most of the executive departments ; 22 States and most of the smaller local jurisdictions only apply the principle selectively. In these 22 States, the merit principle applies in all instances to departments administering those few federally aided programs ,subject to merit requirements, but in only some in.stances to employees of one or more other departments. In these States, the impact of those grants-based on approximately nine statutes and administered by the Departments of Health, Education , and Welfare; Labor; and Defense-has been a primary if not exclusive factor in encouraging the merit principle. Is this record adequate? I think not. I am completely aware that formal merit systems based on detailed examination, promotion, dismissal, and other factors may not prevent political sabotage of the p1inciple. I am also aware that a patronage-based system of personnel administration may produce at any given time a competent civil service with high morale. In general, however, I am convinced that the application and extension of the formal requirements have had a salutary effect. And I am convinced that the arguments President Roosevelt advanced in his message calling for application of the merit principle to the social security program are as valid today as they were in 1939: • • • I recommend th at the States be required, as a condition for the receipt o! Federal funds , to establlsh and maintain a merit system for t he selection of personnel. Such a requirement would represent a protection to the States and cl tlzens thereof r ather than an encroachment by the Federal Government, since It would automatically promote efficiency and eliminate the necessity for minute Federal scrutiny of State operations. F or these reasons, I b elieve m erit standards should be added to more grant-in-aid programs as a condition for elig ibility. Title I of the Intergovernm e ntal P ersonnel Act of 1966 provides for this by autho1izing the President to require , insofar as he d eems p ractica ble, that, as a condition f or receiving Fede r a l funds under any grant program , personnel engaged in its a dminis tration mus t be employed under a me1it syst em m eeting Federal standards. This discretionary provision recognizes the difficulties of extending the merit system to all g r a nt-inaid programs. More particul arly, it recognizes the troubles inherent in att empting to apply it to many of the recently enacted p rograms. At the same time, it encourages action in those grant programs which involve s ubstantial Federal funds and are on going, rath e r than experimental , ventures. The Federa l hig hway prog ram immediately comes to mind as an excelle nt candidate. The proposed legislation also seeks to strengthen the merit system by· providing that the grants authorized for improving S t ate personn el administration under title II be used to strengthen or e xtend the career civil service of the State. To sum up, the Federal Govern- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ment, a majority of the States, most of the larger cities, and nearly all of the experts in the field recognize the relationship between attracting and retaining competent public administrators and the presence of · a viable merit system. These provisions of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act are based on this relationship. (2) OVERALL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Aside from the Federal interest in more effective administration of grant programs, there is a clear Federal interest in strengthening the overall personnel management of the States and their localities as partners in the federal system. The absence of an effective system of personnel management contributes to the manpower difficulties now confronting State and local governments. Both the merit principle and modern management techniques require such a system, which calls for imaginative recruitment efforts and sophisticated examination techniques; an intelligent placement system, which fits the man to the job, and a fair and rewarding promotion system; the development and continuous updating of a position classification plan, since the grouping of positions into classes helps to identify questions of pay, lines of promotion, requirements for transfer, and other basic administrative questions; the meaningful development of the time-honored concept of a career service, in which advancement is not limited merely to service in one agency; and planning for the manpower needs of the years ahead. These are but a few of the basic objectives of good personnel management. Concern with the merit system initially prompted the development of examinations and classification plans. And the requirements of modern management and modern government have modified and expanded the original list of personnel administrative functions. Yet, in nearly all of the States and localities that lack a general civil service system, personnel management, in practice, is usually limited to the job classification and salary setting functions. Even in those States possessing a viable merit system, conflicts between the policing efforts of the Civil Service Commission and the management concerns of the Governor-his staff and personnel officer-sometimes have impeded improvements in this area. In general, then, State and local resources for public personnel administration have not kept pace with the growth of the programs they administer. With few exceptions, State and local personnel agencic:; have not been equipped or given additional support for new workloads. The inadequate support of personnel planning and operations has left many personnel agencies short of needed professional personnel, including trained job analysts, personnel psychologists and training staff. For example, only 10 States have as many as 25 professional, administrative, and technical employees in the State civil service or merit system agency to handle their continuing responsibilities, let alone to undertake broadened activities. Yet State and local personnel agencies must cope with new needs and new problems. The Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1966 recognizes these needs and attempts to come to grips with these problems. Title II of the proposed legislation authorizes grants to enable States to strengthen their systems of personnel administration, to provide State personnel services to smaller jurisdictions of local government, and to stimulate projects for the improvement of personnel administration in their lar'ger cities. To qualify, States would need to develop programs of personnel improvement which might cover such topics as: expansion of the coverage of a State merit system; planning for manpower needs; improvement in one or more of the traditional areas of recruitment, examination, position classification plans, and compensation schedules; or possibly research and demonstration projects in the new areas of electronic data processing and motivational research. Title II also seeks to improve the personnel administration of smaller units of local government. Grants are authorized for the development of State plans that might involve broader coverage of local employees under a State merit system, State technical personnel services to such units of government, cooperative research and demonstration projects in this field, or cooperative intergovernmental ·efforts relating to loans, transfers, or promotions of personnel. The title assigns full responsibility to the States for developing their own programs and a coordinating role for their local jurisdictions. There is a need for pioneering efforts in State assistance to nonmetropolitan local governments. At the local level, the smaller jurisdictions are not in a position to establish modern personnel systems that meet the need for broader recruitment for professional personnel or for attracting able young men and women who regard these initial jobs as rungs on the career ladder rather than as blind alleys. Intergovernmental ·c ooperation with the possibility of increased mobility can help meet these prnblems. Self-contained local personnel systems present certain problems of parochialism even in our larger metropolitan governments. They are simply not feasible for the smaller nonmetropolitan governments in terms of either the expense or the availability of technica l services. Hence there is a need for State services to the nonmetropolitan governments. The act provides for a variety of services ranging from merit system coverage to more limited specialized services. Part C of the title authorizes a separate program of Federal assistance for personnel improvement in our larger cities. There is a pressing need for innovative activities in our metropolitan areas. The shortages of professional, administrative, and technical personnel require planned recruitment, selection to assure the Intake of a fair share of young talent, and a long-range staff development pro- 10985 gram covering various occupational fields. Imaginative job analyses can lead to the establishment . of new types of auxiliary jobs to help meet the absolute shortage in many professional and technical fields. They also may open up opportunities for job training and employment for many of the disadvantaged. While public personnel administration is not a social program designed to solve the problem of employn1ent of the disadvantaged, governments, as large employers, can and should show leadership in this· area. The act provides for project grants for metropolitan personnel administration in order to permit a wide range of experimentation and demonstration projects to strengthen personnel administration and meet urgent manpower problems. These grants may be used for personnel planning, for upgrading or establishing personnel agencies, for improving personnel operations in specific functions, or for initiating pilot projects designed to meet current and projected needs. The States are given the initial opportunity to work with the cities in developing project proposals under this section, with special emphasis on the particular problems of our larger metropolitan units of general local government. But if a State fails to submit any projects after one year, individual metropolitan units may then initiate their own projects. This aproach, I feel, recognizes the necessary coordinating role of the States in personel management, while permitting direct Federal-local efforts· in cases of State inaction. Title II, it should be noted, would be administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. More specifically, It is anticipated that HEW's Division of State Merit Systems would assume primary responsibility for its administration. This division has h a d more practical experience with State personnel systems than any other unit in the Federal Government, thanks to the merit requirements of many HEW grant programs. Moreover, it already has a tradition of extending technical assistance to State and local governments which have sought out its assistance in upgrading their civil service. The concurrence of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, however, would be required before HEW could approve projects for metropolitan jurisdictions. In addition to the grants authorized for State and local personnel administration under title II, the proposed legislation provides another means for Improved intergovernmental collaboration In this field. Title V of the act authorizes the Civil Service Commission to join on a shared-cost basis with States or units of general local government, or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under mutually agreeable regulations. Some authorities believe the Commission already pos.5esses this autho11ty, but the same authorities concede that adequate provision is lacking with respect to financing such joint activity. This title provides a statutory �10986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE basis for the Commission's au thority to enter into such cooperative arran gem ents, and it settles t he financial question by adopting the sh ared-cost formula . In these ways, the proposed legislation squarely confronts many of t h e mo re significant personnel m an agement problems confronting S tate a nd local governm ents t oday. The amounts a uthorized a re m odest, a nd the coopera tive arrangem ents are permissive. But t he fun ds will be seed money well spent, a nd t he devices for cooperation will encourage a concerted a t tack on wh a t we must now concede to be a joint problem. ( 3) TRAINING Inextricably linked to t he m erit system a nd personnel m a n agem ent problems is the n eed for more a nd better tra ining op'por tunities. Ideally , such a progra m should in clude provision fo r orienta tion, in-service and out -ser vice training, tuition r efund, a nd educational leave. It should be r ooted in th e car eer service ethic a nd imply future prospects tha t r eward special effo r t on the part of employees. Our concern h ere is training within the service after a ppoint ment, not educa tion for public service prior to appointmen t . T he la t te r, of course, deserves t h e consideration of a ll of us, a n d hopefully title I of t h e H igh er Education Act of 1965 will resolve some of the problems in t his area. T he man power shortages I have described, a long with t h e mou nting technological, social, a n d econ omic ch an ges affect ing t h e a ctivities of S ta te and local governmen ts, u nderscore t h e emphasis tha t a ll of us should give to establish in g and st ren gthening tra ining progra ms at these levels of governm en t. Many legisla tors , administrators, a nd other public officials n ow recognize the need for such programs. Yet only California, New York, Mich igan, a nd a few other States have t raining programs for top m anagement. Others provide some trainin g fo r other key ·p ersonnel. But a ccording to a r ecen t sur vey conducted by t he International City Man agers Association, most of the States have no t raining or development progra ms for administrative, t echnical, a nd professional personnel. And no city h as anything approaching a model training program. Most existing t raining is still designed to improve the skills of routi ne officeworkers, policem en , and firemen. Moreover, training prog rams stimulated by Federal grants-in-aid are largely geared to specific functional specialties. Such inservice training and education al leave are valuable, of course, but they do not meet the growing requirements of S tate a nd local govern ments for more and better administrative, professiona l, and technical talen t . The repor t of t he Municipal Ma npower Commission a nd the survey of th e Federal aid officials by the subcommittee fully document the need for a Federal response to this critical personnel management deficiency, The Intergover nmental P ersonnel Act attacks this problem of training in four ways. First, title III authorizes Federal departments and agencies conducting programs for their professional, admin- lstrative, and tech nical employees to open t h em up to S ta te and local personnel in counterpart agencies. The S tates or localities would initiate t h e r equest to participate, and f ees for a ttendance could be waived for employees in sh ort -supply categories. S econ d, Federal departments or a gen cies a dministering grant -in-a id programs are a ut horized to establish training programs fo r counte rpart State and local personnel in the professional, a dministrative, and tech nical fields. Such a gencies a re authorized to m ake grants to S tates a nd localities from F ederal funds appropria ted for administrative costs of the progra m to cover the expenses of such training. In a ddition, such F ederal agencies are permi tted t o m ake grants from such funds for educa tional lea ve or comparable arra ngements fo r sa laries a nd training expenses of m erit system employees in short-supply a reas, to permit them to a ttend university or other training courses r elated to their progra m. Third, title IV establish es a grant.;!_!1a id progra m f or inservice training of S tate and local employees. This provision is geared to promoting high levels of per form ance of such personnel, pa rticula rly in th e professional, a dministra tive, and technical a reas, and t h e development of employee potential by providing F ederal fun ds for S tate and local governments t o initiate or strength en t raining programs for t h eir own public servants. Such assista nce would be available only in personnel a reas wh ere compa rable a id is not already provided under other Federa l statutes. The pattern of Federal assista nce h ere roughly pa rallels that of title II, except that the Civil S ervice Commission would be the a dministering a gency. T h e S ta tes would be given t he p1im ary r esponsibility for developing pla ns for the training of their employees and the initia l responsibility for joinin g with local governm ents in the developmen t of t raining progra ms for local personnel. Such pla ns would include provisions for a continuing assessment of training needs, for equitable stan dards r elating to the selection and assignment of per sonnel for t raining, a nd fo r efficient utilization of personnel receiving train ing-including contin ued service for a reasonable period of time. Educa tional leave or other a.rra ngements for salary a nd tra ining payments for periods in excess of a month in a ny one ca lenda r year would be permitted only for career personnel employed under a merit system. In addition, a Sta te plan would include guidelines covering t h e selection of universities or other nongovernmental facilities, when such institutions a re to be used for t raining purposes. The title also autho1izes units of general local government in a State, either jointly or separately, to submit a training plan if , within a year from the effective date of the act, the State fails to submit a proposal which includes sub.stantial provisions for training local government employees. Such proj ect applications would have to m eet the same general requirements applying t o State plans and t he administrative regulations 5 May 25, 1966 establish ed by t h e Civil Service Commission. I n addition , the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing a nd Urban Developm ent would also be r equired for project approval, to assure full considera tion of the special training problems of our Na tion's cities . It is impor tant t o underst and what this title does not provide. It does not , for example, distinguish between m etropolitan a nd n onmetro:i,iolitan units of local government, since the problems relating to inser vice t raining differ mat e1ially fr om those falling under the tra dition al h eading of personnel administration. It d oes n ot compete with title VIII of the Housing Act of 1964 which, a mong other things, a uthorizes m a tching g1·ants t o the States for developing and expanding pr ogra ms to provide special training in skills needed for economic a nd efficient community development to technical and profess ional people who a re employed or are being trained for employm ent in a governmental body which h as resp onsibility for such development. That Housing Act title is prim arily concer ned wit h a compar atively n arrow range of voca tional specialties and, it should be n oted, h as yet to be fund ed . Title IV also is not intended to duplica te or compete ,vith title I of t he High er Educa tion Act of 1965. Tha t Act authorizes the Commission er of Education to m ake gra nts t o strengthen community service programs of colleges a nd univer sities. It is geared to institutions of high er education in t h e Stat es, and to the development of an educational program design ed t o assist in the solution of community problems in ru ral, ur ban , or suburban areas, with particular emph asis on urban and suburban problems. To date, only a few project applications submitted un der t itle I of the High er Educa tion Act of 1965 relate t o t h e broad inservice trainin g n eeds of the various cat egories of State and local personnel. In sh ort, t itle IV is residual. Personn el receiving training under oth er F ederal statutes are specifically excluded from its coverage. It does not repla ce or restrict existing F ederal tra ining programs for a wide va riety of professional personnel in grant-aided fields. But more positively, it m eets the t rainin g n eeds of the Stat es and their localities, as these jurisdictions see them. It em ph asizes training n eeds as t h ey a re seen from the a dministra tive firin g line. It is designed to r epla ce the piecemeal method t ha t has to date cha racterized the Federal approa ch. It is geared to a ttacking a problem tha t a dministrator::; a t a ll levels, as well as experts in public a dministration , h ave described as criti cal. . Finally, it full y recognizes t h a t, as President J oh nson sta ted a t P rinceton : The public serva;:i.t toda y moves along p a ths of a d ven t ure wh ere h e Is h elp less wit hout the tools of a d vanced learnin g. The proposed I n tergovernmenta l Pers on nel Act provides still another m eans for improving t he in-service t r aining capability of State and local governments. Title VI gives prior Congr essional consent to interstate compacts or other agreements, not in conflict with �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 10987 Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- grants In any program fin a nced in whole or sent that the text of the bill, together in part by Federa l funds, the personnel engaged in the ad.ministration of the program with a section-by-section analysis, be be employed under a State or local merit inse1ted in the RECORD immediately fol- system meeting Federal standards. He is lowing my remarks, and that the bill authorized to approve for this purpose standlie on the table for 10 days so that other ards for a merit system of personnel administration. The Federal Government, howSenators may join in cosponsoring it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill ever, shall exercise no authority over the selection, tenure, or compensation of ind ividwill be received and appropriately re- uals ferred; ,and, without objection, the bill system.employed in accordance with such will be printed in the REconD , and will lie TITLE II-GRANT6 FOR s X. ATE AND LOCAL at the desk, as requested by the Senator PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION from Maine. Declaration of Purpose The bill <S. 3408) to strengthen interSEC. 201. The purpose of this title is to governmental cooperation and the ad- provide Federal grants-in-aid to enable each ministration of grant-in-!!id programs, State to strengthen its system of p erson n el to extend State merit systems to addi- ad ministr ation, to provide State personnel CONCLUSION tional programs financed by Feder.al ser vices in nonmetropolita n units of loca l Improved merit systems, improved funds, to provide grants for improvement government, a nd to stimulate projects for State and local personnel management, of state and local personnel administra- the improvement of personnel administration and improved in-service training pro- tion, to authorize Federal assistance in in metropolita n areas. Appropria tion Authorization grams--these are the three basic con- training State and local employees, to SEC. 202. There is hereby authorized to be cerns of the Intergovernmental Personnel provide grants to Sta,te and local governAct of 1966. Put more simply, greater ments for training of their employees, to appropriated for the fisc a l year ending June career competence is the paramount authorize interstate compacts for per- 30, 1967, and each of the four succeeding years, the following sums: (a) $10 ,theme of this legislation. Through a sonnel and training activities, and for fiscal 000,000 for payments to States which h ave judicious combination of grant funds, other purposes; introduced by Mr. Mus- plans for State personnel administration aptechnical assistance, and new devices for KIE, was received, read twice by its title, proved under section 204; (b) $8,000,000 for intergovernmental cooperation in the referred to the Committee on Govern- payments to States which h ave plans -for personnel area, the proposed legislation ment Operations, and ordered to be provision of State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of general loca l governprovides a variety of ways to strengthen printed in the RECORD, as follows: ments approved under section 206; and (c) the professional standing and prestige of s. 3408 $15,000,000 for payments to States or metropersonnel at the State and local levels. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of politan units of general loca l governments The Advisory Commission on Intergov- Representatives of the United States of which have projects for metropolitan p erAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act ernmental Relations went on record at its sonnel administration approved under secmay be cited as the "Intergovernmental PerApril meeting as favoring the objectives tion 208. of this legislation. And at Princeton, son n el Act of 1966." Part A . Grants for State personnel Declaration of Policy President Johnson called for a program administration of assistance to "State and local governSEC. 2. The Congress hereby finds a nd SEC. 203. (a) From the sums a ppropriated ments seeking to develop more effective declares : under section 202(a) the Secretary of Heal th , That effective State and loca l governmen- Education, and Welfare (hereinafter referred career services for their employees." tal institutions are essential in the mainte- to as the Secretary) sh all make annually Prof. Charles Adrian has pointed out n a nce and development of the Feder al sys to States wh ich h ave plans for State that conflict in our cooperative federal tem in a n increasingly complex and grants personnel ad.ministration approved by him system does not stem today from the interdependent society. under section 204. relations between the levels of governTh at, since numerous governmental activ (b). The sum availabl e a nnually for grants ment as such, but that "friction results ities administered by the Sta te and loca l under this section s h a ll be a llotted among governments are related to national purpose whenever the administrative personnel the States under a formula approved by the at a particular level for a particular and are fin a nced in part by F edera l funds, a Secretary which shall give weight to the national interest exists in a high calib er of number of employees under the merit sys function are not fully professionalized." public service in State a nd local governments. tem and the financial ability of the State The findings in our survey, "The Federal Th at intergovernmental cooperation in as indicated by its r ela tive per capita inSystem as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," State personnel administration on a merit come, except th at each State will receive clearly illustrate the administrative diffi- basis has contributed to greater efficiency not less than $25,000. culties produced by such friction. in various federally a ided programs ·and Requirem ents of State Plans We n eed greater expertise at these should b e extended generally to such proSEC . 204. A S tate plan for State personnel grams. levels, then, because its absence is now administration to be approved by the SecThat F ederal financial and technical assis- retary mustone of the primary sources of tension and tance to State and local governments for conflict in intergovernmental relations. (a) des ignate the appropriate S tate perstrengthening their personnel administra - sonnel agency for the administration of the We need it because t he success of the tion will Improve the effectiveness of the pla n; Great Society programs depends on re- public service and is in the n ational interest. (b) provide for a merit system conform ducing these antagonisms. We need it That the continuing training and developto the Federal sta ndards established because we live in an age of administra- ment of career employees, particularly in ing under this Act for a Merit System of Per tive federalism ; in an age of more, not professi onal, administrative , and technical sonnel Administration; · less, use of grants-in-aid; in an age of fields, are critical to the success of joint Fed(c) set forth a program for the improve more, not less, contact among the ad- eral-State-loca l programs and that the Fed- ment and s trengthening of State personnel eral Government should encourage and assist ministrative officials at all levels of administration which m ay include, among government. We need it if the States in such training for State and local em- other features : ployees. ( 1) expansion of the coverage of S tate and their localities are to be vigorous TITLE I-EX PAN S ION OF MERIT SYSTEM I N employees under the State m er it system; members in the great partnership that FED ERALLY AID ED PROGRAMS (2) assessment of m anpower need s in was established in 1789. We need it if we developing programs and methods for m eet Declara tion of Purpose are--in the President's words-to "dethem; SEc. 101. The purpose of this title is to Ing(3) velop a creative federalism to best use improvement in one or more a reas of achieve greater efficiency in the administra- personnel administration such as r ecruit the wonderful diversity of our institu- tion of programs financed In whole or in ment, examinations, classificat ion, and comtions and peoples to solve the problems, part by Federal funds extending the a pplicafulfill the dreams of the American tion of personnel standards on a merit b asis pensation pla.ns: (4) research and demonstration projects people." in the a dministration of such programs. for the use of valid personnel methods, inThis is precisely what the IntergovPersonnel Sta ndards cluding electronic data processing techernmental Personnel Act of 1966 is a-11 SEC. 102. The President is authorized to niques; about. And that is precisely why I am require, insofar as he deems practicable, that (5) development of a uxiliary or support as a condition for the receipts of Federal types of positions to perform appropriate introducing this measure today. any law of the United States, for cooperative efforts and mutual assistance relating to the administration of personnel and training programs for State and local employees. The New England Governors' Conference already has launched a survey of the possibilities of regional collaboration with respect to personnel training programs. Building on the precedent set in the Housing Act of 1961-which gave prior congressional approval to interstate compacts establishing metropolitan agencies in multistate urban areas--this provision hopefully will encourage expanded efforts to develop training programs on a regional basis. ' �10988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - functions currently performed in occupations in which there are now shortages; and (6) interdepartmental and intergovernmental cooperation in personnel administration; (d) provide for financial participation by the State in the costs of merit system administration at least equal in amount to the Federal grants, and further provide that the operation of the plan wlll not result in a reduction In State expenditures for such administration or the substitution of Federal for State funds previously available for merit system administration; and (e) provide that the State agency will m ake such reports in such form and containing such Information as the Secretary m ay from time to time require, and shall keep and make available such records as he m ay r equire for the verification of such reports. Part B. Grants for State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of local government SEC. 205(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202(b) the Secretary shall m a ke annually gra nts to States which have plans a pproved by him under section 206 for services to nonmetropolitan units of gener a l local government. (b) The sum available annually for grants under this section shall be allotted under a formUln approved by the Secretary which shall give weight to (1) the number of employees and number of local governments served, (2) the scope of State services provided, and ( 3) the financial ablll ty of the State as indicated by i ts r elative per capita income, except that each State sh all receive not less than $25,000. Requirements of Sta te plan SEC. 206. A plan for State services on personnel administration to nonmetropolltan units of general local government to· be approved by the Secretary must( a) designate the State agency, which may be the agency des ignated under section 204, for the administration of the plan; (b) set forth a program for Improvement and strengthening of personnel administration of such local governments by one or more of the following means : ( 1) the c:>veragc of lc,c1l employees under the State mertt system; (2) technical services In one or m ore areas or personnel admJnlstratlon s uch as recruitm e nt. exnmlnations, classification and compensation pla ns; (3 J cooperative resear ch and demon stration projects for the u se of valid personnel m ethods ; or (4) intergovernmental cooperntlve arra n gem ents between the Sta te and local governments or among local governments, Including facili tating Inter jur isdictional loans, transfers or promotions or personnel; (c) provide for financial participation by State or such local governments, or both, In the costs of providing services a t least equa l In runount to the F ed er al grants, a nd provid e further thn t the opera tlon of the pla n will not result in a r eduction In State and local expenditures or a eubstitutlon of Federal for State or loca l funds for personnel admin is tration; and (d) provide that the State agency will m a ke such reports in such form and containing su ch information as t he Secretary may from time to time r equire and shall keep and m a ke available such records as he may require for the verification of such reports, Part C. Grants for personnel administration in m etropolitan areas Soc. 207(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202 ( c ) the Secretary shall m a ke an nually payments to States or m&tropolitan units of general loca l government which have projects approved by him under section 206. SENATE (b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, shall establlsh such standards for the distribution of grants under this section among the States a nd among such metropolitan units as will most effectively carry out the purposes of this Act, and shall estabJlsh regulations for financial participation by States or such units, or b oth, in an amount equal to at least one-third of the costs of each project, including the reasonable value of facliities a nd personnel services made avaliable by the State or such loca l government for the administration of the project. Project requirements SEC. 208, Projects to be approved for grants unde r section 207 shall conform to ,criteria established in regUlations which shall be Issu ed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Grants wiU be used, in accordance with such regulations, for projects for strengthening personnel administration on a merit basis in order to meet increasingly critical problems of administration In metropolitan units of general loca l government. Projects may Include, but are not limited to-( 1) assessment of m anpower needs In developing programs and methods for meeting them; (2) Improvement of classification and compensatioh plans, and recruitment and examinations, particularly for profeeslonal, administrative and technical personnel In shortage ca tegorles; (3) application of psychological and other research in personnel administration directed toward improvement of selection and development of members of disadvantaged groups whose capacities are not being fully used; (4) plans for establishing auxiliary or support types of positions to perform a ppropriate functions currently performed In occupations In which there are now shortages; (5)research and demonstration relating to t echniques, such as electr onic d a ta processing, for Improving the speed and quality of personnel operations; and ( 6) cooperative activities in recruitment and examining by governmental Jurisdictions operating In metropolitan areaa. Exceptlon--Submittal of Local Projects SEC. 209. After the expiration of one year from the date or enactment of this Act, if a State h as n ot submitted any proje{:ts under section 208 of this title which have received approval, the metropolitan units of general local government may submit proj ects for approval , a nd such projects may be approved If they comply with the reqUlrements or section 208. Administration SEC. 210. The provisions of this title shall be adminis tered by the Secr etary, who Is authorized to furnish such technica l assistance to States or units or general local governments and to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title , Suspension of Grants SEC. 2 11. Whenever the Secretary, after giving reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or local agency administering a plan approval under this title, finds ( 1) that s uch plan has been so changed that it no longer complies with the provisions of thls title, or (2) that 1n the administration of the plan there Is a failure to comply substantially with any s uch provision, the Secr etary shall notify such agency o! h!s findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or in his discretion further pay- 1 May 25, 1966 ments wlll be limited to projects pnder, or portions of, the plan not affected by such failure), until he ls satisfied that there will no longer be a ny failure to comply. TITLE III-AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING D eclaration of Purpose SEC. 301. The plll'pose of this title is to foster the training of State and local employees by permitting their attendance at Federal courses, and by authortzing Federal departments or agencies administering grantin-aid progrruns to conduct training and to permit Federal grants to States and localities to be used for training and educational leave. Participation In Federal Programs SEC. 302. Any Federal department or agency conductlng training programs for professiona l, administrative, or technical employees In the Federa l service is a uthorized to include In such programs , under conditions imposed by the head of such agency, State and local officers and employees in sim_Uar or related functions, on the request of the State or local government. Fees for attendance at any such training program may be received by the Federal agency conducting It and expended In the same manner as fees r eceived for attendance of Federal employees, or the payment of fees may be waived in occupational categories d etermined by the head of the Federa l department or agency to be in short supply. Training In Grant-Aided Programs SEC. 303 , Any Federal department or agency administering a program of gr ants or financia l assistance to States and localities is au thorized (a) to conduct training for State and local officers and employees in professional, administrative, and technical fields r elated to such programs: (b) to make grants to State and localities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administrative expenses of the program, unc!er the usual terms and conditions of such grants, for the conduct of training for S tate and local officers and employees In such progra m: and (c) to make grants to State and loca lities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administra tive expenses of the progr am , under the usual terms a nd conditions of s u ch grants, for education a l leave or comparable arrangements for sala ries a nd training expenses or employees In professiona l, administrative, and technica l fields who h ave been employed under a merit system of personn el administration in State or local agencies ad ministering the federally aided program, In order for . them to attend university or other training courses related to the program. S aving Provis ion SEC. 304. The a uthorizations in this title are not a limita tion on exis ting authority u nder la w for Federal d epartments or agencies to conduct training or to make grants for training or edu cational leave. TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Declaration of Purpose SEC. 401. The purpose of this title Is to promote higher levels of performance of employees In the public service, particularly in professional, administrative, and techn ica l fields , and the development of employee potentia l by providing Federal assistance to State and local gov er nm en ts to ins ti tu t c and carry out programs for the training of their employees ln fields where such Federal assistance is not already provided under grant-in s.Id or other statutes. Appropriation Authorization SEC. 402. There Is h ereby authorized to be appropriated the following sums for payments to States and units of general local government which h a ve plans approved un der this title for the training of their employees: tl0,000,000 for fiscal year 1967, $25,- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - 000,000 for fiscal year 1968, and $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1969, 1970, and 1971. Grants Authorized SEC. 403(a). From the sums appropriated under section 402 the Civil Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission). shall make annually grants to States or units of general local government which have plans approved by It under sections 404 and 405, respectively. , (b) The sums available annually !or grants under this section shall be allotted among the States, and between States a nd units of general local government In a State, under formulas to be approved by the Commission which shall gi ve weight to the number of State and local employees, the number of local governments p a rticipating, the scope of training to be provided , and the financial ab lllty of th e State as indicated by Its relative per capita Income , excep.t that each State will receive not Jess than $25,000 for fiscal year 1967 and $50,000 annually therea fter. Requirements of State plans SEC. 404. A State plan for training of officers and employees to be approved mus t ( 1) designate the State agency for the admini stration of the plan; ( 2) set forth a program for the training of omcers and employees of States and units of general loca l government which will meet the objectives of this title and provide for training personnel of agencies not r ece iving assis tance under other Federal program s ; (3) provide for continuing assessment of trai ning needs ; (4) set for th equitable standards for the selection and assignment of personnel for training; (5) provide fo r the efficient utillzation of p ersonnel who h ave been given such training, a nd for their continued service for a reasonable p eriod of time; (6) provide that educational leave or other arra n gements for p aymP.nt of salary and training expenses for period s In excess or one month in a ny one year sh a ll be allowed only for career personnel empl oyed in accordance with a merit system; (7) set forth, when training ls to be given through univers ity or other nongovernmental facilities t h e policies with respect to the selection of such facilities and the types of agreements to be entered Into for th e training ; and (8) provide for financl ,t l p:nticlpation by the States. the uni ts of genera l loca l government thereof, or from private sources. in a n amount equal to one-fourth of the cost or the training, In cluding the reasonable value of facilities and personal se rvices made available for admini stration of the training, provided that the operation of the plan wlll not r esu lt in a reduction in State and local expenditures or substitution of Federal for State or loca l funds !or training . Exception-Submitta l of Loca l Plans SEC. 405. I! after one year from the effective date of this Act, a State has not sub mitted and had approved a plan under sec tion 404, Including provision for training o! local governmental emr-'oyees Involving expenditures at Ins t equ iv alent to the expendi tures for training of State government employees, one or more units of general loca l government In the State Jointly or severally may submit a plan for such training during the following fiscal year, designating a single local agency for adm ini stration and otherwise conforming to the requirements of section 404 under regulations which sha ll be prescrl bed by the Commission with the concurrence or the Secretary o! Housing and Urban Development. Administration SEC. 406. The provisions of this title shall be admlnlstered by the Commission, which SENATE 10989 Is authorized to furnish such technical assistance to States or units of general iocal government a nd to prescribe such regulations as m ay be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title. Suspension of Grants SEC. 407. Whenever the Commlssion, after giving reasona ble notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or other agency administering any plan app~oved under this title, finds (a) that a State or other plan has been so changed that It no longer compiles with the provis ions of th.ls title, or (b) that in the administration of the plan there ls a !allure to comply s ubstantially with any such provision', the Commission shall notify such agency of !ts findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or In !ts discretion further payments wlll be llmlted to projects under, or portions of, the plan not affected by such !allure) until It ls satisfied that there will no longer be any failure to comply. Metropolltan Unit of General Local Government SEC. 703. "Metropolltan un!t(s) of general local government" mea ns any city or comp a ra ble general-purpose political subdivision of a State with a population of 100,000 or more, as determined by the most recent Federal census, or any county or parish with such population which Includes a city or comparable subdivision with a population of 50,000 or more, as determined by such census. Non-metropolltan Unit qf General Loca l Government SEC. 704. "Non-metropolltan unlt(s) of general local government" means any city, county, p al\ish, town, village or other generalpurpose polltlca l subdivision of a State, except such units of general local government as are included In section 703 of this Act. TITLE V-COOPERATION JN PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE INTER- SEC. 501. The Commission Is authorized to Join, on a shared-cost basis, with State or units of general local government or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon . SEC. 502. The Commission Is authorized, upon written request from a State, a unit of general loca l government thereof, or both, and under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon , to certify to such agencies, from appropriate registers, a llst of ellglble personnel who h av e successfully completed such examinations a nd satisfied such requirements as the Commiss ion has prescribed, upon the pay ment by the unit of government making the request, of the salaries and such other costs for performing such service. SEC. 503. The terms of reimbursement for the service authorized under section 502 shall be d etermined by the Commission. All mon eys received by the Commission In payment for furnishing such serv ice a uthorized s hall be deposited to the credit of the a ppropriation of the Commission. There being no objection, the bill and the section-by-section analysis was ordered to be printed in the RECORD , as follows: GOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF Section 1. Short title. Section 2. Declaration of Polley. 1966 Under our federal system and In an Increasingly complex society, effective State and local governments are Indispensable. Their efficiency a nd administrative competence Is of nationa l concern, p articularly since many programs they administer are federally financed . The appllcatlon of merit systems of p ersonnel administration In certain federally aided progra ms h as contributed to their efficiency, and such systems should b e extended to other grant programs. Federa l fin a ncia l a nd technical assistance should a lso be made avallable to State and local governments to strengthen their overall personnel administration. The Federal Government should encourage and assist in the continuing training and development of State and local employees, particularly in professional, administrative and technical fields , in order to Improve the capab!llty of the public service. The Act recognizes that the success o'f the Joint-action programs enacted by the Congress and the State legislatures Is vitally affected by the caliber of State a nd loca l personnel a dministering them. It recognizes TITLE VI-AUTHORITY FOR INTERSTATE COMPACTS that a ll levels of government Involved · In SEC. 601. To promote higher personnel these Joint ventures-Including the Federal standa rds and mobillty of quallfied person- Government-have not only a right but a n el, particularly profession a l , administrative, duty to take steps to see that such progra ms and tech nical personnel In s hortage cate- are efficiently a dministered and that the -gorlcs, the consent of the Congress Is hereby fund s provided a re u sed effectively to accom give n to any two or more States to enter Into plish the purposes prescribed by Jaw . The compacts or other agreements, not In conflict Act, then, Is designed to assist State and with any law of the United States, for co- loca l governments in strengthening their opernLlve efforts and mutual assistance (In- partners hip role In the federal system. cluding the establishment of such agencies, States and Iocall ties are facing cri tlca l Joint or otherwise, as they deem desirable) for the admin is tration of personnel and problems In the recruitment, selection. and training programs for officers and employees retention of well-qualified personnel for new and expanded programs. This shortage Is of State a nd local governments. acute In the upper levels, both In the public TITLE VII-DEFINITIONS and pri vate sectors of the economy. The When used tn this Act, State and loca l flnanclal and technical resources for publlc personnel a dministration State SEC. 701. The term "State" means any of and staff development, however, h ave not the several States of the United States, the kept pace with the growth of the programs District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, any terri- they administer. Yet, qualified personnel tory or possession of the United States, or and sound personnel policies are absolutely any agency or lnstrumentallty of a State, but essential to effective governmental operadoes not Include the governments of the po- tions . The Act proposes to bulld on the Interlltical subdivisions of any State. governmental personnel experience in certain Merit System grant-In-aid programs. It would make SEC. 702. "Merit system" means a planned matching grants and technical services availState or local operation to develop and main- able to State and local governments for the tain an efficient career service, under publlc improvement of their overall personnel adrules, which among other provisions Include ministration . It would encourage cooperaappointment through competitive examina- tive efforts In recruitment and training on tion, nondiscrimination in race, polltlcs or an lnterle vel and Interstate basis. It would rellglon, equal pay ror equal work, tenure make available Federal training facilities contingent on successful performance, and and also provide grants and technical assistpromotion on evaluated capacity and service. ance for training. Thus, It balances the need �10990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE t o f ost er dynamic p ersonnel systems f o r r ecrui t m e nt of Sta te ana local staffs of high ca p a.c lty with an effort to assis t In their continuous development. TITL E I - EXT E N S ION OF THE M ERIT SYS T EM I N F E DERALLY AIDED PROGRAM S This title a uthorizes the Preside n t, In orde r to achie v e grea ter efficiency in a dministr ation of p rogr a m s fina nce<!. with F ed e ral funds , t o extend to additional programs the r equire m ent that Sta te and local personne l in s uch progra ms be employed unde r a S tate or local merit system meeting Fede r a l standa rds. No F ed er a l authority would be exercised over the selection, tenure of office , or compe n sation of a ny individua l employed in a ccord.a nce with such systems. This p n.ttern o f administration Is n ow applicable In the va rious public assis t a n ce, child h ealth a nd weifare, public h ealth, employment service a nd une mployment Ins urance, ci vil defense , and aging programs . The merit system r equirement was originally enacted for program s under the Social S ecurl ty Boa rd. This action was t a ke n b y Congress in 1939 a f ter some three yea rs ' e xpe rie n ce with out s uch a requireme n t d e m o n str ated the n eed for it to assure pro gra m effectiven ess a nd economy. It h as b een e xpanded ove r t h e years, most r ecently b y the 89t h Con gress i n t h e m edical assis t ance tit le of t h e Socia l Security Ac t and in t h e Olde r Ame ricans Act of 1965 .' The Division of State Merit S ystems of HEW has served f o r more than a quarter of a century as the Fedet"al Interdepartmental unit concerned wi t h State and local p ers onnel a dm1nlstra tion. Under commo n F eder a l standard s f or t he a pplica tion of t h e merit syst em in various gran t programs administer ed b y t h e D ep a r t m e nts of HEW, L a b or and D efense, It h as pr ovided coordinated F ederal technical a nd advisory ser vices on S tate and l ocal personnel m a n agement. Under t h is t itle, the Preside nt, at his dis cretion, would d e t erntlne if and whe n to e x tend t h e m erit system r equire m ent to oth e r programs. H e would b e free to take i n to accou nt su ch f actors as h e deemed r elevant. S u ch c riter ia m ight i nclude the proport1on of F eder al funds i n volved or the exp erimen tal n atu re of t he program. T I TLE II- GRANTS FOR STATE AND LOCAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Section 201 expr esses t h e threef old obj ect! ve of t h Is ti tie to provide Feder a l gra n ts to enable each Sta te t o 1) s tren gth e n Its system of personnel admlrulsr atlon, 2) p rov ide State p e r so nnel services to nonmetr opolitan local governments, a n d 3) stimulate projects for t h e improvement of personnel administration In metropolitan units of general local gover nmen t (as defined In Sectio·n 703 of this Act). Section 202 a u thorizes $8 mi111on , $10 million, a nd $15 million, r espectivel y, to car ry out the purpoees of this title. Grants f or State personnel administration Section 203 p r ovid es that grants will be made to States which have approved p la n s for State personnel administration under a n allotment formula which gives weight to the number of emp1oyees under the State merit system and the financial a bility of the State. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Is assigned the responsibility of administering this program in recognition of the f act that HEW's D iv ision of S tate Merit Systems has the gree.test experience In the area of State personnel admlnlstratlon. Section 204 lists the major elements a State plan must have to be approved. These 1 Cf. U .S.C. Title 42, Sec. 302(a) (5), Sec. 503(a) (1), Sec. 703(a) (3) , Sec. 712(a) (3), Sec. 723(a)(2), Sec. 1202(a)(5), Sec. 1352 (a) (5) , Sec. 2674(a) (5); and U.S.C. Title 50, Sec. 2236(a)(4). include d esign a tion of a State agency, conformity with Federal standards, provision for Sta te ~ a tchl ng funds and a d escription of ~he program f or Improving and strengt henm g p ersonnel administration. The progr a m m ay Include expa nsion of the s cope of the m erit sys t em; pla n s t o meet m a npower needs In new a nd exp a nding S tate program s; improveme nt of ser vices in recruitment e xamin a tions, classifica t ion a nd p a y pla n s; d e velo pm ent of a u x iliary types of pos itions to supple m e nt professiona l staff In short supply; r esear c h a nd d emons tration projects; a nd In terdepa r t m e nta l and int ergovernmental cooperation m ~rsonnel a dminlstrntlon Grants fo r State per sonnel services to non m etropoli tan local governments Section 205 p rovides tha t the Secr etary of H ealth, Educatio n , and Welfa re s h a ll m a ke gran ts a nnually to Sta tes which h a ve a p proved plans f or S ta te personnel services to nonmetropolltan local governments under a n a llo tmen t f ormula. w hich gives weight to the number o f local governments and employees to be ser ved, t h e scop e of the services to be provided, a nd t h e financial a bility of t he Stat e. · Sec tion 206 lis t s the major elem en ts a State pla n f o r s erv ices to nonmetrop olitan local governme n ts must h a ve to b e a pproved, including S t a te or local matching fu n d s. It provides tha t these services to local governments m a y include: covera ge of local e mployees under the State merit sys tem;. teclmlcal services f rom the State In such areas a s recruitment, examinations classlficntlon a nd compe n sation plan s; cooperative r esearch a nd d e mons tra~lo n pro jects ; a nd coop erative a rrang eme nts (Including inter c h a n ge of p ersonnel) amon g units o f local go.J1e1nments or b e t ween State and local governmen ts. The S tates and loca lities could s tre n gth e n p ersonnel oper a tions for nonmetropolltan units of go vernment in a variety of ways. The plan may not only va ry from S tate t o State, but may p rovide f o r differe n tiated ser vices w ithin a Stat e d ep e nding on t he s ize a nd needs of the local governrne n ts. The services m ay va ry from complete coverage o f local e m p loyees under the State m erit system to liml t ed ser vices t o m eet ,;p ecliic local n eeds. T h e . latter migh t Include recrmtme nt of specialized p ers onnel or d emon s tra tion pro ject s .fo r Improved classifica tion plans . Gran t s f or personnel admini st ra t ion in metropolit a n areas Section 207 provides t h at t h e Secr etary of the D ep a r tment of Health, Education, a nd Welfare sh a ll m ake p aymen ts annu ally to S t ates ( a nd a lternatively u n d er . Section 209 t o l ocal governmen ts in m etr opolitan areas ) w hich h ave approved pro jects for personnel administra tio n , with State or local financia l participation to the ext ent o f one-t hird o f t h e costs of the p ro jects. Sta nda rds governi ng the d istribu t ion of s u ch gran ts shall be made by the Secretary o f HEW w l th t h e concu rrence of the Secret ary of Housi ng a nd Urban Development. Section 208 provides that app roved projects may incl ude man power p lanni ng and u t ilization; Improvement of classification and compensation p lans and of recruitment and exantlnlng; research for the Improvement o f the selec tion and the developmen t of tllsadvantaged persons whose capacities are not being used; developing .aux lllary positions in shortage occu pations; improvement of management techniques, s u ch as electronic data processing, in p ersonnel operations; and d eveloping cooperative activities in such areas as recruiting and examining by government Jurisdictions in a metropolitan are&. Metropolitan governments are facing new and acute problems with lintlted resources May 25, 1966 in pe rsonnel a dminis tration . This t it le Is designed to provide for innovative projects of various kinds to meet special n eeds. This m a y Involve t he application of tested personnel m ethods or the d emonstrat ion o f new t echniques . Local governments vary g reatly in both their organization f or p er sonn el administration a nd t he level of i ts e!Iec tlven ess. Ma n y factors exp lain this , including the administrative a nd p o litical traditions of the juris diction, the stat utory b ase a nd the _fina n cia l support for n ersonnel a dministra tion, a nd public a ttftudes. Since the s cope and quality of personnel oper a tions va ry, the Act p ermits projects to be d esigned realis tically to m eet specific needs for improvement. Sect ion 209 provides tha t if a S tate has not s ubmitted a ny projects (unde r section 208) r eceiving a pproval w ithin one yea r a fter the en actme nt of this l egisla tion, the metropolita n unit of gen e ral local go'iernment m a y submit projects for a ppr oval. Section 210 provides tha t this title will be administer ed b y the Secretary of H ealth, Educa tio n , a nd Welfa re. The criteria for m e tropolita n p roj ects, a s was n oted previously, would be established with t he concurrence of t he Secretary o f Housing a nd Urba n D evelopm ent. The inten t o f t his s ection Is t o u t ilize the e xperie n ce in In tergovernmen tal pers onnel r ela tion s of the Depa rtme nt of Heal t h, Education, a nd Welfa re's Division of Sta te Merit Sys tems In various gra nt-In-a id . progra ms. At the s a me time, the responslb!llt y of the Department of Housing a nd Urba n Developm e n t with resp ect to urba n per sonnel adminis tration would b e recognized b y i ts required concurren ce i n the d evelopment o f criter ia for m etropolitan personnel pro jects. The F ed er a l appr oach would b e coordina ted, t a king i n t o account t h e Federal interest In the various grant program s a nd t h e d iffer ential n eed s for S tate a nd for local nonmetropollta n a nd m etr o politan a dmin istra tion. T echnical s er vices, a s well as fin ancia l ass ist a nce, would b e a va ilable t o str engthen S tate a nd local personnel adm in istration. Section 211 provides f or w it h holding of f unds after notice a nd h earing for noncomplia n ce with a p proved plans or p roject,;;. TIT L E I I I -AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING This tit le permits, u pon requ est of the r espective S tate a nd local governmen ts, the attenda nce of State and local em ployees ·at F ed era l t raining courses; it a u t h orizes F eder a l agen cies administering grant programs to con duct training for S tate and local profess ional, administrative, and technical p er ~ sonnel; and it provides that Fed er al f u nds granted to State and local governments for t h e a d ministration of Joint programs may b e u sed to cond uct training or for education a l leave. Cooperative relationships in the field o f t r a ining h ave, in recent years , d eveloped to s u c h a n ex tent that t h ey are becoming common p ractice. Even so, most of the m are limited to p a r ticu lar types of training o f fered by one Federal department or agency t o e m pl oyees In counterpart State and local agencies. That the F .B.I. Academy provides cer tain training f or law enforcement officers for both State and local governments Is well known. Not so well known is the fact t h at many other Federal d epartments and agen cies al so offer train i ng to S tate and local officers and employees. Among these are the D epartment of Agricul ture, the Food a.nd Dru g Administration, the Forest Service, the Internal Revenue Service, the Public Health Service, and many more. This title builds on these precedents and extends authority to all Federal departments and agencies to make their training programs ava!lable to ·counterpart State and local officers and employees. It d oes not limit existing training authorizations. �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Section 401 states the purpose of t his title: to promote higher levels of performance In the publ!c service and to develop employee potential through Fed eral assistance to Sta t e and local governmen ts for Initiating and ca rrying out training programs in fields where s u ch Federal assistance Is not already provided under exis ting grantin-aid or other statutes. Secti on 402 authorizes $10 million for fiscal 1967, $25 million for 1968, and $50 million each for 1969, 1970, and 1971 to carry out the stated purpose of this title. Secti on 403 provides that the Civil Service Commission shall make grants to S tates (and, alternatively under Section 405, t o local governments) which h ave approved plans for t raining under an a llotment formula which gives weight to the n umb er of State and/ or local employees and governments to be ser ved, t he scope of the services to be provided, and the financia l ab!l!ty of the S tate. Section 404 lists the major elem ents a State plan for training must h ave to be approved under Section 403. These Include: designating the State agency to a dminister the training plan; settin g forth t he program of tralnlng, with educa tional leave for periods of over one month limited to ca reer personnel; providing for continuing assessment of training needs; es tabllsh!ng s tandards for the s election of personnel for trainIng and their subsequ ent u t ilization; a nd Issuing policies a nd standards for the sel ection of univer sity or ot h er nongovernmental f ac!llties a n d for the t ypes of agreements to be entered Into for such tra ining; providing f or fina ncia l p a rticipation f rom State, loca l or priva t e sources to the extent of onefourth of the total training costs. Section 405 provides t hat If within a year after t he enactment of this legislation a State has not received approval for projects which provide at least a s much training for l ocal employees as for State employees, then the local govern m en ts may submit pJa ns for such t r a in ing . Section 406 au t h orizes the U .S . Civil Service CommlS&ion t o administer the provisions of this title and to furnish t ech n ical assistance to State or local governments. The Commission Is assigned t h is responslbll!ty because of the exten sive experience It has acquired · throu gh Its own career development training program f or F ederal employees . The Commission Is a lso authorized to prescribe t h e regulations necessar y to ca rry out t he p urposes of this title. Local pla ns for tra ln1ng m u st be consistent with criteria est a blished In regulations Issu ed with the concurrence of the Secretar y of Hou sing a nd Ur ban Development. Section 407 provides for the withholding of f und s after notice and hearing f or n oncomplia n ce with a p p r oved plans. ently fea red that It might be Improperly used. Thus, It was further assumed that each proposed compact would be carefully examined and debated as a part of the consent procedure. This procedure often Is no longer fully a dhered to. The Congress has on numerous occasions given prior consent, and In 1948 when the Southern Regional Education Compact was under consideration, the point was m a de that no formal consent was r equired for two or more States to perform cooperatively an a ctivity that each h as the power to perform Individua lly. TITLE VII-DEFINITION This title provides definitions of the terms "Sta te," "m erit system," "m etropolitan unit of general local government," a nd "nonmetr opolitan unit of general loca l governm ent." TITLE V---<:O OPERATION IN PERSONNEL R ECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION This title a u thorizes the U.S. Civil Ser vice Commission to cooperate with State or l ocal governments on a shared-cost basis In cooperative recruitment or examinations. TITLE VI- AUTHORITY FOR PACTS INTERSTATE COM - T his t itle a uthorizes any two or more Sta t es to enter Into compacts br other agreements for cooperative effort s and mutua l assistance for the adin1nistrat1on of person nel a n d t raining prograins for officers and employees of State and local governmen ts. The purpooe Is to promote higher personnel standards and moblllty of qualified personnel , particularly professional, administrative, and techn1cal personnel In shortage categories. When the compact clause of the Constitution was framed and adopted, It was appilr- ,o 10991 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document United States of America Vol. 112 <to grcssi n tRecord PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89 th CONGRES S 1 SECOND 11 SESSION WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 1966 F ederal aid to State and local governments will have more than quadrupledrising from $3.1 billion in 1955 to an estimated $14.6 billion in 1967. And in number, these programs have reached the 170 mark. In relative terms, this growth has been fairly modest. Witness the fact that Federal a id as a percentage of State and local revenue during this 13-year period increased by only appi·oximately 5 percent. But this gradual growth highlights indirectly the extraorTHE STATE AND LOCAL MANPO\VER CRISIS For over three and a half years the dinary effort that State and local govSubcommittee on Intergovernmental Re- ernments have made to resolve their fislations of the Committee on Government cal crisis. During this same 13-year peOperations, which I am priviJeged to riod, State and loca l expenditures will chair, has been examining the critical, h r.ve more than d oubled-rising from but largely misunderstood, topic of Fed- $34.5 billion in 1055 to approximately eral-State-local relations. On the basis $84 billion for fiscal 1967. The increase of the subcommittee's diverse legislative in the number and amount of- Federal and research undertakings, I am now aid available to State and local govconvinced that the success of the Great ernments, then, is not the most signifiSociety programs-and indeed, perhaps cant factor in the total State-local fiscal the future of American federalism- picture, but it has thrust greater burdens largely depends on whether or not we on a n already strained intergovernmenrecognize and overcome the crisis in gov- tal system. State and local employment, for exernmental m anpower, especially as it involves State and local governments. In ample, reached the 8 million mark last his May 11 address at Princeton Univer- year. This represented a half million sity, President Johnson took note of this increase over the 19'64 fi gure, a 2.2 milcrisis and called for a joint effort to sur- lion rise from the 1961 fi gme, and a 4.7 million hike from the 1946 employment mount it. But to date, we at the national level level. By way of contrast, the Federal h ave acted largely as though the crisis Government employed 2.6 million workdoes not exist. During the past five ses- ers in 1965, or 60 ,000 more than in sions of Congress we have developed the 1964. This figure-was 200,000 above that most impressive package of Federal of· 1961, but 100,000 less than in 1946 . legislation since the New Deal to attack These comp&.risons dramatically high.: poverty, ignorance, uneven economic de- light the strenuous efforts State and velopment, discrimination, and urban local governments have made in the blight and sprawl. For the most part past two decades to meet the demand we have utilized the categorical grant- for more public services. A breakdown of the 8 million Statein-aid device as the basic weapon in this many-faceted attempt to achieve a social local employees, by jurisdictional cateand economic betterment of all our peo- gories, is equally striking. State govple. But the grant-in-aid involves joint vernments now account for over oneefforts, not simply Federal efforts. It fourth of the State and local total. involves joint action, not just Federal Counties have one-eighth of all such action. It involves the utilization of employees, while municipalities engage governmental manpower at all levels, nearly one-fourth, and school districts a little less than a third. Townships not merely the F ederal. The grant-in-aid today is the most employ 3.5 percent, and other special striking symbol of cooperative federal- districts, 2 perce1,t of the total. From ism. Yet its effective use constitutes one 1961 to 1965, the States, other special of the greatest challenges to creative districts, townships, school districts, and federalism. And in the final analysis, counties--in that order-experienced our heavy reliance on the grant mech- the greatest increase in employment. Changes in · occupational categories anism has made the gover~ental manpower crisis a crisis of contemporary further highlight the impact of public demand for new or improved·State and federalism. governmental services. From April Most of us are unaware of the extent local 1957 to October 1965, the number of fullto which we have turned to the grant- time State and local highway workers in-aid in our efforts to implement the rose by 24 percent. Employment in poEisenhower program, to chart the New lice protection increased by 30 percent, Frontier, and to establish the Great Society. From 1955 through 1967, total and in public health and hospitals by 41 THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF 1966 Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to enable greater colla boration in personnel matters between and among the levels of government in order to improve t he administration of Federal grant-in-aid programs and to strengthen the public service of the States and their localities. No. 86 percent. The number of full-time public employees in education soared by 60 percent, and those in public welfare, by 62 percent. Much of this massive growth in State and local employment can be attributed to the population explosion and the demand for expanded services generated by it. The physical and social problems stemming from urbanization and suburbanization, however, have been other key factors in developing greater needs for police, fire, housing, sanitation, welfare, and other public services. In addition, one of the byproducts of our a ffluent society is the rise in popular expectations with respect to governmental services. To put it more bluntly, the American citizem-y is not willing to settle for the level and quality of services that were provided three, or even two, decades ago. THE FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY The c1isis in State and local employment, however, also bears a close relationship to expanded Federal programs and activity. Federal programs in highway construction, education, urban ren ewal, housing, water pollution control, and poverty-to mention only a fewh ave produced new and urgent personnel needs at the . State and local levels. Moreover, other new legislation in the fields of primary and secondary education, the aged, and medical assistance-if inadequately planned for-will only aggravate this manpower crisis. Much of the recent Federal aid legislation sets only general goals and provides the funds necessary to achieve them. The job of implementation falls to the States, the counties, and the cities, which then have to "staff up" to accomplish the objectives of this legislation. Further, some Federal aid programs simply make .money available to the States and municipalities for developing their own plans for use of such funds . In these instances, Federal agencies merely play the role of disbursing agent to underwrite plans and projects Initiated and developed at the State and local levels. Finally, many of these Federal efforts generate counterpart efforts at other levels of gove1nment, with many States and localities enacting legislation in program areas similar to those covered in Federal legislation. In these various ways, congressional action directly or indirectly has contributed to the extraordinary growth of public employment at the State and local levels. So, the States now employ more than 2 million workers with a monthly payroll of $850 million, and �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - local governments employ nearly 6 million workers with a monthly payroll of $2.5 billion. We have reached the point where, on a day-to-day basis, intergovernmental relations are primarily administrative rela,tions. As the recent subcommittee survey, "The Federal.System as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," pointed out, the authorizing statutes, the funds, and the legislative oversight which affect Federal-State-local relations come from legislative bodies. Policy directives, budgetary review and control, and administrative rules and regulations come from top management policymakers. Advice, assistance, and support, as well as complaints, criticism, and censure, come from officeholders, individual citizens, and interest groups at all levels. These basic forc es in our pluralistic political system shape and sustain the intricate pattern of today's intergovernmental relations. But the "wheelhorses of federalism" are administrative, professional , and t echnical personnel-the Federal middle-managem ent aid offi. cials, their fieldmen, and their functional counterparts at the State and local levels . We must focus our attention, then , on the largely unexplored topic of intergovernmental m anpower if our eff01ts to achieve a creative f ederalism are to succeed. The various growth figur es I have cited indicate that State and local governments are vigorously attempting to provide the m anpower needed to administer the new joint-action programs as well as their own . They suggest that present Federal efforts in this area are inadequate, since they are geared largely to the needs of certain grant progr ams and to certain categories of specialized personnel administering them. They indicate that the Federal Government has a greater responsibility to provide financial, technical, and other forms of assistance to the States and localities to h elp them mount a broad attack on this manpower crisis. And they indicate the critica l need for the legislation I am introducing today. Economy and efficiency compel our concern, for the wisest use of the Federal grant-in-aid dollar depends upon how well we m eet this challenge. Improved public administration makes it necessary, since the success of these various programs depends on our ability and willingness to solve this crit ical problem. Improved intergovernmental cooperation requires it, for conflict between and among administrators is one of the major sources of friction in contemporary Federal-State-local r elations. Finally, manpower needs of State and local governments in the years immediately ahead clearly dictate that the Federal Government must join with the other levels of government in helping to surmount this crisis. Present estimates indicate that total governmental employment will reach the 13 million m ark by 1975. As in the past t wo decades, nearly all of the increase will be in State and local governmental agencies. Continued population growth and the ·migration of people from rural to urban areas, and from cities to sub- 10983 SENATE urbs, will raise the requirements for public health services, education, police and fire protection, sanitation, street and highway maintenance, welfare, and other services. Consequently, State and local government employment is expected to rise by more than 38 percent between now and 1975 , whereas little change is expected in Federal employment-barring, of course, major unemployment, big wars, or other national catastrophes. There already exists a shortage of welltrained and highly qualified administrative, professional, and technical personnel at all levels of government, and forecasts indicate this gap will grow. Many well-trained and well-qualified employees in State and local governments were hired during the depression years and are now approaching retirement age. More than one-third of all municipal executives fall in this category and will retire within the next decade. · In certain specialized categories, howeve1'., the proportion is even higher. Half of the Nation's municipal health directors, for example, will be eligible for retirement within the next 10 years. And a recent survey of New York City revealed that one out of every five budgeted positions of a professional, managerial, .or technical nature-excluding education-was vacant. Many others were filled with people not fully qualified . More or less similar conditions exist in many other of the Nation's cities. By 1980, local governments will have to recruit approximately 300,000 additional administrative employees to achieve their current program obj ectives. When the long-term implications of r ecently enacted programs are considered, this m anpower gap widens. Witness these facts: That, as of 1964, it was estimated that the Nation's counseling personnel would have to be increased during the subsequent 3 years by approximately 90 percent to m eet the new requirements for public schools, public employment offices, and other governm ental a gencies; that there will be an estimated 3,000 vacancies each year for trained, recreation workers, but only about 600 persons complete preparation for this occupation annually; that there will be 200 traffic engineer vacancies occurring annually, but there are only approximately 50 n ew gradu ates in this specialized area; that there will be at least 2 vacancies for every graduate of a university course in city management; and that between 1960 and 1970, accordIng to t h e Manpower Commission's report, the overall demand for professional and technical personnel at the local level will h ave increased by 40 p ercent. These current and projected estimates of governmental manpower sho1tages have implications extendin g far beyond the individual States, communities, and programs that are affected. They indicate that we can take no great comfort in the fact that State and local employment has reached the 8 million mark. They indicate that State and local governments generally-not just a few of these jurisdictions-are having difficulty in attracting and holding professional, managerial, and technical personnel, and that these levels will experience even greater difficulties in the future. They suggest that decisionmakers at all levels of Government are not yet fully aware of the c1itical nature of this manpower gap, and that long-range planning in this area is in its infancy. They further corroborate John W. Gardner's assessment-in his book on "Excellence"that: • • • The demand for hlg-h-talent manpower is firmly rooted In the level of technological complexity which characterizes modern life, and In the complexity of modern social organization. And more important than either of these is the r ate of Innovation and change In both technological a nd social spheres. In a world that Is rocking with change we n eed more than anything else a high capacity for adjustment to changed circumstances, a en.pa.city for innovation. And finally , these estimates document the need for a national policy on intergovernmental personnel. The legislation I introduce today provides such a policy. CHA RTING A COURSE The proposed Intergovernmental Personnel Act does not purport to solve all the manpower problems faced by State and local governments. There is, of course, no panacea for the absolute shortages in the country in certain prof essional fields. The Federal Government in a variety of ways is now assisting in the professional education of many in these fields. But these measures are geared to specific Federal program n eeds and specific types of personnel. They must be supplemented to meet the particular staffing requirements of State and local public agencies. Personnel administration in the S tates and localities must be equipped to deal with the whole range of State and local job needs. Practical m ethods must be devised for r ecruitment, selection, utilization, and development within the realities of current supply and demand. At the same time, a rational plan for meeting projected n eeds must be devised and initiated. This legislation will encourage the developm ent of such m ethods and plans. The ac t deals direct ly with three major hurdles confronting State and local governments in recruiting and holding qualified employees. A fourth-low salary schedules--is not so directly considered, but it is a topic that cannot be ignored. Generally, State and local salary schedules-though better today than they were a few years ago-are still lower t han those at both the Federal Government and private industry. The Municipal Manpower Commission r eport found: S ala ries are a major source of dissatisfaction among m ore than one-third of a ll mu nicipal executives- And thatnine out of ten believe that their salaries a re not as high as comparable posi tlons I carry I in private business, a nd 60 percent believe that Federal salaries would also be higher. Not so long ago, Clarence B. Randall, the distinguished Chairman of the Panel that President Kennedy appointed to 1·eview Federal salary policy, wrote: Inadequate Federa l pay poses two problems that seriously hamper Federal agencies' operation . It's a tossup in the Federal service whether getting the best people Is more difficult than keeping the good ones. • • • �10984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE The average salary of vocational rehabllltaInadequate compensation ls one of the principal reasons for reluctance to enter Fed- tlon counsellors ranges !rom an annual mln!eral service. In fact, it frequently eliminates mum of $6,051 to a maximum of $7,712. Such groups o! potential candidates !or Federal counsellors are responsible for ln!tlating and positions. On others it Imposes severe fi- carrying out rehabilitation processors for nancial sacrifices . First there are those who p ersons who are physically and mentally have not yet reached the top of their career h andicapped. The position usually requires ladders and who are still faced with such a college degree and some experience 1n the real problems as mortgages and their ch!l- field of vocational guidance, psychology, dren's education. • • • Not so generally social work, personnel work, or industrial known a.re the problems associated with rel ations. filling second echelon positions. • • • The average salary of an administrative I do not contend th at government salaries officer In a State's Civil Defense program should be Identical with those in Industry. ra nges from a minimum of $ 6,893 to a maxiOn the contrary, I never want to see the mum of $0 ,819. An employee In this posimoney seekers go Into government. • • • tion provides administrative assistance In But the present disparity between publlc pay the personn el, budgetary, and fi scal areas to and private pay In the leadership positions is Clvll Defense offices ; the position u sually a scandal. It must be corrected or the r equires a college degree and considerable United States will not be able to fulfill the experience In the fi eld of general adminhigh destiny to which It has bee n called In istration, office m anagement, or a combinathis difficult modern world. tion of both . While Mr. Randall was primarily conIn light of these and other findings , I cerned with Federal pay scales-and it am convinced that the President and the should be noted that his panel's recom- Advisory Commission on Intergovernmendations were ins"trumental in enact- mental Relations should join in launchment of the Federal Salary Refo1m Acts ing a national study of State and local of 1962 and 1964-his r emarks have no salary reform. The issue is that critical. less relevance to the States and their lo- Constitutional barriers and the dictates calities. The report of the Municipal of interlevel comity bar direct consideraManpower Commission and the survey tion of this question in the proposed legof Federal aid officials conducted by the islation. But certain of its provisions Intergovernmental Rela tions Subcom- b ea r indirectly on such reform-includmittee clearly indicate that low pay and ing those sections which seek respectively the resulting high personnel turnover to streng then the merit system , upgrade have served to put m any State a nd loca l classification and salary schedules, and governments at a competitive disadvan- improve training programs in these tage. And the lates t figures-July 1, jurisdictions . 1965-for specific State and loca l profes ! I) THE MERIT SYSTEM IN GRANT-IN-AID sional and technica l positions, indicate PROGRAMS that, despite some recent improvements, A basic problem in the intergovernsalary schedules are still a critica l problem. A few case studies will illustrate m ental p er sonnel field concerns the m erit principle, and particularly as it my point: The average a nnual sala ry of a State hea r- applies to Fede ral g rant-in-aid proings r efer ee ranges from $7,750 minimum t o g rams. The proposed Intergove rnmen$9,737 ma ximum. Such referee s are respon- t a l Personnel Act deals directly with sible for preparing, conducting, and deciding this controversial issue. My experie nce quasi-judicial h earings Involving questions ::i s a State legisla tor, as Governor of the of statutory compliance, claims, a nd viola State of M a ine. a nd as a U.S. Senator tions of regulations in Issu es between St ate convinces me of the validity of this prindepartments and other parties; they u sually ciple. I s trongly beli eve that an o pen must have an A.B. and a law degree. The average annual sala ry of a n unemploy- system of public empl oym ent, operating ment claims deputy ranges from a mini m um under public rul es and based , among or $5,237 to a maximum of $6 ,604 . This other factors, on competitive exa minatechnical position Involves non-moneta ry tions , equa l pay for equal work, tenure determinations on unemployment Insura nce contingent on successful perfor mance, claims, Includin g the adj udication of ques- and promotion on evalua ted capacity tionable or contested claims; successful ap- a nd se rvice , provides one of th e s urest pllcants must possess considerable prior ex- foundations for the development and perience or college training. The average salary for public ass istance m ai ntenance of a n efficient career civil case worker supervisors ranges from a mini- service based on excelle nce. Equally immum of $5,8 10 to a maximum of $ 7 ,762 . This portant, It m eet s the democratic objecpost involves professional social work a t the tive of equal opportunity. local level and Immediate supervision a nd deThe b eg innings of State a nd local civil velopment of a group Of case workers; It service, b ased on the merit pri nciple, first usuall y requires training In a grad uate appeared in the 1880's, followin g the enschool of social work . The an n u al pay of sanitarians ranges from a c tment of the Federal legislatio n . a mini mum of $5, 142 to a m aximum of $ 6,592. Thanks to the efforts of the National This professional position In environmen tal Civil S erv ice Leag ue and ot hers, addisanitation work Invol ves control of commu- tional jurisdictions subsequently adopted nicable diseases, promotion of health and the s ystem. But widespread acceptance safety, and the solution of environmental did not come until the 1930's. Beginhealth problems; It usually requires a col- n ing with an amendment to the Social lege degree with speclallzatlon In the physical Secu rity Act in 1939, the Federal Govand biological sciences . ernment contributed to this development The mean salary of a public h ealth nurse by specifying standa rds which would ranges from a mlnlmwn of $4 ,778 to a maxlmwn of $6,1 94. T h is position usually re- bind State and local agencies to such quires graduation from an accredited school requirements If ihey received Federal of nursing, State registration, and a program funds under certain grant programs. In spite of these advances and some reof stud y In publlc health nursing, or appropriate public health nursing experience. cent improvements in a fe w of the larger 3 May 25, 1966 States and in some municipalities, only 28 States and only our larger cities today have a merit system covering employees in most of the executive departments ; 22 States and most of the smaller local jurisdictions only apply the principle selectively. In these 22 States, the merit principle applies in all instances to departments administering those few federally aided programs ,subject to merit requirements, but in only some in.stances to employees of one or more other departments. In these States, the impact of those grants-based on approximately nine statutes and administered by the Departments of Health, Education , and Welfare; Labor; and Defense-has been a primary if not exclusive factor in encouraging the merit principle. Is this record adequate? I think not. I am completely aware that formal merit systems based on detailed examination, promotion, dismissal, and other factors may not prevent political sabotage of the p1inciple. I am also aware that a patronage-based system of personnel administration may produce at any given time a competent civil service with high morale. In general, however, I am convinced that the application and extension of the formal requirements have had a salutary effect. And I am convinced that the arguments President Roosevelt advanced in his message calling for application of the merit principle to the social security program are as valid today as they were in 1939: • • • I recommend th at the States be required, as a condition for the receipt o! Federal funds , to establlsh and maintain a merit system for t he selection of personnel. Such a requirement would represent a protection to the States and cl tlzens thereof r ather than an encroachment by the Federal Government, since It would automatically promote efficiency and eliminate the necessity for minute Federal scrutiny of State operations. F or these reasons, I b elieve m erit standards should be added to more grant-in-aid programs as a condition for elig ibility. Title I of the Intergovernm e ntal P ersonnel Act of 1966 provides for this by autho1izing the President to require , insofar as he d eems p ractica ble, that, as a condition f or receiving Fede r a l funds under any grant program , personnel engaged in its a dminis tration mus t be employed under a me1it syst em m eeting Federal standards. This discretionary provision recognizes the difficulties of extending the merit system to all g r a nt-inaid programs. More particul arly, it recognizes the troubles inherent in att empting to apply it to many of the recently enacted p rograms. At the same time, it encourages action in those grant programs which involve s ubstantial Federal funds and are on going, rath e r than experimental , ventures. The Federa l hig hway prog ram immediately comes to mind as an excelle nt candidate. The proposed legislation also seeks to strengthen the merit system by· providing that the grants authorized for improving S t ate personn el administration under title II be used to strengthen or e xtend the career civil service of the State. To sum up, the Federal Govern- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ment, a majority of the States, most of the larger cities, and nearly all of the experts in the field recognize the relationship between attracting and retaining competent public administrators and the presence of · a viable merit system. These provisions of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act are based on this relationship. (2) OVERALL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Aside from the Federal interest in more effective administration of grant programs, there is a clear Federal interest in strengthening the overall personnel management of the States and their localities as partners in the federal system. The absence of an effective system of personnel management contributes to the manpower difficulties now confronting State and local governments. Both the merit principle and modern management techniques require such a system, which calls for imaginative recruitment efforts and sophisticated examination techniques; an intelligent placement system, which fits the man to the job, and a fair and rewarding promotion system; the development and continuous updating of a position classification plan, since the grouping of positions into classes helps to identify questions of pay, lines of promotion, requirements for transfer, and other basic administrative questions; the meaningful development of the time-honored concept of a career service, in which advancement is not limited merely to service in one agency; and planning for the manpower needs of the years ahead. These are but a few of the basic objectives of good personnel management. Concern with the merit system initially prompted the development of examinations and classification plans. And the requirements of modern management and modern government have modified and expanded the original list of personnel administrative functions. Yet, in nearly all of the States and localities that lack a general civil service system, personnel management, in practice, is usually limited to the job classification and salary setting functions. Even in those States possessing a viable merit system, conflicts between the policing efforts of the Civil Service Commission and the management concerns of the Governor-his staff and personnel officer-sometimes have impeded improvements in this area. In general, then, State and local resources for public personnel administration have not kept pace with the growth of the programs they administer. With few exceptions, State and local personnel agencic:; have not been equipped or given additional support for new workloads. The inadequate support of personnel planning and operations has left many personnel agencies short of needed professional personnel, including trained job analysts, personnel psychologists and training staff. For example, only 10 States have as many as 25 professional, administrative, and technical employees in the State civil service or merit system agency to handle their continuing responsibilities, let alone to undertake broadened activities. Yet State and local personnel agencies must cope with new needs and new problems. The Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1966 recognizes these needs and attempts to come to grips with these problems. Title II of the proposed legislation authorizes grants to enable States to strengthen their systems of personnel administration, to provide State personnel services to smaller jurisdictions of local government, and to stimulate projects for the improvement of personnel administration in their lar'ger cities. To qualify, States would need to develop programs of personnel improvement which might cover such topics as: expansion of the coverage of a State merit system; planning for manpower needs; improvement in one or more of the traditional areas of recruitment, examination, position classification plans, and compensation schedules; or possibly research and demonstration projects in the new areas of electronic data processing and motivational research. Title II also seeks to improve the personnel administration of smaller units of local government. Grants are authorized for the development of State plans that might involve broader coverage of local employees under a State merit system, State technical personnel services to such units of government, cooperative research and demonstration projects in this field, or cooperative intergovernmental ·efforts relating to loans, transfers, or promotions of personnel. The title assigns full responsibility to the States for developing their own programs and a coordinating role for their local jurisdictions. There is a need for pioneering efforts in State assistance to nonmetropolitan local governments. At the local level, the smaller jurisdictions are not in a position to establish modern personnel systems that meet the need for broader recruitment for professional personnel or for attracting able young men and women who regard these initial jobs as rungs on the career ladder rather than as blind alleys. Intergovernmental ·c ooperation with the possibility of increased mobility can help meet these prnblems. Self-contained local personnel systems present certain problems of parochialism even in our larger metropolitan governments. They are simply not feasible for the smaller nonmetropolitan governments in terms of either the expense or the availability of technica l services. Hence there is a need for State services to the nonmetropolitan governments. The act provides for a variety of services ranging from merit system coverage to more limited specialized services. Part C of the title authorizes a separate program of Federal assistance for personnel improvement in our larger cities. There is a pressing need for innovative activities in our metropolitan areas. The shortages of professional, administrative, and technical personnel require planned recruitment, selection to assure the Intake of a fair share of young talent, and a long-range staff development pro- 10985 gram covering various occupational fields. Imaginative job analyses can lead to the establishment . of new types of auxiliary jobs to help meet the absolute shortage in many professional and technical fields. They also may open up opportunities for job training and employment for many of the disadvantaged. While public personnel administration is not a social program designed to solve the problem of employn1ent of the disadvantaged, governments, as large employers, can and should show leadership in this· area. The act provides for project grants for metropolitan personnel administration in order to permit a wide range of experimentation and demonstration projects to strengthen personnel administration and meet urgent manpower problems. These grants may be used for personnel planning, for upgrading or establishing personnel agencies, for improving personnel operations in specific functions, or for initiating pilot projects designed to meet current and projected needs. The States are given the initial opportunity to work with the cities in developing project proposals under this section, with special emphasis on the particular problems of our larger metropolitan units of general local government. But if a State fails to submit any projects after one year, individual metropolitan units may then initiate their own projects. This aproach, I feel, recognizes the necessary coordinating role of the States in personel management, while permitting direct Federal-local efforts· in cases of State inaction. Title II, it should be noted, would be administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. More specifically, It is anticipated that HEW's Division of State Merit Systems would assume primary responsibility for its administration. This division has h a d more practical experience with State personnel systems than any other unit in the Federal Government, thanks to the merit requirements of many HEW grant programs. Moreover, it already has a tradition of extending technical assistance to State and local governments which have sought out its assistance in upgrading their civil service. The concurrence of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, however, would be required before HEW could approve projects for metropolitan jurisdictions. In addition to the grants authorized for State and local personnel administration under title II, the proposed legislation provides another means for Improved intergovernmental collaboration In this field. Title V of the act authorizes the Civil Service Commission to join on a shared-cost basis with States or units of general local government, or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under mutually agreeable regulations. Some authorities believe the Commission already pos.5esses this autho11ty, but the same authorities concede that adequate provision is lacking with respect to financing such joint activity. This title provides a statutory �10986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE basis for the Commission's au thority to enter into such cooperative arran gem ents, and it settles t he financial question by adopting the sh ared-cost formula . In these ways, the proposed legislation squarely confronts many of t h e mo re significant personnel m an agement problems confronting S tate a nd local governm ents t oday. The amounts a uthorized a re m odest, a nd the coopera tive arrangem ents are permissive. But t he fun ds will be seed money well spent, a nd t he devices for cooperation will encourage a concerted a t tack on wh a t we must now concede to be a joint problem. ( 3) TRAINING Inextricably linked to t he m erit system a nd personnel m a n agem ent problems is the n eed for more a nd better tra ining op'por tunities. Ideally , such a progra m should in clude provision fo r orienta tion, in-service and out -ser vice training, tuition r efund, a nd educational leave. It should be r ooted in th e car eer service ethic a nd imply future prospects tha t r eward special effo r t on the part of employees. Our concern h ere is training within the service after a ppoint ment, not educa tion for public service prior to appointmen t . T he la t te r, of course, deserves t h e consideration of a ll of us, a n d hopefully title I of t h e H igh er Education Act of 1965 will resolve some of the problems in t his area. T he man power shortages I have described, a long with t h e mou nting technological, social, a n d econ omic ch an ges affect ing t h e a ctivities of S ta te and local governmen ts, u nderscore t h e emphasis tha t a ll of us should give to establish in g and st ren gthening tra ining progra ms at these levels of governm en t. Many legisla tors , administrators, a nd other public officials n ow recognize the need for such programs. Yet only California, New York, Mich igan, a nd a few other States have t raining programs for top m anagement. Others provide some trainin g fo r other key ·p ersonnel. But a ccording to a r ecen t sur vey conducted by t he International City Man agers Association, most of the States have no t raining or development progra ms for administrative, t echnical, a nd professional personnel. And no city h as anything approaching a model training program. Most existing t raining is still designed to improve the skills of routi ne officeworkers, policem en , and firemen. Moreover, training prog rams stimulated by Federal grants-in-aid are largely geared to specific functional specialties. Such inservice training and education al leave are valuable, of course, but they do not meet the growing requirements of S tate a nd local govern ments for more and better administrative, professiona l, and technical talen t . The repor t of t he Municipal Ma npower Commission a nd the survey of th e Federal aid officials by the subcommittee fully document the need for a Federal response to this critical personnel management deficiency, The Intergover nmental P ersonnel Act attacks this problem of training in four ways. First, title III authorizes Federal departments and agencies conducting programs for their professional, admin- lstrative, and tech nical employees to open t h em up to S ta te and local personnel in counterpart agencies. The S tates or localities would initiate t h e r equest to participate, and f ees for a ttendance could be waived for employees in sh ort -supply categories. S econ d, Federal departments or a gen cies a dministering grant -in-a id programs are a ut horized to establish training programs fo r counte rpart State and local personnel in the professional, a dministrative, and tech nical fields. Such a gencies a re authorized to m ake grants to S tates a nd localities from F ederal funds appropria ted for administrative costs of the progra m to cover the expenses of such training. In a ddition, such F ederal agencies are permi tted t o m ake grants from such funds for educa tional lea ve or comparable arra ngements fo r sa laries a nd training expenses of m erit system employees in short-supply a reas, to permit them to a ttend university or other training courses r elated to their progra m. Third, title IV establish es a grant.;!_!1a id progra m f or inservice training of S tate and local employees. This provision is geared to promoting high levels of per form ance of such personnel, pa rticula rly in th e professional, a dministra tive, and technical a reas, and t h e development of employee potential by providing F ederal fun ds for S tate and local governments t o initiate or strength en t raining programs for t h eir own public servants. Such assista nce would be available only in personnel a reas wh ere compa rable a id is not already provided under other Federa l statutes. The pattern of Federal assista nce h ere roughly pa rallels that of title II, except that the Civil S ervice Commission would be the a dministering a gency. T h e S ta tes would be given t he p1im ary r esponsibility for developing pla ns for the training of their employees and the initia l responsibility for joinin g with local governm ents in the developmen t of t raining progra ms for local personnel. Such pla ns would include provisions for a continuing assessment of training needs, for equitable stan dards r elating to the selection and assignment of per sonnel for t raining, a nd fo r efficient utilization of personnel receiving train ing-including contin ued service for a reasonable period of time. Educa tional leave or other a.rra ngements for salary a nd tra ining payments for periods in excess of a month in a ny one ca lenda r year would be permitted only for career personnel employed under a merit system. In addition, a Sta te plan would include guidelines covering t h e selection of universities or other nongovernmental facilities, when such institutions a re to be used for t raining purposes. The title also autho1izes units of general local government in a State, either jointly or separately, to submit a training plan if , within a year from the effective date of the act, the State fails to submit a proposal which includes sub.stantial provisions for training local government employees. Such proj ect applications would have to m eet the same general requirements applying t o State plans and t he administrative regulations 5 May 25, 1966 establish ed by t h e Civil Service Commission. I n addition , the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing a nd Urban Developm ent would also be r equired for project approval, to assure full considera tion of the special training problems of our Na tion's cities . It is impor tant t o underst and what this title does not provide. It does not , for example, distinguish between m etropolitan a nd n onmetro:i,iolitan units of local government, since the problems relating to inser vice t raining differ mat e1ially fr om those falling under the tra dition al h eading of personnel administration. It d oes n ot compete with title VIII of the Housing Act of 1964 which, a mong other things, a uthorizes m a tching g1·ants t o the States for developing and expanding pr ogra ms to provide special training in skills needed for economic a nd efficient community development to technical and profess ional people who a re employed or are being trained for employm ent in a governmental body which h as resp onsibility for such development. That Housing Act title is prim arily concer ned wit h a compar atively n arrow range of voca tional specialties and, it should be n oted, h as yet to be fund ed . Title IV also is not intended to duplica te or compete ,vith title I of t he High er Educa tion Act of 1965. Tha t Act authorizes the Commission er of Education to m ake gra nts t o strengthen community service programs of colleges a nd univer sities. It is geared to institutions of high er education in t h e Stat es, and to the development of an educational program design ed t o assist in the solution of community problems in ru ral, ur ban , or suburban areas, with particular emph asis on urban and suburban problems. To date, only a few project applications submitted un der t itle I of the High er Educa tion Act of 1965 relate t o t h e broad inservice trainin g n eeds of the various cat egories of State and local personnel. In sh ort, t itle IV is residual. Personn el receiving training under oth er F ederal statutes are specifically excluded from its coverage. It does not repla ce or restrict existing F ederal tra ining programs for a wide va riety of professional personnel in grant-aided fields. But more positively, it m eets the t rainin g n eeds of the Stat es and their localities, as these jurisdictions see them. It em ph asizes training n eeds as t h ey a re seen from the a dministra tive firin g line. It is designed to r epla ce the piecemeal method t ha t has to date cha racterized the Federal approa ch. It is geared to a ttacking a problem tha t a dministrator::; a t a ll levels, as well as experts in public a dministration , h ave described as criti cal. . Finally, it full y recognizes t h a t, as President J oh nson sta ted a t P rinceton : The public serva;:i.t toda y moves along p a ths of a d ven t ure wh ere h e Is h elp less wit hout the tools of a d vanced learnin g. The proposed I n tergovernmenta l Pers on nel Act provides still another m eans for improving t he in-service t r aining capability of State and local governments. Title VI gives prior Congr essional consent to interstate compacts or other agreements, not in conflict with �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 10987 Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- grants In any program fin a nced in whole or sent that the text of the bill, together in part by Federa l funds, the personnel engaged in the ad.ministration of the program with a section-by-section analysis, be be employed under a State or local merit inse1ted in the RECORD immediately fol- system meeting Federal standards. He is lowing my remarks, and that the bill authorized to approve for this purpose standlie on the table for 10 days so that other ards for a merit system of personnel administration. The Federal Government, howSenators may join in cosponsoring it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill ever, shall exercise no authority over the selection, tenure, or compensation of ind ividwill be received and appropriately re- uals ferred; ,and, without objection, the bill system.employed in accordance with such will be printed in the REconD , and will lie TITLE II-GRANT6 FOR s X. ATE AND LOCAL at the desk, as requested by the Senator PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION from Maine. Declaration of Purpose The bill <S. 3408) to strengthen interSEC. 201. The purpose of this title is to governmental cooperation and the ad- provide Federal grants-in-aid to enable each ministration of grant-in-!!id programs, State to strengthen its system of p erson n el to extend State merit systems to addi- ad ministr ation, to provide State personnel CONCLUSION tional programs financed by Feder.al ser vices in nonmetropolita n units of loca l Improved merit systems, improved funds, to provide grants for improvement government, a nd to stimulate projects for State and local personnel management, of state and local personnel administra- the improvement of personnel administration and improved in-service training pro- tion, to authorize Federal assistance in in metropolita n areas. Appropria tion Authorization grams--these are the three basic con- training State and local employees, to SEC. 202. There is hereby authorized to be cerns of the Intergovernmental Personnel provide grants to Sta,te and local governAct of 1966. Put more simply, greater ments for training of their employees, to appropriated for the fisc a l year ending June career competence is the paramount authorize interstate compacts for per- 30, 1967, and each of the four succeeding years, the following sums: (a) $10 ,theme of this legislation. Through a sonnel and training activities, and for fiscal 000,000 for payments to States which h ave judicious combination of grant funds, other purposes; introduced by Mr. Mus- plans for State personnel administration aptechnical assistance, and new devices for KIE, was received, read twice by its title, proved under section 204; (b) $8,000,000 for intergovernmental cooperation in the referred to the Committee on Govern- payments to States which h ave plans -for personnel area, the proposed legislation ment Operations, and ordered to be provision of State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of general loca l governprovides a variety of ways to strengthen printed in the RECORD, as follows: ments approved under section 206; and (c) the professional standing and prestige of s. 3408 $15,000,000 for payments to States or metropersonnel at the State and local levels. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of politan units of general loca l governments The Advisory Commission on Intergov- Representatives of the United States of which have projects for metropolitan p erAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act ernmental Relations went on record at its sonnel administration approved under secmay be cited as the "Intergovernmental PerApril meeting as favoring the objectives tion 208. of this legislation. And at Princeton, son n el Act of 1966." Part A . Grants for State personnel Declaration of Policy President Johnson called for a program administration of assistance to "State and local governSEC. 2. The Congress hereby finds a nd SEC. 203. (a) From the sums a ppropriated ments seeking to develop more effective declares : under section 202(a) the Secretary of Heal th , That effective State and loca l governmen- Education, and Welfare (hereinafter referred career services for their employees." tal institutions are essential in the mainte- to as the Secretary) sh all make annually Prof. Charles Adrian has pointed out n a nce and development of the Feder al sys to States wh ich h ave plans for State that conflict in our cooperative federal tem in a n increasingly complex and grants personnel ad.ministration approved by him system does not stem today from the interdependent society. under section 204. relations between the levels of governTh at, since numerous governmental activ (b). The sum availabl e a nnually for grants ment as such, but that "friction results ities administered by the Sta te and loca l under this section s h a ll be a llotted among governments are related to national purpose whenever the administrative personnel the States under a formula approved by the at a particular level for a particular and are fin a nced in part by F edera l funds, a Secretary which shall give weight to the national interest exists in a high calib er of number of employees under the merit sys function are not fully professionalized." public service in State a nd local governments. tem and the financial ability of the State The findings in our survey, "The Federal Th at intergovernmental cooperation in as indicated by its r ela tive per capita inSystem as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," State personnel administration on a merit come, except th at each State will receive clearly illustrate the administrative diffi- basis has contributed to greater efficiency not less than $25,000. culties produced by such friction. in various federally a ided programs ·and Requirem ents of State Plans We n eed greater expertise at these should b e extended generally to such proSEC . 204. A S tate plan for State personnel grams. levels, then, because its absence is now administration to be approved by the SecThat F ederal financial and technical assis- retary mustone of the primary sources of tension and tance to State and local governments for conflict in intergovernmental relations. (a) des ignate the appropriate S tate perstrengthening their personnel administra - sonnel agency for the administration of the We need it because t he success of the tion will Improve the effectiveness of the pla n; Great Society programs depends on re- public service and is in the n ational interest. (b) provide for a merit system conform ducing these antagonisms. We need it That the continuing training and developto the Federal sta ndards established because we live in an age of administra- ment of career employees, particularly in ing under this Act for a Merit System of Per tive federalism ; in an age of more, not professi onal, administrative , and technical sonnel Administration; · less, use of grants-in-aid; in an age of fields, are critical to the success of joint Fed(c) set forth a program for the improve more, not less, contact among the ad- eral-State-loca l programs and that the Fed- ment and s trengthening of State personnel eral Government should encourage and assist ministrative officials at all levels of administration which m ay include, among government. We need it if the States in such training for State and local em- other features : ployees. ( 1) expansion of the coverage of S tate and their localities are to be vigorous TITLE I-EX PAN S ION OF MERIT SYSTEM I N employees under the State m er it system; members in the great partnership that FED ERALLY AID ED PROGRAMS (2) assessment of m anpower need s in was established in 1789. We need it if we developing programs and methods for m eet Declara tion of Purpose are--in the President's words-to "dethem; SEc. 101. The purpose of this title is to Ing(3) velop a creative federalism to best use improvement in one or more a reas of achieve greater efficiency in the administra- personnel administration such as r ecruit the wonderful diversity of our institu- tion of programs financed In whole or in ment, examinations, classificat ion, and comtions and peoples to solve the problems, part by Federal funds extending the a pplicafulfill the dreams of the American tion of personnel standards on a merit b asis pensation pla.ns: (4) research and demonstration projects people." in the a dministration of such programs. for the use of valid personnel methods, inThis is precisely what the IntergovPersonnel Sta ndards cluding electronic data processing techernmental Personnel Act of 1966 is a-11 SEC. 102. The President is authorized to niques; about. And that is precisely why I am require, insofar as he deems practicable, that (5) development of a uxiliary or support as a condition for the receipts of Federal types of positions to perform appropriate introducing this measure today. any law of the United States, for cooperative efforts and mutual assistance relating to the administration of personnel and training programs for State and local employees. The New England Governors' Conference already has launched a survey of the possibilities of regional collaboration with respect to personnel training programs. Building on the precedent set in the Housing Act of 1961-which gave prior congressional approval to interstate compacts establishing metropolitan agencies in multistate urban areas--this provision hopefully will encourage expanded efforts to develop training programs on a regional basis. ' �10988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - functions currently performed in occupations in which there are now shortages; and (6) interdepartmental and intergovernmental cooperation in personnel administration; (d) provide for financial participation by the State in the costs of merit system administration at least equal in amount to the Federal grants, and further provide that the operation of the plan wlll not result in a reduction In State expenditures for such administration or the substitution of Federal for State funds previously available for merit system administration; and (e) provide that the State agency will m ake such reports in such form and containing such Information as the Secretary m ay from time to time require, and shall keep and make available such records as he m ay r equire for the verification of such reports. Part B. Grants for State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of local government SEC. 205(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202(b) the Secretary shall m a ke annually gra nts to States which have plans a pproved by him under section 206 for services to nonmetropolitan units of gener a l local government. (b) The sum available annually for grants under this section shall be allotted under a formUln approved by the Secretary which shall give weight to (1) the number of employees and number of local governments served, (2) the scope of State services provided, and ( 3) the financial ablll ty of the State as indicated by i ts r elative per capita income, except that each State sh all receive not less than $25,000. Requirements of Sta te plan SEC. 206. A plan for State services on personnel administration to nonmetropolltan units of general local government to· be approved by the Secretary must( a) designate the State agency, which may be the agency des ignated under section 204, for the administration of the plan; (b) set forth a program for Improvement and strengthening of personnel administration of such local governments by one or more of the following means : ( 1) the c:>veragc of lc,c1l employees under the State mertt system; (2) technical services In one or m ore areas or personnel admJnlstratlon s uch as recruitm e nt. exnmlnations, classification and compensation pla ns; (3 J cooperative resear ch and demon stration projects for the u se of valid personnel m ethods ; or (4) intergovernmental cooperntlve arra n gem ents between the Sta te and local governments or among local governments, Including facili tating Inter jur isdictional loans, transfers or promotions or personnel; (c) provide for financial participation by State or such local governments, or both, In the costs of providing services a t least equa l In runount to the F ed er al grants, a nd provid e further thn t the opera tlon of the pla n will not result in a r eduction In State and local expenditures or a eubstitutlon of Federal for State or loca l funds for personnel admin is tration; and (d) provide that the State agency will m a ke such reports in such form and containing su ch information as t he Secretary may from time to time r equire and shall keep and m a ke available such records as he may require for the verification of such reports, Part C. Grants for personnel administration in m etropolitan areas Soc. 207(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202 ( c ) the Secretary shall m a ke an nually payments to States or m&tropolitan units of general loca l government which have projects approved by him under section 206. SENATE (b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, shall establlsh such standards for the distribution of grants under this section among the States a nd among such metropolitan units as will most effectively carry out the purposes of this Act, and shall estabJlsh regulations for financial participation by States or such units, or b oth, in an amount equal to at least one-third of the costs of each project, including the reasonable value of facliities a nd personnel services made avaliable by the State or such loca l government for the administration of the project. Project requirements SEC. 208, Projects to be approved for grants unde r section 207 shall conform to ,criteria established in regUlations which shall be Issu ed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Grants wiU be used, in accordance with such regulations, for projects for strengthening personnel administration on a merit basis in order to meet increasingly critical problems of administration In metropolitan units of general loca l government. Projects may Include, but are not limited to-( 1) assessment of m anpower needs In developing programs and methods for meeting them; (2) Improvement of classification and compensatioh plans, and recruitment and examinations, particularly for profeeslonal, administrative and technical personnel In shortage ca tegorles; (3) application of psychological and other research in personnel administration directed toward improvement of selection and development of members of disadvantaged groups whose capacities are not being fully used; (4) plans for establishing auxiliary or support types of positions to perform a ppropriate functions currently performed In occupations In which there are now shortages; (5)research and demonstration relating to t echniques, such as electr onic d a ta processing, for Improving the speed and quality of personnel operations; and ( 6) cooperative activities in recruitment and examining by governmental Jurisdictions operating In metropolitan areaa. Exceptlon--Submittal of Local Projects SEC. 209. After the expiration of one year from the date or enactment of this Act, if a State h as n ot submitted any proje{:ts under section 208 of this title which have received approval, the metropolitan units of general local government may submit proj ects for approval , a nd such projects may be approved If they comply with the reqUlrements or section 208. Administration SEC. 210. The provisions of this title shall be adminis tered by the Secr etary, who Is authorized to furnish such technica l assistance to States or units or general local governments and to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title , Suspension of Grants SEC. 2 11. Whenever the Secretary, after giving reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or local agency administering a plan approval under this title, finds ( 1) that s uch plan has been so changed that it no longer complies with the provisions of thls title, or (2) that 1n the administration of the plan there Is a failure to comply substantially with any s uch provision, the Secr etary shall notify such agency o! h!s findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or in his discretion further pay- 1 May 25, 1966 ments wlll be limited to projects pnder, or portions of, the plan not affected by such failure), until he ls satisfied that there will no longer be a ny failure to comply. TITLE III-AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING D eclaration of Purpose SEC. 301. The plll'pose of this title is to foster the training of State and local employees by permitting their attendance at Federal courses, and by authortzing Federal departments or agencies administering grantin-aid progrruns to conduct training and to permit Federal grants to States and localities to be used for training and educational leave. Participation In Federal Programs SEC. 302. Any Federal department or agency conductlng training programs for professiona l, administrative, or technical employees In the Federa l service is a uthorized to include In such programs , under conditions imposed by the head of such agency, State and local officers and employees in sim_Uar or related functions, on the request of the State or local government. Fees for attendance at any such training program may be received by the Federal agency conducting It and expended In the same manner as fees r eceived for attendance of Federal employees, or the payment of fees may be waived in occupational categories d etermined by the head of the Federa l department or agency to be in short supply. Training In Grant-Aided Programs SEC. 303 , Any Federal department or agency administering a program of gr ants or financia l assistance to States and localities is au thorized (a) to conduct training for State and local officers and employees in professional, administrative, and technical fields r elated to such programs: (b) to make grants to State and localities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administrative expenses of the program, unc!er the usual terms and conditions of such grants, for the conduct of training for S tate and local officers and employees In such progra m: and (c) to make grants to State and loca lities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administra tive expenses of the progr am , under the usual terms a nd conditions of s u ch grants, for education a l leave or comparable arrangements for sala ries a nd training expenses or employees In professiona l, administrative, and technica l fields who h ave been employed under a merit system of personn el administration in State or local agencies ad ministering the federally aided program, In order for . them to attend university or other training courses related to the program. S aving Provis ion SEC. 304. The a uthorizations in this title are not a limita tion on exis ting authority u nder la w for Federal d epartments or agencies to conduct training or to make grants for training or edu cational leave. TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Declaration of Purpose SEC. 401. The purpose of this title Is to promote higher levels of performance of employees In the public service, particularly in professional, administrative, and techn ica l fields , and the development of employee potentia l by providing Federal assistance to State and local gov er nm en ts to ins ti tu t c and carry out programs for the training of their employees ln fields where such Federal assistance is not already provided under grant-in s.Id or other statutes. Appropriation Authorization SEC. 402. There Is h ereby authorized to be appropriated the following sums for payments to States and units of general local government which h a ve plans approved un der this title for the training of their employees: tl0,000,000 for fiscal year 1967, $25,- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - 000,000 for fiscal year 1968, and $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1969, 1970, and 1971. Grants Authorized SEC. 403(a). From the sums appropriated under section 402 the Civil Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission). shall make annually grants to States or units of general local government which have plans approved by It under sections 404 and 405, respectively. , (b) The sums available annually !or grants under this section shall be allotted among the States, and between States a nd units of general local government In a State, under formulas to be approved by the Commission which shall gi ve weight to the number of State and local employees, the number of local governments p a rticipating, the scope of training to be provided , and the financial ab lllty of th e State as indicated by Its relative per capita Income , excep.t that each State will receive not Jess than $25,000 for fiscal year 1967 and $50,000 annually therea fter. Requirements of State plans SEC. 404. A State plan for training of officers and employees to be approved mus t ( 1) designate the State agency for the admini stration of the plan; ( 2) set forth a program for the training of omcers and employees of States and units of general loca l government which will meet the objectives of this title and provide for training personnel of agencies not r ece iving assis tance under other Federal program s ; (3) provide for continuing assessment of trai ning needs ; (4) set for th equitable standards for the selection and assignment of personnel for training; (5) provide fo r the efficient utillzation of p ersonnel who h ave been given such training, a nd for their continued service for a reasonable p eriod of time; (6) provide that educational leave or other arra n gements for p aymP.nt of salary and training expenses for period s In excess or one month in a ny one year sh a ll be allowed only for career personnel empl oyed in accordance with a merit system; (7) set forth, when training ls to be given through univers ity or other nongovernmental facilities t h e policies with respect to the selection of such facilities and the types of agreements to be entered Into for th e training ; and (8) provide for financl ,t l p:nticlpation by the States. the uni ts of genera l loca l government thereof, or from private sources. in a n amount equal to one-fourth of the cost or the training, In cluding the reasonable value of facilities and personal se rvices made available for admini stration of the training, provided that the operation of the plan wlll not r esu lt in a reduction in State and local expenditures or substitution of Federal for State or loca l funds !or training . Exception-Submitta l of Loca l Plans SEC. 405. I! after one year from the effective date of this Act, a State has not sub mitted and had approved a plan under sec tion 404, Including provision for training o! local governmental emr-'oyees Involving expenditures at Ins t equ iv alent to the expendi tures for training of State government employees, one or more units of general loca l government In the State Jointly or severally may submit a plan for such training during the following fiscal year, designating a single local agency for adm ini stration and otherwise conforming to the requirements of section 404 under regulations which sha ll be prescrl bed by the Commission with the concurrence or the Secretary o! Housing and Urban Development. Administration SEC. 406. The provisions of this title shall be admlnlstered by the Commission, which SENATE 10989 Is authorized to furnish such technical assistance to States or units of general iocal government a nd to prescribe such regulations as m ay be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title. Suspension of Grants SEC. 407. Whenever the Commlssion, after giving reasona ble notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or other agency administering any plan app~oved under this title, finds (a) that a State or other plan has been so changed that It no longer compiles with the provis ions of th.ls title, or (b) that in the administration of the plan there ls a !allure to comply s ubstantially with any such provision', the Commission shall notify such agency of !ts findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or In !ts discretion further payments wlll be llmlted to projects under, or portions of, the plan not affected by such !allure) until It ls satisfied that there will no longer be any failure to comply. Metropolltan Unit of General Local Government SEC. 703. "Metropolltan un!t(s) of general local government" mea ns any city or comp a ra ble general-purpose political subdivision of a State with a population of 100,000 or more, as determined by the most recent Federal census, or any county or parish with such population which Includes a city or comparable subdivision with a population of 50,000 or more, as determined by such census. Non-metropolltan Unit qf General Loca l Government SEC. 704. "Non-metropolltan unlt(s) of general local government" means any city, county, p al\ish, town, village or other generalpurpose polltlca l subdivision of a State, except such units of general local government as are included In section 703 of this Act. TITLE V-COOPERATION JN PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE INTER- SEC. 501. The Commission Is authorized to Join, on a shared-cost basis, with State or units of general local government or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon . SEC. 502. The Commission Is authorized, upon written request from a State, a unit of general loca l government thereof, or both, and under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon , to certify to such agencies, from appropriate registers, a llst of ellglble personnel who h av e successfully completed such examinations a nd satisfied such requirements as the Commiss ion has prescribed, upon the pay ment by the unit of government making the request, of the salaries and such other costs for performing such service. SEC. 503. The terms of reimbursement for the service authorized under section 502 shall be d etermined by the Commission. All mon eys received by the Commission In payment for furnishing such serv ice a uthorized s hall be deposited to the credit of the a ppropriation of the Commission. There being no objection, the bill and the section-by-section analysis was ordered to be printed in the RECORD , as follows: GOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF Section 1. Short title. Section 2. Declaration of Polley. 1966 Under our federal system and In an Increasingly complex society, effective State and local governments are Indispensable. Their efficiency a nd administrative competence Is of nationa l concern, p articularly since many programs they administer are federally financed . The appllcatlon of merit systems of p ersonnel administration In certain federally aided progra ms h as contributed to their efficiency, and such systems should b e extended to other grant programs. Federa l fin a ncia l a nd technical assistance should a lso be made avallable to State and local governments to strengthen their overall personnel administration. The Federal Government should encourage and assist in the continuing training and development of State and local employees, particularly in professional, administrative and technical fields , in order to Improve the capab!llty of the public service. The Act recognizes that the success o'f the Joint-action programs enacted by the Congress and the State legislatures Is vitally affected by the caliber of State a nd loca l personnel a dministering them. It recognizes TITLE VI-AUTHORITY FOR INTERSTATE COMPACTS that a ll levels of government Involved · In SEC. 601. To promote higher personnel these Joint ventures-Including the Federal standa rds and mobillty of quallfied person- Government-have not only a right but a n el, particularly profession a l , administrative, duty to take steps to see that such progra ms and tech nical personnel In s hortage cate- are efficiently a dministered and that the -gorlcs, the consent of the Congress Is hereby fund s provided a re u sed effectively to accom give n to any two or more States to enter Into plish the purposes prescribed by Jaw . The compacts or other agreements, not In conflict Act, then, Is designed to assist State and with any law of the United States, for co- loca l governments in strengthening their opernLlve efforts and mutual assistance (In- partners hip role In the federal system. cluding the establishment of such agencies, States and Iocall ties are facing cri tlca l Joint or otherwise, as they deem desirable) for the admin is tration of personnel and problems In the recruitment, selection. and training programs for officers and employees retention of well-qualified personnel for new and expanded programs. This shortage Is of State a nd local governments. acute In the upper levels, both In the public TITLE VII-DEFINITIONS and pri vate sectors of the economy. The When used tn this Act, State and loca l flnanclal and technical resources for publlc personnel a dministration State SEC. 701. The term "State" means any of and staff development, however, h ave not the several States of the United States, the kept pace with the growth of the programs District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, any terri- they administer. Yet, qualified personnel tory or possession of the United States, or and sound personnel policies are absolutely any agency or lnstrumentallty of a State, but essential to effective governmental operadoes not Include the governments of the po- tions . The Act proposes to bulld on the Interlltical subdivisions of any State. governmental personnel experience in certain Merit System grant-In-aid programs. It would make SEC. 702. "Merit system" means a planned matching grants and technical services availState or local operation to develop and main- able to State and local governments for the tain an efficient career service, under publlc improvement of their overall personnel adrules, which among other provisions Include ministration . It would encourage cooperaappointment through competitive examina- tive efforts In recruitment and training on tion, nondiscrimination in race, polltlcs or an lnterle vel and Interstate basis. It would rellglon, equal pay ror equal work, tenure make available Federal training facilities contingent on successful performance, and and also provide grants and technical assistpromotion on evaluated capacity and service. ance for training. Thus, It balances the need �10990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE t o f ost er dynamic p ersonnel systems f o r r ecrui t m e nt of Sta te ana local staffs of high ca p a.c lty with an effort to assis t In their continuous development. TITL E I - EXT E N S ION OF THE M ERIT SYS T EM I N F E DERALLY AIDED PROGRAM S This title a uthorizes the Preside n t, In orde r to achie v e grea ter efficiency in a dministr ation of p rogr a m s fina nce<!. with F ed e ral funds , t o extend to additional programs the r equire m ent that Sta te and local personne l in s uch progra ms be employed unde r a S tate or local merit system meeting Fede r a l standa rds. No F ed er a l authority would be exercised over the selection, tenure of office , or compe n sation of a ny individua l employed in a ccord.a nce with such systems. This p n.ttern o f administration Is n ow applicable In the va rious public assis t a n ce, child h ealth a nd weifare, public h ealth, employment service a nd une mployment Ins urance, ci vil defense , and aging programs . The merit system r equirement was originally enacted for program s under the Social S ecurl ty Boa rd. This action was t a ke n b y Congress in 1939 a f ter some three yea rs ' e xpe rie n ce with out s uch a requireme n t d e m o n str ated the n eed for it to assure pro gra m effectiven ess a nd economy. It h as b een e xpanded ove r t h e years, most r ecently b y the 89t h Con gress i n t h e m edical assis t ance tit le of t h e Socia l Security Ac t and in t h e Olde r Ame ricans Act of 1965 .' The Division of State Merit S ystems of HEW has served f o r more than a quarter of a century as the Fedet"al Interdepartmental unit concerned wi t h State and local p ers onnel a dm1nlstra tion. Under commo n F eder a l standard s f or t he a pplica tion of t h e merit syst em in various gran t programs administer ed b y t h e D ep a r t m e nts of HEW, L a b or and D efense, It h as pr ovided coordinated F ederal technical a nd advisory ser vices on S tate and l ocal personnel m a n agement. Under t h is t itle, the Preside nt, at his dis cretion, would d e t erntlne if and whe n to e x tend t h e m erit system r equire m ent to oth e r programs. H e would b e free to take i n to accou nt su ch f actors as h e deemed r elevant. S u ch c riter ia m ight i nclude the proport1on of F eder al funds i n volved or the exp erimen tal n atu re of t he program. T I TLE II- GRANTS FOR STATE AND LOCAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Section 201 expr esses t h e threef old obj ect! ve of t h Is ti tie to provide Feder a l gra n ts to enable each Sta te t o 1) s tren gth e n Its system of personnel admlrulsr atlon, 2) p rov ide State p e r so nnel services to nonmetr opolitan local governments, a n d 3) stimulate projects for t h e improvement of personnel administration In metropolitan units of general local gover nmen t (as defined In Sectio·n 703 of this Act). Section 202 a u thorizes $8 mi111on , $10 million, a nd $15 million, r espectivel y, to car ry out the purpoees of this title. Grants f or State personnel administration Section 203 p r ovid es that grants will be made to States which have approved p la n s for State personnel administration under a n allotment formula which gives weight to the number of emp1oyees under the State merit system and the financial a bility of the State. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Is assigned the responsibility of administering this program in recognition of the f act that HEW's D iv ision of S tate Merit Systems has the gree.test experience In the area of State personnel admlnlstratlon. Section 204 lists the major elements a State plan must have to be approved. These 1 Cf. U .S.C. Title 42, Sec. 302(a) (5), Sec. 503(a) (1), Sec. 703(a) (3) , Sec. 712(a) (3), Sec. 723(a)(2), Sec. 1202(a)(5), Sec. 1352 (a) (5) , Sec. 2674(a) (5); and U.S.C. Title 50, Sec. 2236(a)(4). include d esign a tion of a State agency, conformity with Federal standards, provision for Sta te ~ a tchl ng funds and a d escription of ~he program f or Improving and strengt henm g p ersonnel administration. The progr a m m ay Include expa nsion of the s cope of the m erit sys t em; pla n s t o meet m a npower needs In new a nd exp a nding S tate program s; improveme nt of ser vices in recruitment e xamin a tions, classifica t ion a nd p a y pla n s; d e velo pm ent of a u x iliary types of pos itions to supple m e nt professiona l staff In short supply; r esear c h a nd d emons tration projects; a nd In terdepa r t m e nta l and int ergovernmental cooperation m ~rsonnel a dminlstrntlon Grants fo r State per sonnel services to non m etropoli tan local governments Section 205 p rovides tha t the Secr etary of H ealth, Educatio n , and Welfa re s h a ll m a ke gran ts a nnually to Sta tes which h a ve a p proved plans f or S ta te personnel services to nonmetropolltan local governments under a n a llo tmen t f ormula. w hich gives weight to the number o f local governments and employees to be ser ved, t h e scop e of the services to be provided, a nd t h e financial a bility of t he Stat e. · Sec tion 206 lis t s the major elem en ts a State pla n f o r s erv ices to nonmetrop olitan local governme n ts must h a ve to b e a pproved, including S t a te or local matching fu n d s. It provides tha t these services to local governments m a y include: covera ge of local e mployees under the State merit sys tem;. teclmlcal services f rom the State In such areas a s recruitment, examinations classlficntlon a nd compe n sation plan s; cooperative r esearch a nd d e mons tra~lo n pro jects ; a nd coop erative a rrang eme nts (Including inter c h a n ge of p ersonnel) amon g units o f local go.J1e1nments or b e t ween State and local governmen ts. The S tates and loca lities could s tre n gth e n p ersonnel oper a tions for nonmetropolltan units of go vernment in a variety of ways. The plan may not only va ry from S tate t o State, but may p rovide f o r differe n tiated ser vices w ithin a Stat e d ep e nding on t he s ize a nd needs of the local governrne n ts. The services m ay va ry from complete coverage o f local e m p loyees under the State m erit system to liml t ed ser vices t o m eet ,;p ecliic local n eeds. T h e . latter migh t Include recrmtme nt of specialized p ers onnel or d emon s tra tion pro ject s .fo r Improved classifica tion plans . Gran t s f or personnel admini st ra t ion in metropolit a n areas Section 207 provides t h at t h e Secr etary of the D ep a r tment of Health, Education, a nd Welfare sh a ll m ake p aymen ts annu ally to S t ates ( a nd a lternatively u n d er . Section 209 t o l ocal governmen ts in m etr opolitan areas ) w hich h ave approved pro jects for personnel administra tio n , with State or local financia l participation to the ext ent o f one-t hird o f t h e costs of the p ro jects. Sta nda rds governi ng the d istribu t ion of s u ch gran ts shall be made by the Secretary o f HEW w l th t h e concu rrence of the Secret ary of Housi ng a nd Urban Development. Section 208 provides that app roved projects may incl ude man power p lanni ng and u t ilization; Improvement of classification and compensation p lans and of recruitment and exantlnlng; research for the Improvement o f the selec tion and the developmen t of tllsadvantaged persons whose capacities are not being used; developing .aux lllary positions in shortage occu pations; improvement of management techniques, s u ch as electronic data processing, in p ersonnel operations; and d eveloping cooperative activities in such areas as recruiting and examining by government Jurisdictions in a metropolitan are&. Metropolitan governments are facing new and acute problems with lintlted resources May 25, 1966 in pe rsonnel a dminis tration . This t it le Is designed to provide for innovative projects of various kinds to meet special n eeds. This m a y Involve t he application of tested personnel m ethods or the d emonstrat ion o f new t echniques . Local governments vary g reatly in both their organization f or p er sonn el administration a nd t he level of i ts e!Iec tlven ess. Ma n y factors exp lain this , including the administrative a nd p o litical traditions of the juris diction, the stat utory b ase a nd the _fina n cia l support for n ersonnel a dministra tion, a nd public a ttftudes. Since the s cope and quality of personnel oper a tions va ry, the Act p ermits projects to be d esigned realis tically to m eet specific needs for improvement. Sect ion 209 provides tha t if a S tate has not s ubmitted a ny projects (unde r section 208) r eceiving a pproval w ithin one yea r a fter the en actme nt of this l egisla tion, the metropolita n unit of gen e ral local go'iernment m a y submit projects for a ppr oval. Section 210 provides tha t this title will be administer ed b y the Secretary of H ealth, Educa tio n , a nd Welfa re. The criteria for m e tropolita n p roj ects, a s was n oted previously, would be established with t he concurrence of t he Secretary o f Housing a nd Urba n D evelopm ent. The inten t o f t his s ection Is t o u t ilize the e xperie n ce in In tergovernmen tal pers onnel r ela tion s of the Depa rtme nt of Heal t h, Education, a nd Welfa re's Division of Sta te Merit Sys tems In various gra nt-In-a id . progra ms. At the s a me time, the responslb!llt y of the Department of Housing a nd Urba n Developm e n t with resp ect to urba n per sonnel adminis tration would b e recognized b y i ts required concurren ce i n the d evelopment o f criter ia for m etropolitan personnel pro jects. The F ed er a l appr oach would b e coordina ted, t a king i n t o account t h e Federal interest In the various grant program s a nd t h e d iffer ential n eed s for S tate a nd for local nonmetropollta n a nd m etr o politan a dmin istra tion. T echnical s er vices, a s well as fin ancia l ass ist a nce, would b e a va ilable t o str engthen S tate a nd local personnel adm in istration. Section 211 provides f or w it h holding of f unds after notice a nd h earing for noncomplia n ce with a p proved plans or p roject,;;. TIT L E I I I -AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING This tit le permits, u pon requ est of the r espective S tate a nd local governmen ts, the attenda nce of State and local em ployees ·at F ed era l t raining courses; it a u t h orizes F eder a l agen cies administering grant programs to con duct training for S tate and local profess ional, administrative, and technical p er ~ sonnel; and it provides that Fed er al f u nds granted to State and local governments for t h e a d ministration of Joint programs may b e u sed to cond uct training or for education a l leave. Cooperative relationships in the field o f t r a ining h ave, in recent years , d eveloped to s u c h a n ex tent that t h ey are becoming common p ractice. Even so, most of the m are limited to p a r ticu lar types of training o f fered by one Federal department or agency t o e m pl oyees In counterpart State and local agencies. That the F .B.I. Academy provides cer tain training f or law enforcement officers for both State and local governments Is well known. Not so well known is the fact t h at many other Federal d epartments and agen cies al so offer train i ng to S tate and local officers and employees. Among these are the D epartment of Agricul ture, the Food a.nd Dru g Administration, the Forest Service, the Internal Revenue Service, the Public Health Service, and many more. This title builds on these precedents and extends authority to all Federal departments and agencies to make their training programs ava!lable to ·counterpart State and local officers and employees. It d oes not limit existing training authorizations. �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Section 401 states the purpose of t his title: to promote higher levels of performance In the publ!c service and to develop employee potential through Fed eral assistance to Sta t e and local governmen ts for Initiating and ca rrying out training programs in fields where s u ch Federal assistance Is not already provided under exis ting grantin-aid or other statutes. Secti on 402 authorizes $10 million for fiscal 1967, $25 million for 1968, and $50 million each for 1969, 1970, and 1971 to carry out the stated purpose of this title. Secti on 403 provides that the Civil Service Commission shall make grants to S tates (and, alternatively under Section 405, t o local governments) which h ave approved plans for t raining under an a llotment formula which gives weight to the n umb er of State and/ or local employees and governments to be ser ved, t he scope of the services to be provided, and the financia l ab!l!ty of the S tate. Section 404 lists the major elem ents a State plan for training must h ave to be approved under Section 403. These Include: designating the State agency to a dminister the training plan; settin g forth t he program of tralnlng, with educa tional leave for periods of over one month limited to ca reer personnel; providing for continuing assessment of training needs; es tabllsh!ng s tandards for the s election of personnel for trainIng and their subsequ ent u t ilization; a nd Issuing policies a nd standards for the sel ection of univer sity or ot h er nongovernmental f ac!llties a n d for the t ypes of agreements to be entered Into for such tra ining; providing f or fina ncia l p a rticipation f rom State, loca l or priva t e sources to the extent of onefourth of the total training costs. Section 405 provides t hat If within a year after t he enactment of this legislation a State has not received approval for projects which provide at least a s much training for l ocal employees as for State employees, then the local govern m en ts may submit pJa ns for such t r a in ing . Section 406 au t h orizes the U .S . Civil Service CommlS&ion t o administer the provisions of this title and to furnish t ech n ical assistance to State or local governments. The Commission Is assigned t h is responslbll!ty because of the exten sive experience It has acquired · throu gh Its own career development training program f or F ederal employees . The Commission Is a lso authorized to prescribe t h e regulations necessar y to ca rry out t he p urposes of this title. Local pla ns for tra ln1ng m u st be consistent with criteria est a blished In regulations Issu ed with the concurrence of the Secretar y of Hou sing a nd Ur ban Development. Section 407 provides for the withholding of f und s after notice and hearing f or n oncomplia n ce with a p p r oved plans. ently fea red that It might be Improperly used. Thus, It was further assumed that each proposed compact would be carefully examined and debated as a part of the consent procedure. This procedure often Is no longer fully a dhered to. The Congress has on numerous occasions given prior consent, and In 1948 when the Southern Regional Education Compact was under consideration, the point was m a de that no formal consent was r equired for two or more States to perform cooperatively an a ctivity that each h as the power to perform Individua lly. TITLE VII-DEFINITION This title provides definitions of the terms "Sta te," "m erit system," "m etropolitan unit of general local government," a nd "nonmetr opolitan unit of general loca l governm ent." TITLE V---<:O OPERATION IN PERSONNEL R ECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION This title a u thorizes the U.S. Civil Ser vice Commission to cooperate with State or l ocal governments on a shared-cost basis In cooperative recruitment or examinations. TITLE VI- AUTHORITY FOR PACTS INTERSTATE COM - T his t itle a uthorizes any two or more Sta t es to enter Into compacts br other agreements for cooperative effort s and mutua l assistance for the adin1nistrat1on of person nel a n d t raining prograins for officers and employees of State and local governmen ts. The purpooe Is to promote higher personnel standards and moblllty of qualified personnel , particularly professional, administrative, and techn1cal personnel In shortage categories. When the compact clause of the Constitution was framed and adopted, It was appilr- ,o 10991 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Document 2 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/2e8cf0830801f4a63d2dc2c0efb84bfe.pdf d0c31382a6af7158ad6442290027e82c Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. @}IlE©~@~ ~ C 1TY C°'<MI SSIO N ER J . STE V E COL U MBU S ©~IT©IT~£& M AYOR M ALC OL M SAVANNAH R. MAYOR J oH N L . C R OMARTIE, G A I NES VILLE W. 4 06 F ULTO N FEDE R AL BUILDI N G• / AT L A NTA . GEORGI A 30303 ELMER GEORGE, / K N I GHT, M A CLE AN, President First Vice President Second Vice President E xecutive Director TE L EPHO NE 2 55 -0 4 2 4 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENT S June 28 , 196 6 CIT Y C O MM I S S IONER JOHN E . Y A RBROUGH I MMED I A TE PA S T PR E S I D E N T ROM E, G A . M AYO R R ANDO LPH MED LOC K S TONE M O U NTA IN, GA . M A Y OR W . 8 . W I THERS M OU L TR I E , G A . C1T v C OMM 1s s10NER C A R L E . PR u E r r TO: GR I F F I N , G A . M A Y OR 8 . F . M E RR ITT , J R . M A CO N , GA . FI R ST GMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MUNICIPAL EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMI TTEE GMA MUNICIPAL SERVICES REVIEW COMMI TTEE DISTRICT PR E S I D E N T MAYO R J AC K A . LEROY AILE Y D I R E CTO R M AYOR J . W . SN E LL W R I GHT SV I LL E SECOND DISTRICT P RES I D E N T M A YOR W . P . H EN R Y P E L HAM D I RE C T OR M AY OR MAC K E . WI LLI S B A I N BRID G E T H I R D D I S TRICT PRE S I DE N T RI CH A RD B . R AY PERRY D I RE C T OR M A YOR 0 . E . WHI T E P I N E M O U NTA IN F OU R T H It becomes more evident ever y showing stronger and stro n ger fairs. The Intergovernme n tal is a further demonstration of Congre s sio n al wr ote d is tr ibut i o n Po li c y Commi t t e e . day that Wash i ngt on i s interest in l oc a l a fPer sonne l Ac t o f 1966 thi s . D IST R IC T PR E S I D E NT C O U N C IL M A N LI NT O N BROO M E DO RAV ILL E DI REC T OR C OUNC IL MA N C L Y DE J. HI C K S CO NY ERS F I FTH Attached is a report from the May 25, 1966, Record which may be of interest to you. We Senator Muskie, requesting ext r a copies fo r to the GMA Board, the Municipal Educ at io na l Committee and the Municipal Ser vices Rev iew It will be appr e ciated i f you would let u s hear f r om you if y ou have any suggestio ns or rec omme n d a ti o s regarding this Act. DISTRI C T Your s ve ry tru l y, PR ES IDEN T MA Y O R A U B R EY E . GRE E NWAY R OS W E LL D I R E C TOR ALDER M AN E . GREGOR Y GRIGGS A TL AN T A S IXTH DISTR I CT W. Elmer George Exe c u tive Direc t or PR ES I D EN T MA Y OR J . GA R DN ER N E WM A N LAG RAN GE DIRE CTOR MAY O R H E R B E RT H . J O N E S McD O NOU G H SEVE N TH WEG/ r s DISTRICT P RE S I D E N T encl o sure MA Y OR J . C . W OO D S T R I ON D I REC TOR M A Y OR R A LP H R . C L ARK , J R . R I NGGO LD EI G HT H DI S T R ICT P RESIDEN T MA Y O R ELT ON D . B ROO K S DO U G L AS D I R EC TOR MA YO R J AMES T . W I N DSO R , JR . Mc RAE NINTH DISTRICT P R ES I DE NT M AYOR O U ARD 8 . W H I TL OW CARNES VIL L E D I R ECTOR M AYOR M R S . J ESS I E D AH LO NEG A T E NT H L. G A R NE R DI S TR IC T PRES I DENT MAYOR JULIUS F . BIS H OP A T HENS DIREC T OR GEORGE A . S ANC KE N , J R . AUGUS T A DIRECTO R S STATE C O UN CILMAN GE O RGE H . BULLOCK ATHE N S A L DERMAN J . J . S HOOB MAYOR WILLI AM JACK H AM I LTON DECATUR ALDERMAN CECIL TURNER ATLANTA MAYOR JOHN C . EDENFIELD THOMASTON MAYOR LEE E . CARTER AT LARGE SAVANNAH CITY M ANA GER JO HN H . M A R KLAND PRESIDE NT. CI TY MANA G ERS ' SECT IO N DECATUR ADMIN . ASSIST R . TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PRESIDEN T . CITY CLERKS ' S ECTION A L BANY HARTWELL C I T Y ATTORNEY WILLIAM E . S M I TH PRESIDENT , C I TY ATTORNEYS' S EC TION AMERICUS � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document GOR GrIUBN IZ OCSINVUCION PANG, RISOCIUIATCUOIWS City Commussionern J. Steve Knicut, President COLUMBUS Mayor Matcotm R. Mac ean, First Vice President SAVANNAH Mayor Joun L. Cromantie, Second Vice President GAINESVILLE W. Extmen Geonce, Executive Director 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING: / ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30303 / TELEPHONE 255-0424 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS CITY COMMISSIONER JOHN E. YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROME, GA. MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK STONE MOUNTAIN, GA. Mayor W. B. WITHERS MOULTRIE, GA. June 28, 1966 CITY COMMISSIONER CARL E. PRUETT TO: GMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS PER Hg MUNICIPAL EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE MACON, GA. GMA MUNICIPAL SERVICES REVIEW COMMITTEE FIRST DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor Jack A. LERoy AILEY DIRECTOR Attached is a report from the May 25, 1966, Congressional Mayor J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE Record which may be of interest to you. We wrote SECOND DISTRICT Senator Muskie, requesting extra copies for distribution Mavon W. P, Henny to the GMA Board, the Municipal Educational Policy DIRECTOR Committee and the Municipal Services Review Committee. MAYOR Mack E. WILLIS BAINBRIDGE THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDENT RICHARD B. RAY PERRY DIRECTOR Mayor ©. E. WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNCILMAN LINTON BROOME DORAVILLE DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN CLYDE J. Hicks CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR AUBREY E. GREENWAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E, GREGORY GRIGGS ATLANTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J. GARDNER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERBERT H. JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor J. C. Woops TRION DIRECTOR MAYOR RALPH R. CLARK, JR. RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT Mayor ELTON D, Brooks DOUGLAS DIRECTOR MAYOR JAMES T. WINDSOR, JR. McRAE NINTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR DUARD B. WHITLOW CARNESVILLE DIRECTOR Mayor Mrs. JESSIE L. GARNER It becomes more evident every showing stronger and stronger fairs. The Intergovernmental is a further demonstration of It will be appreciated if you day that Washington is interest in local af- Personnel Act of 1966 this. would let us hear from you if you have any suggestions or recommendations regarding this Act. Yours very truly, W. Elmer George Executive Director WEG/rs enclosure DAHLONEGA TENTH DISTRICT DIRECTORS PRESIDENT STATE MAYOR JULIUS F. BISHOP AT LARGE ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A. SANCKEN, JR. AUGUSTA COUNCILMAN GEORGE H, BULLOcK ATHENS MAYOR WILLIAM JACK HAMILTON DECATUR: MAYOR JOHN C. EDENFIELD THOMASTON ALDERMAN J, J. SHOOB SAVANNAH ALDERMAN CECIL TURNER ATLANTA MAYOR LEE E, CARTER HARTWELL. CITY MANAGER JOHN H. Mp PRESIDENT, CITY MANAGERS" SECTION DECATUR ADMIN. A R. TRAVIS Higar HAM. ae Ane ae ? ee secrloN ALBANY CITY ATTORNEY men Maehicte ‘Cine or thie ae eecriant AMERI  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Document 1 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/913819f4c6baac8f27c914ce2e91da2f.pdf df3de58841df2983824a5f0e198a1780 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. @}IlE©~@~ ~ C 1TY C°'<MI SSIO N ER J . STE V E COL U MBU S ©~IT©IT~£& M AYOR M ALC OL M SAVANNAH R. MAYOR J oH N L . C R OMARTIE, G A I NES VILLE W. 4 06 F ULTO N FEDE R AL BUILDI N G• / AT L A NTA . GEORGI A 30303 ELMER GEORGE, / K N I GHT, M A CLE AN, President First Vice President Second Vice President E xecutive Director TE L EPHO NE 2 55 -0 4 2 4 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENT S June 28 , 196 6 CIT Y C O MM I S S IONER JOHN E . Y A RBROUGH I MMED I A TE PA S T PR E S I D E N T ROM E, G A . M AYO R R ANDO LPH MED LOC K S TONE M O U NTA IN, GA . M A Y OR W . 8 . W I THERS M OU L TR I E , G A . C1T v C OMM 1s s10NER C A R L E . PR u E r r TO: GR I F F I N , G A . M A Y OR 8 . F . M E RR ITT , J R . M A CO N , GA . FI R ST GMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MUNICIPAL EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMI TTEE GMA MUNICIPAL SERVICES REVIEW COMMI TTEE DISTRICT PR E S I D E N T MAYO R J AC K A . LEROY AILE Y D I R E CTO R M AYOR J . W . SN E LL W R I GHT SV I LL E SECOND DISTRICT P RES I D E N T M A YOR W . P . H EN R Y P E L HAM D I RE C T OR M AY OR MAC K E . WI LLI S B A I N BRID G E T H I R D D I S TRICT PRE S I DE N T RI CH A RD B . R AY PERRY D I RE C T OR M A YOR 0 . E . WHI T E P I N E M O U NTA IN F OU R T H It becomes more evident ever y showing stronger and stro n ger fairs. The Intergovernme n tal is a further demonstration of Congre s sio n al wr ote d is tr ibut i o n Po li c y Commi t t e e . day that Wash i ngt on i s interest in l oc a l a fPer sonne l Ac t o f 1966 thi s . D IST R IC T PR E S I D E NT C O U N C IL M A N LI NT O N BROO M E DO RAV ILL E DI REC T OR C OUNC IL MA N C L Y DE J. HI C K S CO NY ERS F I FTH Attached is a report from the May 25, 1966, Record which may be of interest to you. We Senator Muskie, requesting ext r a copies fo r to the GMA Board, the Municipal Educ at io na l Committee and the Municipal Ser vices Rev iew It will be appr e ciated i f you would let u s hear f r om you if y ou have any suggestio ns or rec omme n d a ti o s regarding this Act. DISTRI C T Your s ve ry tru l y, PR ES IDEN T MA Y O R A U B R EY E . GRE E NWAY R OS W E LL D I R E C TOR ALDER M AN E . GREGOR Y GRIGGS A TL AN T A S IXTH DISTR I CT W. Elmer George Exe c u tive Direc t or PR ES I D EN T MA Y OR J . GA R DN ER N E WM A N LAG RAN GE DIRE CTOR MAY O R H E R B E RT H . J O N E S McD O NOU G H SEVE N TH WEG/ r s DISTRICT P RE S I D E N T encl o sure MA Y OR J . C . W OO D S T R I ON D I REC TOR M A Y OR R A LP H R . C L ARK , J R . R I NGGO LD EI G HT H DI S T R ICT P RESIDEN T MA Y O R ELT ON D . B ROO K S DO U G L AS D I R EC TOR MA YO R J AMES T . W I N DSO R , JR . Mc RAE NINTH DISTRICT P R ES I DE NT M AYOR O U ARD 8 . W H I TL OW CARNES VIL L E D I R ECTOR M AYOR M R S . J ESS I E D AH LO NEG A T E NT H L. G A R NE R DI S TR IC T PRES I DENT MAYOR JULIUS F . BIS H OP A T HENS DIREC T OR GEORGE A . S ANC KE N , J R . AUGUS T A DIRECTO R S STATE C O UN CILMAN GE O RGE H . BULLOCK ATHE N S A L DERMAN J . J . S HOOB MAYOR WILLI AM JACK H AM I LTON DECATUR ALDERMAN CECIL TURNER ATLANTA MAYOR JOHN C . EDENFIELD THOMASTON MAYOR LEE E . CARTER AT LARGE SAVANNAH CITY M ANA GER JO HN H . M A R KLAND PRESIDE NT. CI TY MANA G ERS ' SECT IO N DECATUR ADMIN . ASSIST R . TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PRESIDEN T . CITY CLERKS ' S ECTION A L BANY HARTWELL C I T Y ATTORNEY WILLIAM E . S M I TH PRESIDENT , C I TY ATTORNEYS' S EC TION AMERICUS �United States of America Vol. 112 <to grcssi n tRecord PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89 th CONGRES S 1 SECOND 11 SESSION WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 1966 F ederal aid to State and local governments will have more than quadrupledrising from $3.1 billion in 1955 to an estimated $14.6 billion in 1967. And in number, these programs have reached the 170 mark. In relative terms, this growth has been fairly modest. Witness the fact that Federal a id as a percentage of State and local revenue during this 13-year period increased by only appi·oximately 5 percent. But this gradual growth highlights indirectly the extraorTHE STATE AND LOCAL MANPO\VER CRISIS For over three and a half years the dinary effort that State and local govSubcommittee on Intergovernmental Re- ernments have made to resolve their fislations of the Committee on Government cal crisis. During this same 13-year peOperations, which I am priviJeged to riod, State and loca l expenditures will chair, has been examining the critical, h r.ve more than d oubled-rising from but largely misunderstood, topic of Fed- $34.5 billion in 1055 to approximately eral-State-local relations. On the basis $84 billion for fiscal 1967. The increase of the subcommittee's diverse legislative in the number and amount of- Federal and research undertakings, I am now aid available to State and local govconvinced that the success of the Great ernments, then, is not the most signifiSociety programs-and indeed, perhaps cant factor in the total State-local fiscal the future of American federalism- picture, but it has thrust greater burdens largely depends on whether or not we on a n already strained intergovernmenrecognize and overcome the crisis in gov- tal system. State and local employment, for exernmental m anpower, especially as it involves State and local governments. In ample, reached the 8 million mark last his May 11 address at Princeton Univer- year. This represented a half million sity, President Johnson took note of this increase over the 19'64 fi gure, a 2.2 milcrisis and called for a joint effort to sur- lion rise from the 1961 fi gme, and a 4.7 million hike from the 1946 employment mount it. But to date, we at the national level level. By way of contrast, the Federal h ave acted largely as though the crisis Government employed 2.6 million workdoes not exist. During the past five ses- ers in 1965, or 60 ,000 more than in sions of Congress we have developed the 1964. This figure-was 200,000 above that most impressive package of Federal of· 1961, but 100,000 less than in 1946 . legislation since the New Deal to attack These comp&.risons dramatically high.: poverty, ignorance, uneven economic de- light the strenuous efforts State and velopment, discrimination, and urban local governments have made in the blight and sprawl. For the most part past two decades to meet the demand we have utilized the categorical grant- for more public services. A breakdown of the 8 million Statein-aid device as the basic weapon in this many-faceted attempt to achieve a social local employees, by jurisdictional cateand economic betterment of all our peo- gories, is equally striking. State govple. But the grant-in-aid involves joint vernments now account for over oneefforts, not simply Federal efforts. It fourth of the State and local total. involves joint action, not just Federal Counties have one-eighth of all such action. It involves the utilization of employees, while municipalities engage governmental manpower at all levels, nearly one-fourth, and school districts a little less than a third. Townships not merely the F ederal. The grant-in-aid today is the most employ 3.5 percent, and other special striking symbol of cooperative federal- districts, 2 perce1,t of the total. From ism. Yet its effective use constitutes one 1961 to 1965, the States, other special of the greatest challenges to creative districts, townships, school districts, and federalism. And in the final analysis, counties--in that order-experienced our heavy reliance on the grant mech- the greatest increase in employment. Changes in · occupational categories anism has made the gover~ental manpower crisis a crisis of contemporary further highlight the impact of public demand for new or improved·State and federalism. governmental services. From April Most of us are unaware of the extent local 1957 to October 1965, the number of fullto which we have turned to the grant- time State and local highway workers in-aid in our efforts to implement the rose by 24 percent. Employment in poEisenhower program, to chart the New lice protection increased by 30 percent, Frontier, and to establish the Great Society. From 1955 through 1967, total and in public health and hospitals by 41 THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF 1966 Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to enable greater colla boration in personnel matters between and among the levels of government in order to improve t he administration of Federal grant-in-aid programs and to strengthen the public service of the States and their localities. No. 86 percent. The number of full-time public employees in education soared by 60 percent, and those in public welfare, by 62 percent. Much of this massive growth in State and local employment can be attributed to the population explosion and the demand for expanded services generated by it. The physical and social problems stemming from urbanization and suburbanization, however, have been other key factors in developing greater needs for police, fire, housing, sanitation, welfare, and other public services. In addition, one of the byproducts of our a ffluent society is the rise in popular expectations with respect to governmental services. To put it more bluntly, the American citizem-y is not willing to settle for the level and quality of services that were provided three, or even two, decades ago. THE FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY The c1isis in State and local employment, however, also bears a close relationship to expanded Federal programs and activity. Federal programs in highway construction, education, urban ren ewal, housing, water pollution control, and poverty-to mention only a fewh ave produced new and urgent personnel needs at the . State and local levels. Moreover, other new legislation in the fields of primary and secondary education, the aged, and medical assistance-if inadequately planned for-will only aggravate this manpower crisis. Much of the recent Federal aid legislation sets only general goals and provides the funds necessary to achieve them. The job of implementation falls to the States, the counties, and the cities, which then have to "staff up" to accomplish the objectives of this legislation. Further, some Federal aid programs simply make .money available to the States and municipalities for developing their own plans for use of such funds . In these instances, Federal agencies merely play the role of disbursing agent to underwrite plans and projects Initiated and developed at the State and local levels. Finally, many of these Federal efforts generate counterpart efforts at other levels of gove1nment, with many States and localities enacting legislation in program areas similar to those covered in Federal legislation. In these various ways, congressional action directly or indirectly has contributed to the extraordinary growth of public employment at the State and local levels. So, the States now employ more than 2 million workers with a monthly payroll of $850 million, and �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - local governments employ nearly 6 million workers with a monthly payroll of $2.5 billion. We have reached the point where, on a day-to-day basis, intergovernmental relations are primarily administrative rela,tions. As the recent subcommittee survey, "The Federal.System as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," pointed out, the authorizing statutes, the funds, and the legislative oversight which affect Federal-State-local relations come from legislative bodies. Policy directives, budgetary review and control, and administrative rules and regulations come from top management policymakers. Advice, assistance, and support, as well as complaints, criticism, and censure, come from officeholders, individual citizens, and interest groups at all levels. These basic forc es in our pluralistic political system shape and sustain the intricate pattern of today's intergovernmental relations. But the "wheelhorses of federalism" are administrative, professional , and t echnical personnel-the Federal middle-managem ent aid offi. cials, their fieldmen, and their functional counterparts at the State and local levels . We must focus our attention, then , on the largely unexplored topic of intergovernmental m anpower if our eff01ts to achieve a creative f ederalism are to succeed. The various growth figur es I have cited indicate that State and local governments are vigorously attempting to provide the m anpower needed to administer the new joint-action programs as well as their own . They suggest that present Federal efforts in this area are inadequate, since they are geared largely to the needs of certain grant progr ams and to certain categories of specialized personnel administering them. They indicate that the Federal Government has a greater responsibility to provide financial, technical, and other forms of assistance to the States and localities to h elp them mount a broad attack on this manpower crisis. And they indicate the critica l need for the legislation I am introducing today. Economy and efficiency compel our concern, for the wisest use of the Federal grant-in-aid dollar depends upon how well we m eet this challenge. Improved public administration makes it necessary, since the success of these various programs depends on our ability and willingness to solve this crit ical problem. Improved intergovernmental cooperation requires it, for conflict between and among administrators is one of the major sources of friction in contemporary Federal-State-local r elations. Finally, manpower needs of State and local governments in the years immediately ahead clearly dictate that the Federal Government must join with the other levels of government in helping to surmount this crisis. Present estimates indicate that total governmental employment will reach the 13 million m ark by 1975. As in the past t wo decades, nearly all of the increase will be in State and local governmental agencies. Continued population growth and the ·migration of people from rural to urban areas, and from cities to sub- 10983 SENATE urbs, will raise the requirements for public health services, education, police and fire protection, sanitation, street and highway maintenance, welfare, and other services. Consequently, State and local government employment is expected to rise by more than 38 percent between now and 1975 , whereas little change is expected in Federal employment-barring, of course, major unemployment, big wars, or other national catastrophes. There already exists a shortage of welltrained and highly qualified administrative, professional, and technical personnel at all levels of government, and forecasts indicate this gap will grow. Many well-trained and well-qualified employees in State and local governments were hired during the depression years and are now approaching retirement age. More than one-third of all municipal executives fall in this category and will retire within the next decade. · In certain specialized categories, howeve1'., the proportion is even higher. Half of the Nation's municipal health directors, for example, will be eligible for retirement within the next 10 years. And a recent survey of New York City revealed that one out of every five budgeted positions of a professional, managerial, .or technical nature-excluding education-was vacant. Many others were filled with people not fully qualified . More or less similar conditions exist in many other of the Nation's cities. By 1980, local governments will have to recruit approximately 300,000 additional administrative employees to achieve their current program obj ectives. When the long-term implications of r ecently enacted programs are considered, this m anpower gap widens. Witness these facts: That, as of 1964, it was estimated that the Nation's counseling personnel would have to be increased during the subsequent 3 years by approximately 90 percent to m eet the new requirements for public schools, public employment offices, and other governm ental a gencies; that there will be an estimated 3,000 vacancies each year for trained, recreation workers, but only about 600 persons complete preparation for this occupation annually; that there will be 200 traffic engineer vacancies occurring annually, but there are only approximately 50 n ew gradu ates in this specialized area; that there will be at least 2 vacancies for every graduate of a university course in city management; and that between 1960 and 1970, accordIng to t h e Manpower Commission's report, the overall demand for professional and technical personnel at the local level will h ave increased by 40 p ercent. These current and projected estimates of governmental manpower sho1tages have implications extendin g far beyond the individual States, communities, and programs that are affected. They indicate that we can take no great comfort in the fact that State and local employment has reached the 8 million mark. They indicate that State and local governments generally-not just a few of these jurisdictions-are having difficulty in attracting and holding professional, managerial, and technical personnel, and that these levels will experience even greater difficulties in the future. They suggest that decisionmakers at all levels of Government are not yet fully aware of the c1itical nature of this manpower gap, and that long-range planning in this area is in its infancy. They further corroborate John W. Gardner's assessment-in his book on "Excellence"that: • • • The demand for hlg-h-talent manpower is firmly rooted In the level of technological complexity which characterizes modern life, and In the complexity of modern social organization. And more important than either of these is the r ate of Innovation and change In both technological a nd social spheres. In a world that Is rocking with change we n eed more than anything else a high capacity for adjustment to changed circumstances, a en.pa.city for innovation. And finally , these estimates document the need for a national policy on intergovernmental personnel. The legislation I introduce today provides such a policy. CHA RTING A COURSE The proposed Intergovernmental Personnel Act does not purport to solve all the manpower problems faced by State and local governments. There is, of course, no panacea for the absolute shortages in the country in certain prof essional fields. The Federal Government in a variety of ways is now assisting in the professional education of many in these fields. But these measures are geared to specific Federal program n eeds and specific types of personnel. They must be supplemented to meet the particular staffing requirements of State and local public agencies. Personnel administration in the S tates and localities must be equipped to deal with the whole range of State and local job needs. Practical m ethods must be devised for r ecruitment, selection, utilization, and development within the realities of current supply and demand. At the same time, a rational plan for meeting projected n eeds must be devised and initiated. This legislation will encourage the developm ent of such m ethods and plans. The ac t deals direct ly with three major hurdles confronting State and local governments in recruiting and holding qualified employees. A fourth-low salary schedules--is not so directly considered, but it is a topic that cannot be ignored. Generally, State and local salary schedules-though better today than they were a few years ago-are still lower t han those at both the Federal Government and private industry. The Municipal Manpower Commission r eport found: S ala ries are a major source of dissatisfaction among m ore than one-third of a ll mu nicipal executives- And thatnine out of ten believe that their salaries a re not as high as comparable posi tlons I carry I in private business, a nd 60 percent believe that Federal salaries would also be higher. Not so long ago, Clarence B. Randall, the distinguished Chairman of the Panel that President Kennedy appointed to 1·eview Federal salary policy, wrote: Inadequate Federa l pay poses two problems that seriously hamper Federal agencies' operation . It's a tossup in the Federal service whether getting the best people Is more difficult than keeping the good ones. • • • �10984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE The average salary of vocational rehabllltaInadequate compensation ls one of the principal reasons for reluctance to enter Fed- tlon counsellors ranges !rom an annual mln!eral service. In fact, it frequently eliminates mum of $6,051 to a maximum of $7,712. Such groups o! potential candidates !or Federal counsellors are responsible for ln!tlating and positions. On others it Imposes severe fi- carrying out rehabilitation processors for nancial sacrifices . First there are those who p ersons who are physically and mentally have not yet reached the top of their career h andicapped. The position usually requires ladders and who are still faced with such a college degree and some experience 1n the real problems as mortgages and their ch!l- field of vocational guidance, psychology, dren's education. • • • Not so generally social work, personnel work, or industrial known a.re the problems associated with rel ations. filling second echelon positions. • • • The average salary of an administrative I do not contend th at government salaries officer In a State's Civil Defense program should be Identical with those in Industry. ra nges from a minimum of $ 6,893 to a maxiOn the contrary, I never want to see the mum of $0 ,819. An employee In this posimoney seekers go Into government. • • • tion provides administrative assistance In But the present disparity between publlc pay the personn el, budgetary, and fi scal areas to and private pay In the leadership positions is Clvll Defense offices ; the position u sually a scandal. It must be corrected or the r equires a college degree and considerable United States will not be able to fulfill the experience In the fi eld of general adminhigh destiny to which It has bee n called In istration, office m anagement, or a combinathis difficult modern world. tion of both . While Mr. Randall was primarily conIn light of these and other findings , I cerned with Federal pay scales-and it am convinced that the President and the should be noted that his panel's recom- Advisory Commission on Intergovernmendations were ins"trumental in enact- mental Relations should join in launchment of the Federal Salary Refo1m Acts ing a national study of State and local of 1962 and 1964-his r emarks have no salary reform. The issue is that critical. less relevance to the States and their lo- Constitutional barriers and the dictates calities. The report of the Municipal of interlevel comity bar direct consideraManpower Commission and the survey tion of this question in the proposed legof Federal aid officials conducted by the islation. But certain of its provisions Intergovernmental Rela tions Subcom- b ea r indirectly on such reform-includmittee clearly indicate that low pay and ing those sections which seek respectively the resulting high personnel turnover to streng then the merit system , upgrade have served to put m any State a nd loca l classification and salary schedules, and governments at a competitive disadvan- improve training programs in these tage. And the lates t figures-July 1, jurisdictions . 1965-for specific State and loca l profes ! I) THE MERIT SYSTEM IN GRANT-IN-AID sional and technica l positions, indicate PROGRAMS that, despite some recent improvements, A basic problem in the intergovernsalary schedules are still a critica l problem. A few case studies will illustrate m ental p er sonnel field concerns the m erit principle, and particularly as it my point: The average a nnual sala ry of a State hea r- applies to Fede ral g rant-in-aid proings r efer ee ranges from $7,750 minimum t o g rams. The proposed Intergove rnmen$9,737 ma ximum. Such referee s are respon- t a l Personnel Act deals directly with sible for preparing, conducting, and deciding this controversial issue. My experie nce quasi-judicial h earings Involving questions ::i s a State legisla tor, as Governor of the of statutory compliance, claims, a nd viola State of M a ine. a nd as a U.S. Senator tions of regulations in Issu es between St ate convinces me of the validity of this prindepartments and other parties; they u sually ciple. I s trongly beli eve that an o pen must have an A.B. and a law degree. The average annual sala ry of a n unemploy- system of public empl oym ent, operating ment claims deputy ranges from a mini m um under public rul es and based , among or $5,237 to a maximum of $6 ,604 . This other factors, on competitive exa minatechnical position Involves non-moneta ry tions , equa l pay for equal work, tenure determinations on unemployment Insura nce contingent on successful perfor mance, claims, Includin g the adj udication of ques- and promotion on evalua ted capacity tionable or contested claims; successful ap- a nd se rvice , provides one of th e s urest pllcants must possess considerable prior ex- foundations for the development and perience or college training. The average salary for public ass istance m ai ntenance of a n efficient career civil case worker supervisors ranges from a mini- service based on excelle nce. Equally immum of $5,8 10 to a maximum of $ 7 ,762 . This portant, It m eet s the democratic objecpost involves professional social work a t the tive of equal opportunity. local level and Immediate supervision a nd deThe b eg innings of State a nd local civil velopment of a group Of case workers; It service, b ased on the merit pri nciple, first usuall y requires training In a grad uate appeared in the 1880's, followin g the enschool of social work . The an n u al pay of sanitarians ranges from a c tment of the Federal legislatio n . a mini mum of $5, 142 to a m aximum of $ 6,592. Thanks to the efforts of the National This professional position In environmen tal Civil S erv ice Leag ue and ot hers, addisanitation work Invol ves control of commu- tional jurisdictions subsequently adopted nicable diseases, promotion of health and the s ystem. But widespread acceptance safety, and the solution of environmental did not come until the 1930's. Beginhealth problems; It usually requires a col- n ing with an amendment to the Social lege degree with speclallzatlon In the physical Secu rity Act in 1939, the Federal Govand biological sciences . ernment contributed to this development The mean salary of a public h ealth nurse by specifying standa rds which would ranges from a mlnlmwn of $4 ,778 to a maxlmwn of $6,1 94. T h is position usually re- bind State and local agencies to such quires graduation from an accredited school requirements If ihey received Federal of nursing, State registration, and a program funds under certain grant programs. In spite of these advances and some reof stud y In publlc health nursing, or appropriate public health nursing experience. cent improvements in a fe w of the larger 3 May 25, 1966 States and in some municipalities, only 28 States and only our larger cities today have a merit system covering employees in most of the executive departments ; 22 States and most of the smaller local jurisdictions only apply the principle selectively. In these 22 States, the merit principle applies in all instances to departments administering those few federally aided programs ,subject to merit requirements, but in only some in.stances to employees of one or more other departments. In these States, the impact of those grants-based on approximately nine statutes and administered by the Departments of Health, Education , and Welfare; Labor; and Defense-has been a primary if not exclusive factor in encouraging the merit principle. Is this record adequate? I think not. I am completely aware that formal merit systems based on detailed examination, promotion, dismissal, and other factors may not prevent political sabotage of the p1inciple. I am also aware that a patronage-based system of personnel administration may produce at any given time a competent civil service with high morale. In general, however, I am convinced that the application and extension of the formal requirements have had a salutary effect. And I am convinced that the arguments President Roosevelt advanced in his message calling for application of the merit principle to the social security program are as valid today as they were in 1939: • • • I recommend th at the States be required, as a condition for the receipt o! Federal funds , to establlsh and maintain a merit system for t he selection of personnel. Such a requirement would represent a protection to the States and cl tlzens thereof r ather than an encroachment by the Federal Government, since It would automatically promote efficiency and eliminate the necessity for minute Federal scrutiny of State operations. F or these reasons, I b elieve m erit standards should be added to more grant-in-aid programs as a condition for elig ibility. Title I of the Intergovernm e ntal P ersonnel Act of 1966 provides for this by autho1izing the President to require , insofar as he d eems p ractica ble, that, as a condition f or receiving Fede r a l funds under any grant program , personnel engaged in its a dminis tration mus t be employed under a me1it syst em m eeting Federal standards. This discretionary provision recognizes the difficulties of extending the merit system to all g r a nt-inaid programs. More particul arly, it recognizes the troubles inherent in att empting to apply it to many of the recently enacted p rograms. At the same time, it encourages action in those grant programs which involve s ubstantial Federal funds and are on going, rath e r than experimental , ventures. The Federa l hig hway prog ram immediately comes to mind as an excelle nt candidate. The proposed legislation also seeks to strengthen the merit system by· providing that the grants authorized for improving S t ate personn el administration under title II be used to strengthen or e xtend the career civil service of the State. To sum up, the Federal Govern- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ment, a majority of the States, most of the larger cities, and nearly all of the experts in the field recognize the relationship between attracting and retaining competent public administrators and the presence of · a viable merit system. These provisions of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act are based on this relationship. (2) OVERALL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Aside from the Federal interest in more effective administration of grant programs, there is a clear Federal interest in strengthening the overall personnel management of the States and their localities as partners in the federal system. The absence of an effective system of personnel management contributes to the manpower difficulties now confronting State and local governments. Both the merit principle and modern management techniques require such a system, which calls for imaginative recruitment efforts and sophisticated examination techniques; an intelligent placement system, which fits the man to the job, and a fair and rewarding promotion system; the development and continuous updating of a position classification plan, since the grouping of positions into classes helps to identify questions of pay, lines of promotion, requirements for transfer, and other basic administrative questions; the meaningful development of the time-honored concept of a career service, in which advancement is not limited merely to service in one agency; and planning for the manpower needs of the years ahead. These are but a few of the basic objectives of good personnel management. Concern with the merit system initially prompted the development of examinations and classification plans. And the requirements of modern management and modern government have modified and expanded the original list of personnel administrative functions. Yet, in nearly all of the States and localities that lack a general civil service system, personnel management, in practice, is usually limited to the job classification and salary setting functions. Even in those States possessing a viable merit system, conflicts between the policing efforts of the Civil Service Commission and the management concerns of the Governor-his staff and personnel officer-sometimes have impeded improvements in this area. In general, then, State and local resources for public personnel administration have not kept pace with the growth of the programs they administer. With few exceptions, State and local personnel agencic:; have not been equipped or given additional support for new workloads. The inadequate support of personnel planning and operations has left many personnel agencies short of needed professional personnel, including trained job analysts, personnel psychologists and training staff. For example, only 10 States have as many as 25 professional, administrative, and technical employees in the State civil service or merit system agency to handle their continuing responsibilities, let alone to undertake broadened activities. Yet State and local personnel agencies must cope with new needs and new problems. The Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1966 recognizes these needs and attempts to come to grips with these problems. Title II of the proposed legislation authorizes grants to enable States to strengthen their systems of personnel administration, to provide State personnel services to smaller jurisdictions of local government, and to stimulate projects for the improvement of personnel administration in their lar'ger cities. To qualify, States would need to develop programs of personnel improvement which might cover such topics as: expansion of the coverage of a State merit system; planning for manpower needs; improvement in one or more of the traditional areas of recruitment, examination, position classification plans, and compensation schedules; or possibly research and demonstration projects in the new areas of electronic data processing and motivational research. Title II also seeks to improve the personnel administration of smaller units of local government. Grants are authorized for the development of State plans that might involve broader coverage of local employees under a State merit system, State technical personnel services to such units of government, cooperative research and demonstration projects in this field, or cooperative intergovernmental ·efforts relating to loans, transfers, or promotions of personnel. The title assigns full responsibility to the States for developing their own programs and a coordinating role for their local jurisdictions. There is a need for pioneering efforts in State assistance to nonmetropolitan local governments. At the local level, the smaller jurisdictions are not in a position to establish modern personnel systems that meet the need for broader recruitment for professional personnel or for attracting able young men and women who regard these initial jobs as rungs on the career ladder rather than as blind alleys. Intergovernmental ·c ooperation with the possibility of increased mobility can help meet these prnblems. Self-contained local personnel systems present certain problems of parochialism even in our larger metropolitan governments. They are simply not feasible for the smaller nonmetropolitan governments in terms of either the expense or the availability of technica l services. Hence there is a need for State services to the nonmetropolitan governments. The act provides for a variety of services ranging from merit system coverage to more limited specialized services. Part C of the title authorizes a separate program of Federal assistance for personnel improvement in our larger cities. There is a pressing need for innovative activities in our metropolitan areas. The shortages of professional, administrative, and technical personnel require planned recruitment, selection to assure the Intake of a fair share of young talent, and a long-range staff development pro- 10985 gram covering various occupational fields. Imaginative job analyses can lead to the establishment . of new types of auxiliary jobs to help meet the absolute shortage in many professional and technical fields. They also may open up opportunities for job training and employment for many of the disadvantaged. While public personnel administration is not a social program designed to solve the problem of employn1ent of the disadvantaged, governments, as large employers, can and should show leadership in this· area. The act provides for project grants for metropolitan personnel administration in order to permit a wide range of experimentation and demonstration projects to strengthen personnel administration and meet urgent manpower problems. These grants may be used for personnel planning, for upgrading or establishing personnel agencies, for improving personnel operations in specific functions, or for initiating pilot projects designed to meet current and projected needs. The States are given the initial opportunity to work with the cities in developing project proposals under this section, with special emphasis on the particular problems of our larger metropolitan units of general local government. But if a State fails to submit any projects after one year, individual metropolitan units may then initiate their own projects. This aproach, I feel, recognizes the necessary coordinating role of the States in personel management, while permitting direct Federal-local efforts· in cases of State inaction. Title II, it should be noted, would be administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. More specifically, It is anticipated that HEW's Division of State Merit Systems would assume primary responsibility for its administration. This division has h a d more practical experience with State personnel systems than any other unit in the Federal Government, thanks to the merit requirements of many HEW grant programs. Moreover, it already has a tradition of extending technical assistance to State and local governments which have sought out its assistance in upgrading their civil service. The concurrence of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, however, would be required before HEW could approve projects for metropolitan jurisdictions. In addition to the grants authorized for State and local personnel administration under title II, the proposed legislation provides another means for Improved intergovernmental collaboration In this field. Title V of the act authorizes the Civil Service Commission to join on a shared-cost basis with States or units of general local government, or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under mutually agreeable regulations. Some authorities believe the Commission already pos.5esses this autho11ty, but the same authorities concede that adequate provision is lacking with respect to financing such joint activity. This title provides a statutory �10986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE basis for the Commission's au thority to enter into such cooperative arran gem ents, and it settles t he financial question by adopting the sh ared-cost formula . In these ways, the proposed legislation squarely confronts many of t h e mo re significant personnel m an agement problems confronting S tate a nd local governm ents t oday. The amounts a uthorized a re m odest, a nd the coopera tive arrangem ents are permissive. But t he fun ds will be seed money well spent, a nd t he devices for cooperation will encourage a concerted a t tack on wh a t we must now concede to be a joint problem. ( 3) TRAINING Inextricably linked to t he m erit system a nd personnel m a n agem ent problems is the n eed for more a nd better tra ining op'por tunities. Ideally , such a progra m should in clude provision fo r orienta tion, in-service and out -ser vice training, tuition r efund, a nd educational leave. It should be r ooted in th e car eer service ethic a nd imply future prospects tha t r eward special effo r t on the part of employees. Our concern h ere is training within the service after a ppoint ment, not educa tion for public service prior to appointmen t . T he la t te r, of course, deserves t h e consideration of a ll of us, a n d hopefully title I of t h e H igh er Education Act of 1965 will resolve some of the problems in t his area. T he man power shortages I have described, a long with t h e mou nting technological, social, a n d econ omic ch an ges affect ing t h e a ctivities of S ta te and local governmen ts, u nderscore t h e emphasis tha t a ll of us should give to establish in g and st ren gthening tra ining progra ms at these levels of governm en t. Many legisla tors , administrators, a nd other public officials n ow recognize the need for such programs. Yet only California, New York, Mich igan, a nd a few other States have t raining programs for top m anagement. Others provide some trainin g fo r other key ·p ersonnel. But a ccording to a r ecen t sur vey conducted by t he International City Man agers Association, most of the States have no t raining or development progra ms for administrative, t echnical, a nd professional personnel. And no city h as anything approaching a model training program. Most existing t raining is still designed to improve the skills of routi ne officeworkers, policem en , and firemen. Moreover, training prog rams stimulated by Federal grants-in-aid are largely geared to specific functional specialties. Such inservice training and education al leave are valuable, of course, but they do not meet the growing requirements of S tate a nd local govern ments for more and better administrative, professiona l, and technical talen t . The repor t of t he Municipal Ma npower Commission a nd the survey of th e Federal aid officials by the subcommittee fully document the need for a Federal response to this critical personnel management deficiency, The Intergover nmental P ersonnel Act attacks this problem of training in four ways. First, title III authorizes Federal departments and agencies conducting programs for their professional, admin- lstrative, and tech nical employees to open t h em up to S ta te and local personnel in counterpart agencies. The S tates or localities would initiate t h e r equest to participate, and f ees for a ttendance could be waived for employees in sh ort -supply categories. S econ d, Federal departments or a gen cies a dministering grant -in-a id programs are a ut horized to establish training programs fo r counte rpart State and local personnel in the professional, a dministrative, and tech nical fields. Such a gencies a re authorized to m ake grants to S tates a nd localities from F ederal funds appropria ted for administrative costs of the progra m to cover the expenses of such training. In a ddition, such F ederal agencies are permi tted t o m ake grants from such funds for educa tional lea ve or comparable arra ngements fo r sa laries a nd training expenses of m erit system employees in short-supply a reas, to permit them to a ttend university or other training courses r elated to their progra m. Third, title IV establish es a grant.;!_!1a id progra m f or inservice training of S tate and local employees. This provision is geared to promoting high levels of per form ance of such personnel, pa rticula rly in th e professional, a dministra tive, and technical a reas, and t h e development of employee potential by providing F ederal fun ds for S tate and local governments t o initiate or strength en t raining programs for t h eir own public servants. Such assista nce would be available only in personnel a reas wh ere compa rable a id is not already provided under other Federa l statutes. The pattern of Federal assista nce h ere roughly pa rallels that of title II, except that the Civil S ervice Commission would be the a dministering a gency. T h e S ta tes would be given t he p1im ary r esponsibility for developing pla ns for the training of their employees and the initia l responsibility for joinin g with local governm ents in the developmen t of t raining progra ms for local personnel. Such pla ns would include provisions for a continuing assessment of training needs, for equitable stan dards r elating to the selection and assignment of per sonnel for t raining, a nd fo r efficient utilization of personnel receiving train ing-including contin ued service for a reasonable period of time. Educa tional leave or other a.rra ngements for salary a nd tra ining payments for periods in excess of a month in a ny one ca lenda r year would be permitted only for career personnel employed under a merit system. In addition, a Sta te plan would include guidelines covering t h e selection of universities or other nongovernmental facilities, when such institutions a re to be used for t raining purposes. The title also autho1izes units of general local government in a State, either jointly or separately, to submit a training plan if , within a year from the effective date of the act, the State fails to submit a proposal which includes sub.stantial provisions for training local government employees. Such proj ect applications would have to m eet the same general requirements applying t o State plans and t he administrative regulations 5 May 25, 1966 establish ed by t h e Civil Service Commission. I n addition , the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing a nd Urban Developm ent would also be r equired for project approval, to assure full considera tion of the special training problems of our Na tion's cities . It is impor tant t o underst and what this title does not provide. It does not , for example, distinguish between m etropolitan a nd n onmetro:i,iolitan units of local government, since the problems relating to inser vice t raining differ mat e1ially fr om those falling under the tra dition al h eading of personnel administration. It d oes n ot compete with title VIII of the Housing Act of 1964 which, a mong other things, a uthorizes m a tching g1·ants t o the States for developing and expanding pr ogra ms to provide special training in skills needed for economic a nd efficient community development to technical and profess ional people who a re employed or are being trained for employm ent in a governmental body which h as resp onsibility for such development. That Housing Act title is prim arily concer ned wit h a compar atively n arrow range of voca tional specialties and, it should be n oted, h as yet to be fund ed . Title IV also is not intended to duplica te or compete ,vith title I of t he High er Educa tion Act of 1965. Tha t Act authorizes the Commission er of Education to m ake gra nts t o strengthen community service programs of colleges a nd univer sities. It is geared to institutions of high er education in t h e Stat es, and to the development of an educational program design ed t o assist in the solution of community problems in ru ral, ur ban , or suburban areas, with particular emph asis on urban and suburban problems. To date, only a few project applications submitted un der t itle I of the High er Educa tion Act of 1965 relate t o t h e broad inservice trainin g n eeds of the various cat egories of State and local personnel. In sh ort, t itle IV is residual. Personn el receiving training under oth er F ederal statutes are specifically excluded from its coverage. It does not repla ce or restrict existing F ederal tra ining programs for a wide va riety of professional personnel in grant-aided fields. But more positively, it m eets the t rainin g n eeds of the Stat es and their localities, as these jurisdictions see them. It em ph asizes training n eeds as t h ey a re seen from the a dministra tive firin g line. It is designed to r epla ce the piecemeal method t ha t has to date cha racterized the Federal approa ch. It is geared to a ttacking a problem tha t a dministrator::; a t a ll levels, as well as experts in public a dministration , h ave described as criti cal. . Finally, it full y recognizes t h a t, as President J oh nson sta ted a t P rinceton : The public serva;:i.t toda y moves along p a ths of a d ven t ure wh ere h e Is h elp less wit hout the tools of a d vanced learnin g. The proposed I n tergovernmenta l Pers on nel Act provides still another m eans for improving t he in-service t r aining capability of State and local governments. Title VI gives prior Congr essional consent to interstate compacts or other agreements, not in conflict with �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 10987 Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- grants In any program fin a nced in whole or sent that the text of the bill, together in part by Federa l funds, the personnel engaged in the ad.ministration of the program with a section-by-section analysis, be be employed under a State or local merit inse1ted in the RECORD immediately fol- system meeting Federal standards. He is lowing my remarks, and that the bill authorized to approve for this purpose standlie on the table for 10 days so that other ards for a merit system of personnel administration. The Federal Government, howSenators may join in cosponsoring it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill ever, shall exercise no authority over the selection, tenure, or compensation of ind ividwill be received and appropriately re- uals ferred; ,and, without objection, the bill system.employed in accordance with such will be printed in the REconD , and will lie TITLE II-GRANT6 FOR s X. ATE AND LOCAL at the desk, as requested by the Senator PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION from Maine. Declaration of Purpose The bill <S. 3408) to strengthen interSEC. 201. The purpose of this title is to governmental cooperation and the ad- provide Federal grants-in-aid to enable each ministration of grant-in-!!id programs, State to strengthen its system of p erson n el to extend State merit systems to addi- ad ministr ation, to provide State personnel CONCLUSION tional programs financed by Feder.al ser vices in nonmetropolita n units of loca l Improved merit systems, improved funds, to provide grants for improvement government, a nd to stimulate projects for State and local personnel management, of state and local personnel administra- the improvement of personnel administration and improved in-service training pro- tion, to authorize Federal assistance in in metropolita n areas. Appropria tion Authorization grams--these are the three basic con- training State and local employees, to SEC. 202. There is hereby authorized to be cerns of the Intergovernmental Personnel provide grants to Sta,te and local governAct of 1966. Put more simply, greater ments for training of their employees, to appropriated for the fisc a l year ending June career competence is the paramount authorize interstate compacts for per- 30, 1967, and each of the four succeeding years, the following sums: (a) $10 ,theme of this legislation. Through a sonnel and training activities, and for fiscal 000,000 for payments to States which h ave judicious combination of grant funds, other purposes; introduced by Mr. Mus- plans for State personnel administration aptechnical assistance, and new devices for KIE, was received, read twice by its title, proved under section 204; (b) $8,000,000 for intergovernmental cooperation in the referred to the Committee on Govern- payments to States which h ave plans -for personnel area, the proposed legislation ment Operations, and ordered to be provision of State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of general loca l governprovides a variety of ways to strengthen printed in the RECORD, as follows: ments approved under section 206; and (c) the professional standing and prestige of s. 3408 $15,000,000 for payments to States or metropersonnel at the State and local levels. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of politan units of general loca l governments The Advisory Commission on Intergov- Representatives of the United States of which have projects for metropolitan p erAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act ernmental Relations went on record at its sonnel administration approved under secmay be cited as the "Intergovernmental PerApril meeting as favoring the objectives tion 208. of this legislation. And at Princeton, son n el Act of 1966." Part A . Grants for State personnel Declaration of Policy President Johnson called for a program administration of assistance to "State and local governSEC. 2. The Congress hereby finds a nd SEC. 203. (a) From the sums a ppropriated ments seeking to develop more effective declares : under section 202(a) the Secretary of Heal th , That effective State and loca l governmen- Education, and Welfare (hereinafter referred career services for their employees." tal institutions are essential in the mainte- to as the Secretary) sh all make annually Prof. Charles Adrian has pointed out n a nce and development of the Feder al sys to States wh ich h ave plans for State that conflict in our cooperative federal tem in a n increasingly complex and grants personnel ad.ministration approved by him system does not stem today from the interdependent society. under section 204. relations between the levels of governTh at, since numerous governmental activ (b). The sum availabl e a nnually for grants ment as such, but that "friction results ities administered by the Sta te and loca l under this section s h a ll be a llotted among governments are related to national purpose whenever the administrative personnel the States under a formula approved by the at a particular level for a particular and are fin a nced in part by F edera l funds, a Secretary which shall give weight to the national interest exists in a high calib er of number of employees under the merit sys function are not fully professionalized." public service in State a nd local governments. tem and the financial ability of the State The findings in our survey, "The Federal Th at intergovernmental cooperation in as indicated by its r ela tive per capita inSystem as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," State personnel administration on a merit come, except th at each State will receive clearly illustrate the administrative diffi- basis has contributed to greater efficiency not less than $25,000. culties produced by such friction. in various federally a ided programs ·and Requirem ents of State Plans We n eed greater expertise at these should b e extended generally to such proSEC . 204. A S tate plan for State personnel grams. levels, then, because its absence is now administration to be approved by the SecThat F ederal financial and technical assis- retary mustone of the primary sources of tension and tance to State and local governments for conflict in intergovernmental relations. (a) des ignate the appropriate S tate perstrengthening their personnel administra - sonnel agency for the administration of the We need it because t he success of the tion will Improve the effectiveness of the pla n; Great Society programs depends on re- public service and is in the n ational interest. (b) provide for a merit system conform ducing these antagonisms. We need it That the continuing training and developto the Federal sta ndards established because we live in an age of administra- ment of career employees, particularly in ing under this Act for a Merit System of Per tive federalism ; in an age of more, not professi onal, administrative , and technical sonnel Administration; · less, use of grants-in-aid; in an age of fields, are critical to the success of joint Fed(c) set forth a program for the improve more, not less, contact among the ad- eral-State-loca l programs and that the Fed- ment and s trengthening of State personnel eral Government should encourage and assist ministrative officials at all levels of administration which m ay include, among government. We need it if the States in such training for State and local em- other features : ployees. ( 1) expansion of the coverage of S tate and their localities are to be vigorous TITLE I-EX PAN S ION OF MERIT SYSTEM I N employees under the State m er it system; members in the great partnership that FED ERALLY AID ED PROGRAMS (2) assessment of m anpower need s in was established in 1789. We need it if we developing programs and methods for m eet Declara tion of Purpose are--in the President's words-to "dethem; SEc. 101. The purpose of this title is to Ing(3) velop a creative federalism to best use improvement in one or more a reas of achieve greater efficiency in the administra- personnel administration such as r ecruit the wonderful diversity of our institu- tion of programs financed In whole or in ment, examinations, classificat ion, and comtions and peoples to solve the problems, part by Federal funds extending the a pplicafulfill the dreams of the American tion of personnel standards on a merit b asis pensation pla.ns: (4) research and demonstration projects people." in the a dministration of such programs. for the use of valid personnel methods, inThis is precisely what the IntergovPersonnel Sta ndards cluding electronic data processing techernmental Personnel Act of 1966 is a-11 SEC. 102. The President is authorized to niques; about. And that is precisely why I am require, insofar as he deems practicable, that (5) development of a uxiliary or support as a condition for the receipts of Federal types of positions to perform appropriate introducing this measure today. any law of the United States, for cooperative efforts and mutual assistance relating to the administration of personnel and training programs for State and local employees. The New England Governors' Conference already has launched a survey of the possibilities of regional collaboration with respect to personnel training programs. Building on the precedent set in the Housing Act of 1961-which gave prior congressional approval to interstate compacts establishing metropolitan agencies in multistate urban areas--this provision hopefully will encourage expanded efforts to develop training programs on a regional basis. ' �10988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - functions currently performed in occupations in which there are now shortages; and (6) interdepartmental and intergovernmental cooperation in personnel administration; (d) provide for financial participation by the State in the costs of merit system administration at least equal in amount to the Federal grants, and further provide that the operation of the plan wlll not result in a reduction In State expenditures for such administration or the substitution of Federal for State funds previously available for merit system administration; and (e) provide that the State agency will m ake such reports in such form and containing such Information as the Secretary m ay from time to time require, and shall keep and make available such records as he m ay r equire for the verification of such reports. Part B. Grants for State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of local government SEC. 205(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202(b) the Secretary shall m a ke annually gra nts to States which have plans a pproved by him under section 206 for services to nonmetropolitan units of gener a l local government. (b) The sum available annually for grants under this section shall be allotted under a formUln approved by the Secretary which shall give weight to (1) the number of employees and number of local governments served, (2) the scope of State services provided, and ( 3) the financial ablll ty of the State as indicated by i ts r elative per capita income, except that each State sh all receive not less than $25,000. Requirements of Sta te plan SEC. 206. A plan for State services on personnel administration to nonmetropolltan units of general local government to· be approved by the Secretary must( a) designate the State agency, which may be the agency des ignated under section 204, for the administration of the plan; (b) set forth a program for Improvement and strengthening of personnel administration of such local governments by one or more of the following means : ( 1) the c:>veragc of lc,c1l employees under the State mertt system; (2) technical services In one or m ore areas or personnel admJnlstratlon s uch as recruitm e nt. exnmlnations, classification and compensation pla ns; (3 J cooperative resear ch and demon stration projects for the u se of valid personnel m ethods ; or (4) intergovernmental cooperntlve arra n gem ents between the Sta te and local governments or among local governments, Including facili tating Inter jur isdictional loans, transfers or promotions or personnel; (c) provide for financial participation by State or such local governments, or both, In the costs of providing services a t least equa l In runount to the F ed er al grants, a nd provid e further thn t the opera tlon of the pla n will not result in a r eduction In State and local expenditures or a eubstitutlon of Federal for State or loca l funds for personnel admin is tration; and (d) provide that the State agency will m a ke such reports in such form and containing su ch information as t he Secretary may from time to time r equire and shall keep and m a ke available such records as he may require for the verification of such reports, Part C. Grants for personnel administration in m etropolitan areas Soc. 207(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202 ( c ) the Secretary shall m a ke an nually payments to States or m&tropolitan units of general loca l government which have projects approved by him under section 206. SENATE (b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, shall establlsh such standards for the distribution of grants under this section among the States a nd among such metropolitan units as will most effectively carry out the purposes of this Act, and shall estabJlsh regulations for financial participation by States or such units, or b oth, in an amount equal to at least one-third of the costs of each project, including the reasonable value of facliities a nd personnel services made avaliable by the State or such loca l government for the administration of the project. Project requirements SEC. 208, Projects to be approved for grants unde r section 207 shall conform to ,criteria established in regUlations which shall be Issu ed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Grants wiU be used, in accordance with such regulations, for projects for strengthening personnel administration on a merit basis in order to meet increasingly critical problems of administration In metropolitan units of general loca l government. Projects may Include, but are not limited to-( 1) assessment of m anpower needs In developing programs and methods for meeting them; (2) Improvement of classification and compensatioh plans, and recruitment and examinations, particularly for profeeslonal, administrative and technical personnel In shortage ca tegorles; (3) application of psychological and other research in personnel administration directed toward improvement of selection and development of members of disadvantaged groups whose capacities are not being fully used; (4) plans for establishing auxiliary or support types of positions to perform a ppropriate functions currently performed In occupations In which there are now shortages; (5)research and demonstration relating to t echniques, such as electr onic d a ta processing, for Improving the speed and quality of personnel operations; and ( 6) cooperative activities in recruitment and examining by governmental Jurisdictions operating In metropolitan areaa. Exceptlon--Submittal of Local Projects SEC. 209. After the expiration of one year from the date or enactment of this Act, if a State h as n ot submitted any proje{:ts under section 208 of this title which have received approval, the metropolitan units of general local government may submit proj ects for approval , a nd such projects may be approved If they comply with the reqUlrements or section 208. Administration SEC. 210. The provisions of this title shall be adminis tered by the Secr etary, who Is authorized to furnish such technica l assistance to States or units or general local governments and to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title , Suspension of Grants SEC. 2 11. Whenever the Secretary, after giving reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or local agency administering a plan approval under this title, finds ( 1) that s uch plan has been so changed that it no longer complies with the provisions of thls title, or (2) that 1n the administration of the plan there Is a failure to comply substantially with any s uch provision, the Secr etary shall notify such agency o! h!s findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or in his discretion further pay- 1 May 25, 1966 ments wlll be limited to projects pnder, or portions of, the plan not affected by such failure), until he ls satisfied that there will no longer be a ny failure to comply. TITLE III-AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING D eclaration of Purpose SEC. 301. The plll'pose of this title is to foster the training of State and local employees by permitting their attendance at Federal courses, and by authortzing Federal departments or agencies administering grantin-aid progrruns to conduct training and to permit Federal grants to States and localities to be used for training and educational leave. Participation In Federal Programs SEC. 302. Any Federal department or agency conductlng training programs for professiona l, administrative, or technical employees In the Federa l service is a uthorized to include In such programs , under conditions imposed by the head of such agency, State and local officers and employees in sim_Uar or related functions, on the request of the State or local government. Fees for attendance at any such training program may be received by the Federal agency conducting It and expended In the same manner as fees r eceived for attendance of Federal employees, or the payment of fees may be waived in occupational categories d etermined by the head of the Federa l department or agency to be in short supply. Training In Grant-Aided Programs SEC. 303 , Any Federal department or agency administering a program of gr ants or financia l assistance to States and localities is au thorized (a) to conduct training for State and local officers and employees in professional, administrative, and technical fields r elated to such programs: (b) to make grants to State and localities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administrative expenses of the program, unc!er the usual terms and conditions of such grants, for the conduct of training for S tate and local officers and employees In such progra m: and (c) to make grants to State and loca lities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administra tive expenses of the progr am , under the usual terms a nd conditions of s u ch grants, for education a l leave or comparable arrangements for sala ries a nd training expenses or employees In professiona l, administrative, and technica l fields who h ave been employed under a merit system of personn el administration in State or local agencies ad ministering the federally aided program, In order for . them to attend university or other training courses related to the program. S aving Provis ion SEC. 304. The a uthorizations in this title are not a limita tion on exis ting authority u nder la w for Federal d epartments or agencies to conduct training or to make grants for training or edu cational leave. TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Declaration of Purpose SEC. 401. The purpose of this title Is to promote higher levels of performance of employees In the public service, particularly in professional, administrative, and techn ica l fields , and the development of employee potentia l by providing Federal assistance to State and local gov er nm en ts to ins ti tu t c and carry out programs for the training of their employees ln fields where such Federal assistance is not already provided under grant-in s.Id or other statutes. Appropriation Authorization SEC. 402. There Is h ereby authorized to be appropriated the following sums for payments to States and units of general local government which h a ve plans approved un der this title for the training of their employees: tl0,000,000 for fiscal year 1967, $25,- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - 000,000 for fiscal year 1968, and $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1969, 1970, and 1971. Grants Authorized SEC. 403(a). From the sums appropriated under section 402 the Civil Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission). shall make annually grants to States or units of general local government which have plans approved by It under sections 404 and 405, respectively. , (b) The sums available annually !or grants under this section shall be allotted among the States, and between States a nd units of general local government In a State, under formulas to be approved by the Commission which shall gi ve weight to the number of State and local employees, the number of local governments p a rticipating, the scope of training to be provided , and the financial ab lllty of th e State as indicated by Its relative per capita Income , excep.t that each State will receive not Jess than $25,000 for fiscal year 1967 and $50,000 annually therea fter. Requirements of State plans SEC. 404. A State plan for training of officers and employees to be approved mus t ( 1) designate the State agency for the admini stration of the plan; ( 2) set forth a program for the training of omcers and employees of States and units of general loca l government which will meet the objectives of this title and provide for training personnel of agencies not r ece iving assis tance under other Federal program s ; (3) provide for continuing assessment of trai ning needs ; (4) set for th equitable standards for the selection and assignment of personnel for training; (5) provide fo r the efficient utillzation of p ersonnel who h ave been given such training, a nd for their continued service for a reasonable p eriod of time; (6) provide that educational leave or other arra n gements for p aymP.nt of salary and training expenses for period s In excess or one month in a ny one year sh a ll be allowed only for career personnel empl oyed in accordance with a merit system; (7) set forth, when training ls to be given through univers ity or other nongovernmental facilities t h e policies with respect to the selection of such facilities and the types of agreements to be entered Into for th e training ; and (8) provide for financl ,t l p:nticlpation by the States. the uni ts of genera l loca l government thereof, or from private sources. in a n amount equal to one-fourth of the cost or the training, In cluding the reasonable value of facilities and personal se rvices made available for admini stration of the training, provided that the operation of the plan wlll not r esu lt in a reduction in State and local expenditures or substitution of Federal for State or loca l funds !or training . Exception-Submitta l of Loca l Plans SEC. 405. I! after one year from the effective date of this Act, a State has not sub mitted and had approved a plan under sec tion 404, Including provision for training o! local governmental emr-'oyees Involving expenditures at Ins t equ iv alent to the expendi tures for training of State government employees, one or more units of general loca l government In the State Jointly or severally may submit a plan for such training during the following fiscal year, designating a single local agency for adm ini stration and otherwise conforming to the requirements of section 404 under regulations which sha ll be prescrl bed by the Commission with the concurrence or the Secretary o! Housing and Urban Development. Administration SEC. 406. The provisions of this title shall be admlnlstered by the Commission, which SENATE 10989 Is authorized to furnish such technical assistance to States or units of general iocal government a nd to prescribe such regulations as m ay be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title. Suspension of Grants SEC. 407. Whenever the Commlssion, after giving reasona ble notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or other agency administering any plan app~oved under this title, finds (a) that a State or other plan has been so changed that It no longer compiles with the provis ions of th.ls title, or (b) that in the administration of the plan there ls a !allure to comply s ubstantially with any such provision', the Commission shall notify such agency of !ts findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or In !ts discretion further payments wlll be llmlted to projects under, or portions of, the plan not affected by such !allure) until It ls satisfied that there will no longer be any failure to comply. Metropolltan Unit of General Local Government SEC. 703. "Metropolltan un!t(s) of general local government" mea ns any city or comp a ra ble general-purpose political subdivision of a State with a population of 100,000 or more, as determined by the most recent Federal census, or any county or parish with such population which Includes a city or comparable subdivision with a population of 50,000 or more, as determined by such census. Non-metropolltan Unit qf General Loca l Government SEC. 704. "Non-metropolltan unlt(s) of general local government" means any city, county, p al\ish, town, village or other generalpurpose polltlca l subdivision of a State, except such units of general local government as are included In section 703 of this Act. TITLE V-COOPERATION JN PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE INTER- SEC. 501. The Commission Is authorized to Join, on a shared-cost basis, with State or units of general local government or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon . SEC. 502. The Commission Is authorized, upon written request from a State, a unit of general loca l government thereof, or both, and under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon , to certify to such agencies, from appropriate registers, a llst of ellglble personnel who h av e successfully completed such examinations a nd satisfied such requirements as the Commiss ion has prescribed, upon the pay ment by the unit of government making the request, of the salaries and such other costs for performing such service. SEC. 503. The terms of reimbursement for the service authorized under section 502 shall be d etermined by the Commission. All mon eys received by the Commission In payment for furnishing such serv ice a uthorized s hall be deposited to the credit of the a ppropriation of the Commission. There being no objection, the bill and the section-by-section analysis was ordered to be printed in the RECORD , as follows: GOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF Section 1. Short title. Section 2. Declaration of Polley. 1966 Under our federal system and In an Increasingly complex society, effective State and local governments are Indispensable. Their efficiency a nd administrative competence Is of nationa l concern, p articularly since many programs they administer are federally financed . The appllcatlon of merit systems of p ersonnel administration In certain federally aided progra ms h as contributed to their efficiency, and such systems should b e extended to other grant programs. Federa l fin a ncia l a nd technical assistance should a lso be made avallable to State and local governments to strengthen their overall personnel administration. The Federal Government should encourage and assist in the continuing training and development of State and local employees, particularly in professional, administrative and technical fields , in order to Improve the capab!llty of the public service. The Act recognizes that the success o'f the Joint-action programs enacted by the Congress and the State legislatures Is vitally affected by the caliber of State a nd loca l personnel a dministering them. It recognizes TITLE VI-AUTHORITY FOR INTERSTATE COMPACTS that a ll levels of government Involved · In SEC. 601. To promote higher personnel these Joint ventures-Including the Federal standa rds and mobillty of quallfied person- Government-have not only a right but a n el, particularly profession a l , administrative, duty to take steps to see that such progra ms and tech nical personnel In s hortage cate- are efficiently a dministered and that the -gorlcs, the consent of the Congress Is hereby fund s provided a re u sed effectively to accom give n to any two or more States to enter Into plish the purposes prescribed by Jaw . The compacts or other agreements, not In conflict Act, then, Is designed to assist State and with any law of the United States, for co- loca l governments in strengthening their opernLlve efforts and mutual assistance (In- partners hip role In the federal system. cluding the establishment of such agencies, States and Iocall ties are facing cri tlca l Joint or otherwise, as they deem desirable) for the admin is tration of personnel and problems In the recruitment, selection. and training programs for officers and employees retention of well-qualified personnel for new and expanded programs. This shortage Is of State a nd local governments. acute In the upper levels, both In the public TITLE VII-DEFINITIONS and pri vate sectors of the economy. The When used tn this Act, State and loca l flnanclal and technical resources for publlc personnel a dministration State SEC. 701. The term "State" means any of and staff development, however, h ave not the several States of the United States, the kept pace with the growth of the programs District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, any terri- they administer. Yet, qualified personnel tory or possession of the United States, or and sound personnel policies are absolutely any agency or lnstrumentallty of a State, but essential to effective governmental operadoes not Include the governments of the po- tions . The Act proposes to bulld on the Interlltical subdivisions of any State. governmental personnel experience in certain Merit System grant-In-aid programs. It would make SEC. 702. "Merit system" means a planned matching grants and technical services availState or local operation to develop and main- able to State and local governments for the tain an efficient career service, under publlc improvement of their overall personnel adrules, which among other provisions Include ministration . It would encourage cooperaappointment through competitive examina- tive efforts In recruitment and training on tion, nondiscrimination in race, polltlcs or an lnterle vel and Interstate basis. It would rellglon, equal pay ror equal work, tenure make available Federal training facilities contingent on successful performance, and and also provide grants and technical assistpromotion on evaluated capacity and service. ance for training. Thus, It balances the need �10990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE t o f ost er dynamic p ersonnel systems f o r r ecrui t m e nt of Sta te ana local staffs of high ca p a.c lty with an effort to assis t In their continuous development. TITL E I - EXT E N S ION OF THE M ERIT SYS T EM I N F E DERALLY AIDED PROGRAM S This title a uthorizes the Preside n t, In orde r to achie v e grea ter efficiency in a dministr ation of p rogr a m s fina nce<!. with F ed e ral funds , t o extend to additional programs the r equire m ent that Sta te and local personne l in s uch progra ms be employed unde r a S tate or local merit system meeting Fede r a l standa rds. No F ed er a l authority would be exercised over the selection, tenure of office , or compe n sation of a ny individua l employed in a ccord.a nce with such systems. This p n.ttern o f administration Is n ow applicable In the va rious public assis t a n ce, child h ealth a nd weifare, public h ealth, employment service a nd une mployment Ins urance, ci vil defense , and aging programs . The merit system r equirement was originally enacted for program s under the Social S ecurl ty Boa rd. This action was t a ke n b y Congress in 1939 a f ter some three yea rs ' e xpe rie n ce with out s uch a requireme n t d e m o n str ated the n eed for it to assure pro gra m effectiven ess a nd economy. It h as b een e xpanded ove r t h e years, most r ecently b y the 89t h Con gress i n t h e m edical assis t ance tit le of t h e Socia l Security Ac t and in t h e Olde r Ame ricans Act of 1965 .' The Division of State Merit S ystems of HEW has served f o r more than a quarter of a century as the Fedet"al Interdepartmental unit concerned wi t h State and local p ers onnel a dm1nlstra tion. Under commo n F eder a l standard s f or t he a pplica tion of t h e merit syst em in various gran t programs administer ed b y t h e D ep a r t m e nts of HEW, L a b or and D efense, It h as pr ovided coordinated F ederal technical a nd advisory ser vices on S tate and l ocal personnel m a n agement. Under t h is t itle, the Preside nt, at his dis cretion, would d e t erntlne if and whe n to e x tend t h e m erit system r equire m ent to oth e r programs. H e would b e free to take i n to accou nt su ch f actors as h e deemed r elevant. S u ch c riter ia m ight i nclude the proport1on of F eder al funds i n volved or the exp erimen tal n atu re of t he program. T I TLE II- GRANTS FOR STATE AND LOCAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Section 201 expr esses t h e threef old obj ect! ve of t h Is ti tie to provide Feder a l gra n ts to enable each Sta te t o 1) s tren gth e n Its system of personnel admlrulsr atlon, 2) p rov ide State p e r so nnel services to nonmetr opolitan local governments, a n d 3) stimulate projects for t h e improvement of personnel administration In metropolitan units of general local gover nmen t (as defined In Sectio·n 703 of this Act). Section 202 a u thorizes $8 mi111on , $10 million, a nd $15 million, r espectivel y, to car ry out the purpoees of this title. Grants f or State personnel administration Section 203 p r ovid es that grants will be made to States which have approved p la n s for State personnel administration under a n allotment formula which gives weight to the number of emp1oyees under the State merit system and the financial a bility of the State. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Is assigned the responsibility of administering this program in recognition of the f act that HEW's D iv ision of S tate Merit Systems has the gree.test experience In the area of State personnel admlnlstratlon. Section 204 lists the major elements a State plan must have to be approved. These 1 Cf. U .S.C. Title 42, Sec. 302(a) (5), Sec. 503(a) (1), Sec. 703(a) (3) , Sec. 712(a) (3), Sec. 723(a)(2), Sec. 1202(a)(5), Sec. 1352 (a) (5) , Sec. 2674(a) (5); and U.S.C. Title 50, Sec. 2236(a)(4). include d esign a tion of a State agency, conformity with Federal standards, provision for Sta te ~ a tchl ng funds and a d escription of ~he program f or Improving and strengt henm g p ersonnel administration. The progr a m m ay Include expa nsion of the s cope of the m erit sys t em; pla n s t o meet m a npower needs In new a nd exp a nding S tate program s; improveme nt of ser vices in recruitment e xamin a tions, classifica t ion a nd p a y pla n s; d e velo pm ent of a u x iliary types of pos itions to supple m e nt professiona l staff In short supply; r esear c h a nd d emons tration projects; a nd In terdepa r t m e nta l and int ergovernmental cooperation m ~rsonnel a dminlstrntlon Grants fo r State per sonnel services to non m etropoli tan local governments Section 205 p rovides tha t the Secr etary of H ealth, Educatio n , and Welfa re s h a ll m a ke gran ts a nnually to Sta tes which h a ve a p proved plans f or S ta te personnel services to nonmetropolltan local governments under a n a llo tmen t f ormula. w hich gives weight to the number o f local governments and employees to be ser ved, t h e scop e of the services to be provided, a nd t h e financial a bility of t he Stat e. · Sec tion 206 lis t s the major elem en ts a State pla n f o r s erv ices to nonmetrop olitan local governme n ts must h a ve to b e a pproved, including S t a te or local matching fu n d s. It provides tha t these services to local governments m a y include: covera ge of local e mployees under the State merit sys tem;. teclmlcal services f rom the State In such areas a s recruitment, examinations classlficntlon a nd compe n sation plan s; cooperative r esearch a nd d e mons tra~lo n pro jects ; a nd coop erative a rrang eme nts (Including inter c h a n ge of p ersonnel) amon g units o f local go.J1e1nments or b e t ween State and local governmen ts. The S tates and loca lities could s tre n gth e n p ersonnel oper a tions for nonmetropolltan units of go vernment in a variety of ways. The plan may not only va ry from S tate t o State, but may p rovide f o r differe n tiated ser vices w ithin a Stat e d ep e nding on t he s ize a nd needs of the local governrne n ts. The services m ay va ry from complete coverage o f local e m p loyees under the State m erit system to liml t ed ser vices t o m eet ,;p ecliic local n eeds. T h e . latter migh t Include recrmtme nt of specialized p ers onnel or d emon s tra tion pro ject s .fo r Improved classifica tion plans . Gran t s f or personnel admini st ra t ion in metropolit a n areas Section 207 provides t h at t h e Secr etary of the D ep a r tment of Health, Education, a nd Welfare sh a ll m ake p aymen ts annu ally to S t ates ( a nd a lternatively u n d er . Section 209 t o l ocal governmen ts in m etr opolitan areas ) w hich h ave approved pro jects for personnel administra tio n , with State or local financia l participation to the ext ent o f one-t hird o f t h e costs of the p ro jects. Sta nda rds governi ng the d istribu t ion of s u ch gran ts shall be made by the Secretary o f HEW w l th t h e concu rrence of the Secret ary of Housi ng a nd Urban Development. Section 208 provides that app roved projects may incl ude man power p lanni ng and u t ilization; Improvement of classification and compensation p lans and of recruitment and exantlnlng; research for the Improvement o f the selec tion and the developmen t of tllsadvantaged persons whose capacities are not being used; developing .aux lllary positions in shortage occu pations; improvement of management techniques, s u ch as electronic data processing, in p ersonnel operations; and d eveloping cooperative activities in such areas as recruiting and examining by government Jurisdictions in a metropolitan are&. Metropolitan governments are facing new and acute problems with lintlted resources May 25, 1966 in pe rsonnel a dminis tration . This t it le Is designed to provide for innovative projects of various kinds to meet special n eeds. This m a y Involve t he application of tested personnel m ethods or the d emonstrat ion o f new t echniques . Local governments vary g reatly in both their organization f or p er sonn el administration a nd t he level of i ts e!Iec tlven ess. Ma n y factors exp lain this , including the administrative a nd p o litical traditions of the juris diction, the stat utory b ase a nd the _fina n cia l support for n ersonnel a dministra tion, a nd public a ttftudes. Since the s cope and quality of personnel oper a tions va ry, the Act p ermits projects to be d esigned realis tically to m eet specific needs for improvement. Sect ion 209 provides tha t if a S tate has not s ubmitted a ny projects (unde r section 208) r eceiving a pproval w ithin one yea r a fter the en actme nt of this l egisla tion, the metropolita n unit of gen e ral local go'iernment m a y submit projects for a ppr oval. Section 210 provides tha t this title will be administer ed b y the Secretary of H ealth, Educa tio n , a nd Welfa re. The criteria for m e tropolita n p roj ects, a s was n oted previously, would be established with t he concurrence of t he Secretary o f Housing a nd Urba n D evelopm ent. The inten t o f t his s ection Is t o u t ilize the e xperie n ce in In tergovernmen tal pers onnel r ela tion s of the Depa rtme nt of Heal t h, Education, a nd Welfa re's Division of Sta te Merit Sys tems In various gra nt-In-a id . progra ms. At the s a me time, the responslb!llt y of the Department of Housing a nd Urba n Developm e n t with resp ect to urba n per sonnel adminis tration would b e recognized b y i ts required concurren ce i n the d evelopment o f criter ia for m etropolitan personnel pro jects. The F ed er a l appr oach would b e coordina ted, t a king i n t o account t h e Federal interest In the various grant program s a nd t h e d iffer ential n eed s for S tate a nd for local nonmetropollta n a nd m etr o politan a dmin istra tion. T echnical s er vices, a s well as fin ancia l ass ist a nce, would b e a va ilable t o str engthen S tate a nd local personnel adm in istration. Section 211 provides f or w it h holding of f unds after notice a nd h earing for noncomplia n ce with a p proved plans or p roject,;;. TIT L E I I I -AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING This tit le permits, u pon requ est of the r espective S tate a nd local governmen ts, the attenda nce of State and local em ployees ·at F ed era l t raining courses; it a u t h orizes F eder a l agen cies administering grant programs to con duct training for S tate and local profess ional, administrative, and technical p er ~ sonnel; and it provides that Fed er al f u nds granted to State and local governments for t h e a d ministration of Joint programs may b e u sed to cond uct training or for education a l leave. Cooperative relationships in the field o f t r a ining h ave, in recent years , d eveloped to s u c h a n ex tent that t h ey are becoming common p ractice. Even so, most of the m are limited to p a r ticu lar types of training o f fered by one Federal department or agency t o e m pl oyees In counterpart State and local agencies. That the F .B.I. Academy provides cer tain training f or law enforcement officers for both State and local governments Is well known. Not so well known is the fact t h at many other Federal d epartments and agen cies al so offer train i ng to S tate and local officers and employees. Among these are the D epartment of Agricul ture, the Food a.nd Dru g Administration, the Forest Service, the Internal Revenue Service, the Public Health Service, and many more. This title builds on these precedents and extends authority to all Federal departments and agencies to make their training programs ava!lable to ·counterpart State and local officers and employees. It d oes not limit existing training authorizations. �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Section 401 states the purpose of t his title: to promote higher levels of performance In the publ!c service and to develop employee potential through Fed eral assistance to Sta t e and local governmen ts for Initiating and ca rrying out training programs in fields where s u ch Federal assistance Is not already provided under exis ting grantin-aid or other statutes. Secti on 402 authorizes $10 million for fiscal 1967, $25 million for 1968, and $50 million each for 1969, 1970, and 1971 to carry out the stated purpose of this title. Secti on 403 provides that the Civil Service Commission shall make grants to S tates (and, alternatively under Section 405, t o local governments) which h ave approved plans for t raining under an a llotment formula which gives weight to the n umb er of State and/ or local employees and governments to be ser ved, t he scope of the services to be provided, and the financia l ab!l!ty of the S tate. Section 404 lists the major elem ents a State plan for training must h ave to be approved under Section 403. These Include: designating the State agency to a dminister the training plan; settin g forth t he program of tralnlng, with educa tional leave for periods of over one month limited to ca reer personnel; providing for continuing assessment of training needs; es tabllsh!ng s tandards for the s election of personnel for trainIng and their subsequ ent u t ilization; a nd Issuing policies a nd standards for the sel ection of univer sity or ot h er nongovernmental f ac!llties a n d for the t ypes of agreements to be entered Into for such tra ining; providing f or fina ncia l p a rticipation f rom State, loca l or priva t e sources to the extent of onefourth of the total training costs. Section 405 provides t hat If within a year after t he enactment of this legislation a State has not received approval for projects which provide at least a s much training for l ocal employees as for State employees, then the local govern m en ts may submit pJa ns for such t r a in ing . Section 406 au t h orizes the U .S . Civil Service CommlS&ion t o administer the provisions of this title and to furnish t ech n ical assistance to State or local governments. The Commission Is assigned t h is responslbll!ty because of the exten sive experience It has acquired · throu gh Its own career development training program f or F ederal employees . The Commission Is a lso authorized to prescribe t h e regulations necessar y to ca rry out t he p urposes of this title. Local pla ns for tra ln1ng m u st be consistent with criteria est a blished In regulations Issu ed with the concurrence of the Secretar y of Hou sing a nd Ur ban Development. Section 407 provides for the withholding of f und s after notice and hearing f or n oncomplia n ce with a p p r oved plans. ently fea red that It might be Improperly used. Thus, It was further assumed that each proposed compact would be carefully examined and debated as a part of the consent procedure. This procedure often Is no longer fully a dhered to. The Congress has on numerous occasions given prior consent, and In 1948 when the Southern Regional Education Compact was under consideration, the point was m a de that no formal consent was r equired for two or more States to perform cooperatively an a ctivity that each h as the power to perform Individua lly. TITLE VII-DEFINITION This title provides definitions of the terms "Sta te," "m erit system," "m etropolitan unit of general local government," a nd "nonmetr opolitan unit of general loca l governm ent." TITLE V---<:O OPERATION IN PERSONNEL R ECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION This title a u thorizes the U.S. Civil Ser vice Commission to cooperate with State or l ocal governments on a shared-cost basis In cooperative recruitment or examinations. TITLE VI- AUTHORITY FOR PACTS INTERSTATE COM - T his t itle a uthorizes any two or more Sta t es to enter Into compacts br other agreements for cooperative effort s and mutua l assistance for the adin1nistrat1on of person nel a n d t raining prograins for officers and employees of State and local governmen ts. The purpooe Is to promote higher personnel standards and moblllty of qualified personnel , particularly professional, administrative, and techn1cal personnel In shortage categories. When the compact clause of the Constitution was framed and adopted, It was appilr- ,o 10991 �~ /V&k ~ ·~:c:. ,~~2~ @}~@~®~ ~'CQJ~IT©IT~£& COLUMBUS M A YOR MA LCOL M // R. MAC L EA N, ,u .A A First Vi ce President ~-L// SAVANNAH MAYOR J o H N L. C ROMARTIE, GA IN ESVILLE ~ ~ © © ~~ IT©~ VV . EL~·t E R GEORGE, 4 06 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING• / ATL A NTA . GEORGIA 30303 / Second V ice President Executive Director TELEPHONE 255-0424 June 3, 1966 ACT I V E PAST PR E SID E NT S C I T Y COMM I SS I ONER J O H N E . YA RB R OUGH I MMED I ATE P AST P R ES I D E N T ROME , GA . MA Y OR R ANDO L P H M EDL OCK S T ONE M O UNTAIN , G A . MAYOR W . 8. W ITHE R S M OULT RI E , GA . Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Associate Administrato :ti EOA, Inc. /__ 101 Marietta Street Building, Room 400 ( _ _ Atlanta, Georgia 30303 CIT Y CO MM I S SIONER C A RL E . PRU E TT GR I F FIN , GA . Dear Dan: M AY OR 8 . F. ME RRITT , JR . MAC O N , GA . FIRST DISTR I CT PRES I DENT MAYOR J AC K A . LER O Y AILEY I am calling a meeting of the GMA Services Evaluation Committee for Thursday, June 9, 1966. The meeting will begin at 12:00 Noon in Elmer George's office, and after luncheon together, we will wind up at approximately 3:00 P. M. D I R ECTOR MAYOR J . W . SNE L L WRIGHTS V I L L E S E CO ND P RES I DENT MAYOR W . PE LH AM DIST RI CT P. H EN R Y D I REC T OR M AY O R MACK E . W ILLI S B A I N B R I DGE THI RD Elmer and Jim Burgees have been working up several important items for consideration by the committee and these have been documented, to save time. D I ST RI CT PRESIDENT R ICHARD 8 . RAY PERR Y DIRE C TOR MA Y OR 0 . E . WH I T E P I NE MOUNTA I N F O URTH I do not believe there will be a more important GMA program this year than the one being undertaken by our committee and it will be appreciated if you will be pre sent. Before it is over, we may have to involve Federal agencies, the National League of Cities, our Congressional delegation, the Governor, State Legislature and county officials. DISTR IC T PRES I DEN T C O U NCILMAN LI NT O N BROOME DO RAV ILLE DI R ECTOR CO U NCILMAN C L Y DE J. H IC KS CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PR ES I DEN T MAYOR A U BRE Y E . GREENW A Y ROSWE LL D I RECT O R ALDERMAN E . GR E GOR Y GR I G GS AT LANTA SIXTH Please advise on the attached postal card if you can attend this first meeting of our committee. DISTRICT PRES I DEN T MA Y OR J . GARD N ER NE W MA N L AG RAN G E D I R E CTOR MA Y OR HE R BERT H . JONES Sinc e r e l y, Mc DONO UGH SEVENTH ~ DISTRICT PRE S I DEN T MAYO R J . C . WOODS TR I ON D I RE C T O R MA Y O R R A L P H R . C LA R K, JR . John Cromartie, Chairman GMA E valuation C ommittee R I NGGO LD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRE S I DE N T MAYOR E LT ON D . B ROO K S DOU GL A S J C:rg Enclo s u r e D I R ECTOR MA YOR JAM ES T . WI ND S OR , JR . McRA E NINTH DISTRICT PAES I OE N M A.YO R 0U A R D B. W H ITL OW C_A Rf"ESVl l,.L E D I RE C T O R MA YOR MR6 . JE SS I E L . GA R NES COUNC IL MAN GEORGE D A HLON E GA T l! N T H D I ST RI CT PRES I DE NT MA YO R JULIU S ATHENS F. B I SHOP D I RECTOR GEORGE: A . SANCKEN. J R . A U G USTA H. BULL O CK ATHENS D IR E C T OR S STATE AT LARGE M ,,,.YO R W I LLIAM JA C K DE C ATUR ALPERMAN ,J , J , S HOOS SAVANNAII H A M I LTO N MAYOR JOHN C . E DENFIELD THOMASTON AL OC RM AN CCIL. T U R N Crt ATLANTA MAYOR LEE E . CARTER HARTW E LL C ITY M A NAGER -'OHN H , MA R K l AND PRFSIDE'NT, CITY MA.NAGFRS ' SECTION DECA TU R ADMIN ASSIST R TRAVIS HIGGIN80THAM PRE SI DENT . C I TY CLERKS ' SECTION ALBANY CITY ATTORN E Y WILLIAM E SMITH PRESIDENT , CITY ATTORN EYS' SECTION AMERIC U S �ce~®~®rr£. ~'(QJ~Il©Il~£& ~~©©Il£.~Il©~ CITY CO MM IS SIONER J . STE VE KNIGHT, C OLUMBUS MAYOR MALCOLM SAVANNAH MACLEAN, MAY OR J OHN L. CROMARTIE, GAINESVll.LE W. 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING• / R. ATLANTA . GEORGIA 30303 ELMER GEORGE, President First Vice President Second Vice President Executive Director / TELEPHONE 255-0424 May 31, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS CITY COMMISSIONER JOHN E . YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROM E, GA . MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK S TO NE MO U NTA IN , GA . MAYOR W . B . WITHERS MO ULTRIE , GA . CITY COMMISSIONER C ARL E . PRUEl"r GRIFFIN, GA . MAYOR B . F. MERRITT, JR. MACON, GA . FIRST Mr . Dan Sweat Federal Programs Coordinator City Hall Atlanta, Georgia DISTRICT PRE SIDENT MA YOR JACK A . L E RO Y AILE Y DIRE CTOR MAYOR J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE SECOND DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR W. P . HENRY PELHAM DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN J. C , MINTER CAIRO THIRD DISTRICT Dear Dan : I appointed a committee during the l ast board meeting in At lanta for the purpose of evaluating the role of the Georgia Munic ipal Association as relates to the part the Association should pl ay in relation to the metropolitan local councils of government and to area planning and development commissions . PRESIDENT RICHARD B . RAY PERRY DIRECTOR MAYOR 0 . E . WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNC IL MAN LINTON BROOME DORA VI LLE DI RECTOR C OUNCILMAN CLYDE J . HICKS CON YE RS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR AUBREY E. GREEN WAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E . GREGORY GRIGGS ATLA NTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYO R J . GARONER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR H ERBERT H . JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR J . C . WOODS TRION DIRECTOR MAYOR R ALP H R . CLARK, JR . RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT Under Section 701- G of the 1965 Housing Act , certain grants may be made to metropolitan loca l councils of government for studies and data collection, etc . It has occurred to the GMA. staff that a relationship might be developed between the local council s and the Association which would have the eff ect of (1) providing the already existing resources of the Association to local councils, thereby avoiding unnecessary duplication and competition of GMA. programs which have been over 33 years in the making and (2) providing a strong liaison between the larger urban a reas in the evaluation of programs which are directed, or should be directed, toward our large cities and/ or their respective metropolitan areas . Since counties are involved in the metropolitan loc al councils of government , it might be of benefit to work with the Assoc iation of County Commissioners in developing joint policy in support of our l arge urban areas, recognizing at the same time , that local decision-making mus t not be interfered with, nor any joint programs pursued, except with the consent of l ocal officials. PRESIDENT MAYOR ELTON D . BROO K S DOUGLAS D I REC T OR MA YO R J AMES T . WINDSOR , JR . MCRAE NINTH Another area for possible considerati on by the committ ee is the problems of the local community out side the metropolitan areas . DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR OUARD 8 CARNESV ILLE . WHITLOW DIRECTOR MAYOR MRS . JESSIE L . GARNER DAHLONEGA TENTH COUNCILMAN GEORGE H . BULLO CK ATH E NS ALDERMAN J . J . S H OOS S A VAN NA H MAYOR WILLIAM JAC K H AM ILTON DE C ATUR ALDERMAN C EC IL T UR NER ATLA N TA MAYOR JOHN C . EDENFIELD THOMASTON MAYOR LE E E . CAR T E R HARTWE LL DI STR ICT PRES I DEN T MAYOR JULIUS F . BISHOP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A . SANC K EN , JR . AUGUSTA DIR ECTORS STATE AT L A RGE CITY MANAG E R JOH N H . MAR K LAND P RE S IDE N T , C I T Y MA NA G E RS ' SE C TION D E C AT U R A D MI N . AS SI ST . R . TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PR E S IDEN T . CI T Y C L E R KS· SEC TION ALB A NY CI T Y ATT OR N E Y W I LLI AM E . S MI TH PRESIDENT , C IT Y ATTOR N EYS ' S EC TION A M E RI C US �Mr. Dan Sweat - 2- May 3l, l 966 There are some problems developing in relation to programs of area planning and development commissions whi ch serve communities outside metropolitan areas. There are federal programs being developed for municipalities under 5,500 population, administered by the Farmers Home Administration and other agencies of the Federal Department of Agriculture. These deserve serious review. For the citie s of over 5,500 population outside standard metropolitan statistical areas, there are other problems, or opportunities . In addition, there are other problems in relation to new and/ or changing federal grant and loan programs which need t o be studied. It has t aken the Georgia Municipal Associ ation 33 years to devel op a coordinated program to assist our cities and towns at the political l evel, as well as at the servic e level. We need to evaluate the role of the Association with the new metropolitan local councils of government, the area commissions and our total membership. The committee, as appointed, is as follows: Mayor John Cromartie, Gainesville, Chairman Mayor Howard Atherton, Marietta, Vice- Chairman Mayo r J ack LeRoy, Ailey J ames B. Blackburn, City Attorney Savannah Dan Sweat , Federal Programs Coordinator, Atlanta Pl ease r eturn the attached card, advising of your acceptance . Sincerely, J. Steve Knight President JSK/ r s cc: Malcolm Maclean enclosure �J. CITY C o:vtM ISSI ONER C OLU?lo·£DU S MAY O R MA L COLM R. S TEVE KNIG H T, MACLEA N , President Fi rst V ice President SAVANNAH MAYO R J mrn L. CROMARTm , GAINESVIL L E W. 406 FULTON FEDER A L BUIL D ING• / AT L AN TA. GEO R GIA 30303 / Second Vice President E xecut ive D irector E LM ER G EORGE , TELEPHONE 2 5 5 -0 4 24 May 17, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS C I TY CO MM I SS I ONER JOH N E . YARBROUGH I MM EDI A T E PAST PRES I DE N T RO M E , GA . MAY O R R ANDO LPH ME DLOCK S TONE MO U NTA I N , G A . MAYOR W . B . W I THERS MOULTRIE , GA . CITY COMM IS S IO NER C AR L E . PRUEl"r GR I FF I N , GA . MAYOR B . F. MERR IT T , J R . MA C ON , GA . FIRST DISTRICT Mr. Dan Sweat Coordinator of Governmental Liaison City Hall Atlanta, Georgia PR E S I D EN T M AYOR J ACK A . L ERO Y A ILE Y Dear Dan : DIRE CTOR MAYO R J . W . SNELL WR I GHT S V I LL E SECOND DISTRICT PRES I DENT MAYOR W . P . H ENRY PELH A M DI R EC TOR M AYOR M A C K E . W I LLIS BA I N BR I DGE THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDE N T R I CH A RD 8 . RAY PERR Y D I REC T OR MA Y OR 0 . E . WHI TE PI N E MOUNTAIN FOURTH Enclosed are copies of a draft memorandum on the urban pol:icy council. I have included in the memorandum the statements and thoughts that you had on the Economic Opportunity Program . I would appreciate your review of the memorandum and any suggestions that you may have for its improvement . Any other ideas or changes that you feel should be covered in a memorandum of this nature would be most welcome . DISTRICT PRE SI D EN T COUN C IL M A N L I N TO N BROOM E DORAVILLE DIRECTO R I look forward to hearing from you . Please do not hesitate to call on us whenever we can be of service or assistance. COUNCIL M AN CLYDE J . HIC KS CONYERS FIFTH Sincerely yours , DISTRICT P RE S I DENT M AYO R A U B REY E . GREENWAY RO SWE LL DI RE C TO R A L DERMAN E . GREGORY GR I GGS ATLAN TA SIXTH Jr. D I STRICT PR E SIDE N T MAYOR J . GARDNER NEWMAN L AGRA N GE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERBERT H . JONES JVBJr/ rs McDO N O UGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRES I DENT enclosures MA Y OR J. C . WOODS TRI O N D I RECTOR MAYOR RA L PH R . CLAR K, JR . R I NGGOLD EI GH TH D I S TRICT PRES I DENT M A YOR ELTON D . BROOKS DOU G L A S D I RE C TO R MAYOR J AME S T . WI NDSOR , JR . MC RAE NINTH D I S T R ICT PRESID ENT MA Y OR DU A R D B . WH I TLOW CARNE S VI L LE DIRECTOR MA Y OR M R S . J ESSIE L . GA R N E R COUNCILMAN G EOR G E H . B U LLO CK DAH LO NE GA T E NTH AT H ENS DI S TRICT PRESIDENT M AYOR JULIU S F. B I S H OP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORG E A. S ANCK E N. J R . AUGUSTA DI R ECTO R S STATE M A YOR WI L L IAM J ACK H AM ILTON DECATU R AL DERMAN J . J . S HOOS SA VANNA H A LDERMAN CECIL T U R NER AT L AN T A AT LARGE MAYOR JOHN C . E DENF IEL D T HOMAST ON M AYOR L EE E . CARTER HARTWEL L CI T Y MANA G ER JOHN H. MAR K LAND PRES I DE NT . C IT Y M ANAGER S' SECTION DECAT UR AOMIN A SSIS T . R . TR AVIS HI G GINBOTHAM PRES I D E NT , C I TY CLERK S ' S EC TION ALBANY C I TY ATTORNEY WIL L IAM E SM I TH PRESIDENT. CIT Y A T T OR NEY S ' S E C TION AMER I CUS �DRA F T M EMO RA NDUM URB A N P OL I CY COUN CI L �MEMORANDUM URBAN POLICY COUNCIL The purpose of this memorandum is to present a statement of the need for establishing a steering committee or Council on Urban Policy in this state to consider formulation of policy recommendations with regard to local government involvement in the development of federal grant-in-aid legislation as affecting urban program development in Georgia . As a bas i c premise it is felt that local government off icials and administrators should play an active part in the initial formulation of federal grant-in-aid legislation that affects the growth, development, administration, and operation of local gover nment in Georg i a. Local govern- ment off icial s and administrator s should also b e cons u lted in the dev e lopment of implementing administrative regulations for such l e gislation . Many fe deral grant- in- aid programs app ear to be f ounded to a l a r ge degree upon criter i a or standards of app lication as de t e r mined almost ent i rely a t the federal leve l . An example is curr ent leg islation in Congress to es t ablish communi ty development dis tr i c ts, the make up and c omposit ion of which is proposed to be approv ed by a cabinet officer based upon prede t ermined criter ia . Intergovernmen tal Cooperation There is strong proba bility that future urban programs, of even our larger c ities , wil l as a p rerequisi t e to fe deral a pp rova l , have t o be reviewed by regional organizations or area p fanning and development commissions. The Intergovernmental Coop eration Act of 1965 (S . 561) which passed the Senate and not the Hou se would have required review by a metropolitan planning agency before the federal government would act. �-2- Regional organizations composed of public officials are now recognized by federal law. These organizations have come into being to meet the need for dealing with problems of urban develop~ent that transcend established political and jurisdictional boundaries and cut across entire regions. These organizations will play a vital role in total coordinated urban development. Only recently were these organizations recognized by the federal government to be more than mere planning agencies. Future federal policy con- templates grants to these agencies conditioned upon mandatory not voluntary membership. Also being considered in some quarters is the evolvement of this regional voluntary association of local governments into an instrumentality, either operating regional type functions or serving as the control center over other regional, functional units. Thus, our traditional gen- eral purpose cities and counties of today may be defining tomorrow's regional general purpose network of government. It should be apparent that these developments are restructuring our intergovernmental relationships in the urban area. Workable Program Part of the problem of local inflexibility and lack of administrative coordination perhaps lies with the over involvement of federal staff personnel in the development and implementation of federal grant-in-aid programs. There has not been enough involvement by local administrators and decision-makers in federal aid program development and implementation . There are many examples of past legislative grant-in-aid enactments by the Congress that often hamstring local government administrative machinery because of the inflexibility of black and white implementing �-3- federal rules and regulations which apply to all units of government regardless of size. development. A good example is the workable program for community This program as a prerequisite to involvement in certain federal programs is lacking in flexibility, in its application, and imposes standards laid down without regard to the fact that local ability to implement and execute programs varies between large and small cities . The requirement of a long range capjtal improvements budget is certainly desirable as a basis for scheduling of projects. However, many local units of government do not even have annual operating budgets. Con- sequently, the reality of a blanket requirement of a long range capital improvements program without requiring operating budgets is open toquestion. The arbitrary requirement that the workable program be recertified each year regardless of size of city results in local administrative falsifying each year. There is a real question of whether the large city should be required to recertify the workable program each year -- why not every five years or every ten years? One large city produced a model workable program and was so claimed by the federal administrator to be one of the best workable programs in the nation. The next year the workable program of that city was not recerti- fied because the federal administrator had said that it had not changed enough over the previous year as reflected by the city's progress reports . Another city was refused recertification because the administrator said the city needed four additional housing inspectors over the previo us year's commitment . Yet no standards or justification were stated as to why these requirements were imposed . �-4- In large cities, specific programs do not necessarily reflect dramatic changes on a yearly basis . Thus, recertification of the workable program for many cities is certainly jeopardized unless that city can "pad" its progress reports in order to convince the federal administrator of progress (not given units of progress but progress) and thus secure recertification. There is involvement in the initial drafting and development of federal legislation because of NLC, USCM, and NACO activities, committee hearings, etc. Yet it appears that broad discretion is given to federal administra- tors with regard to program implementation of legislation . This can be seen in the writing and drafting of agency regulations for implementation. The preparation of such regulations should involve the local public official or administrator in order to bridge the gulf between policy makers and practitioners. Quite often the administrative regulations seem to go much further than the intent of legislation. Urban Renewal In the case of urban renewal, real estate acquisition is supposed to be based upon a program of local determination. The criteria on rehabili- tation are extremely rigid on what a city is allowed to do . The same cri- teria apply to a large agency with large projects as we ll as to a small agency working on a single project. The large agency with the larger pro- jects need more flexibility in the planning, direction , and execution of such projects than would be the case of a small agency . Urban renewal regulations make reference to specific noncash credit items such as a 100% credit for a street serving the project, 50% for a boundary street, 25% for sewer line, etc. However, specific noncash items cannot always be apportioned in specific terms to a given urban renewal �-5- project . As an al t ernative, why not allow an over all total grant with credit given fo r noncash items i n a prog r am sense rathe r t han i n specifics so that the local credit items could be reflected in an overall urban renewal plan, as opposed to spe cific items on a project basis . Specific criteria and prerequisite standards are a pplied in the development of urban renewal projects . Yet similar requirements for streets, highways, and other physical facilities _may be programmed with a total disregard for city 's master plan . Economic Opportunity Program The followi ng is a discussion of areas where cit i es (particularly, mayors) have encountered local problems i n a dmin is t r a tion of the Economic Opportunity Program . Ma ny ma yors would have l iked to have ha d some say in t he initial developme nt of VI STA (Vo lunteers In Se rvic e To Ame rica ), or dome st ic peace corp s program. Apparent ly, many mayor s we r e not i nvolved in the i n i t i al devel op- ment of t his p r ogram , a nd consequent l y, fo und i t ne ces s a ry to refuse part i cipat i on in the VISTA program or were re quired t o use their influence to cancel VISTA pr ograms op erating within t h eir communities . An understanding of the extent of the role of VISTA with in the political area is a demand the mayors could assert . However, this would be in opposition t o the philosophy of VI STA in gra nt ing great flexib ility and freed om. Thu s, EOA, b earing in mind th e problems wh ich could be created for the mayor and the city council by completely unhindered volunteers, has had to demand that VISTA volunte e r s be tie d down to s pec i f i c a ssignments . This has been par ticularly true of the program in Atlanta . �-6- The question of the mayors veto of OEO projects is continuously raised. Certainly obstructionist politicians should not be able to deny necessary and reasonable prog r ams for their citizens o Yet, neither the federal gov- ernment nor any other agency should be in a position to institute programs utilizing tax resources in a political subdivision with complete disregard of the elected leaders of that subdivision . The OEO philosophy demands involv~ment of the poor at the local level by CAP agencies in planning and in conducting CAP programs o However, this philosophy of involvement does not apparently apply at the Washington level. Many programs have originated from Washington with fairly stringent guidelines in which there have been no participation by municipal officials or other interested gro ups at the local level . Many of these programs are under the guise of demonstration programs such as the Foster Grandparents Demonstration project (as conducted in Atlanta) and many of them are actually designed to be on-going projects . Recent changes in the requ irements of the Small Business Development Center program under Ti tle IV of the Economic Opportunity Act is an indication of lack of consideration on the part of local officials in making sweeping changes in the intent and content of a prog r am . The or iginal Title IV p r ovis i on was des i gned to help increase employment by p roviding low inter est loans to small businessmen who would gua r an t ee creation of additional jobs wh i ch co ul d be filled by the poor as well as the creation of new entrepreneurs under low i ncome groups o The initial guidelines have now been so changed that the program simply i s be ing conducted to see how many loans can be g r an ted t o persons who are no t now in business and who are in poverty o The SBA makes it clea r that it is inter ested in making a s many loans as poss i ble to Negroes t o start small businesses . �-7- Recreat i on Rec ent Congre ss e s of t h e Uni ted States, recogn i z i ng the growing demand by citizens for recreation and parks, have passed considerable legislation affecting these movements . The recreation profess i on, although pleased to see the vast interest in recreation and parks on the Federal level of government, does hold some reservations about it . Specifically, the Federal governm~nt has classified all recreation and parks under one heading -- "Outdoor Recreation" . tributes to a narrow view of recreation . This fact alone con- Recreation, as it is conducted in Georgia cities, includes every facet of leisure pursuits for the development of the citizenry . The area of "Outdoor" recreation is only one com- ponent of the field of recreation . It is the feeling of many persons in the field that future wording in Federal legislation should state plainly -- "Recreation" in its broadest sense and not "Outdoor Recreation" . Current Federal laws , such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund Bi ll, th e Housing and Ur ba n Dev e lopment Act of 1965, t he Older Ame r i cans Act , the Economic Oppo r tun ity Ac t of 1965, and many o the r s hav e aff ec ted the gr owth and development of r e c rea tion i n the nation . Bas i c ally sound legislation h a s los t t he ma i n emphas i s on t he p ro gr ams t h r ough gui delines e stabl i shed by t he various Fede ral de partmen t s admini s tering t he p ro g r ams < Bas ic p r og r ams orig i n a l ly i n c l ude d in t h e leg i sla tio n have be en g iven s uch low prior ity t h a t app r oval of a n a ppl ic a t ion i s almo s t i mp oss i bl e . Rec ent Fede r al legis l ation re lating t o recrea t i on and pa r ks wi l l have a g re a t i mpact upo n the r e c r ea tion an d pa r ks moveme n t in t h e Uni t e d States . The r e a r e, however, many a r eas of t h e pr esent l egi slat i on which cou ld be i mp r oved t o b etter s erve t h e communit i e s . �-8- These are : 1. The Feder al government or t he Federal departments administer i ng the legislation has plac ed guidelines on the prog r ams which mak e them quite diffi cult fo r many communi t i e s to take advantage . (a) Practically all the curr ent programs require deta i led communitywide planni ng o Although this requirement is bas ically good, it makes many of our smaller communities inelig i ble from lack of proper finances fo r planning . Federal agencies admi n i stering the programs should be giv en leadway in approving applications from small communities who do not fully meet the guideli nes established by the Federal departme nt . (b) The community leader shi p should be permitted to bes t determine the mo r e sui table locat i on fo r a ny program or facil i ty . It should not be r est ric ted en t ire l y to poverty areas . (c) St ate governments s hould be given the authority to r enew, recomme nd, and approv e appl i cations pr i or to submiss i on t o the Fe deral government . St ate ag en cies are awa r e of th e needs of commun i t ies in t heir res pective s tate s and wi ll a c t wi th sp e e d and e f fi ciency . Cur rently many pr ograms by-pass the stat e al t og e ther . I n suc h i n- s tance s th i s rend er s the a r ea planning and dev elopme n t commi ss i ons and similar groups less effective in guid ing orderly planning a nd deve l opment . By t h e same token, s t a te agencie s c ap a b le of a ssis t - i ng communities with v arious deve lopme n ts, are seldom consul t ed. ( d) Pr e sent p rogr am app lications are by far too difficul t for t he a verage community t o comp l ete and fi le with the proper agency . Pres ent methods almost requ i re the full-time services of a person trained for this pur pose . Many of our smal ler communities cannot aff ord to employ such a person . �-9- (e) Guidelines should be set forth in common terms understandable by all communities o Presently, it is the case where some of the fed- eral employees with the a dministering department s do not agree on t he requirements o This simply causes confusion and misunderstand- ing on the part of local gov e r nments o (f) Federal employees should be qualified to interpret and supervise Federal programs in which they work o It is inconceivable that a person trained in forestry, agriculture, and hort iculture can do the total job necessary for recreation and parks o Recreation is a new profession with personnel trained in this field . Personnel possessing the b ro ad concept of recreation and parks should administer Federal programs o The Land and Water Conser v ation Fund Bill is designed to provide matching funds up to 50 % to states and their political subd ivisions for planning, acquisition and deve lopment of out door recreation areas o State pla nn i ng is essential . Each state, in order to be eligible (Georgia could receive up t o $2 million annually in th i s 25-year program) must prepare a state plan wh i c h must be approved by t he Bureau of Outdoor Recreation " As of May 1 , 1966, comprehensive statewide out doo r re reation plans have been a pp r ov ed exc ept Georg i a, Iowa, North Caro lina, Ut ah , and Wyoming . Proje c ts will no t be approv ed unt i l the s t a t e plan i s app r oved . This law stat es spec if ically that matching funds "may be made available to political subdivi s i ons" o Upon maki ng furth er inquiries as to how the communities a c tually fit int o the plan and how t hey will parti cipa t e in the prog r am , no clear cut answers were a vailable o Actually, local communities do no t now know t o �-10- what ex tent they will be i ncluded in the program . The contention of ma ny i s t hat a state plan canno t be a comprehensive one unless it i nclude s the needs and capabil i t i es of communitie s . After all, the masses of the people are loc ated largely in the urban areas . Al- though the Georgia plan now being developed might include the communities, this does not seem to be the case since inquiries point to the fact that no community has been requested to participate in the planning . It seems, in this light, plans cannot be made for communities without the communities' assistanc e . This piec e of legislat i on is vital to all c i ties and consequently, they should hav e a v o ice i n the make-up of the program in Georgia . In other s t a t es a tt emp t s hav e been made to remove the L&WFB from politics and t o i nsure that project s are considered on the basis of need . In one st_a te, fo r ex ample, ov e r 100 car efully selected leaders were b r ought t og ethe r i n t he form i ng of a c ouncil fo r th e purpose of es tabl i shi ng guidelines fo r t h e prog r am . It wa s t heir r esponsib i l i ty to determ i ne a r eal basi c point -- what percent a ge of the funds would be al l o ca t ed t o l ocal communit i e s, s tate parks, and f ed eral agenci e s wi t hin the s tate . A l ay group , rep resent i ng v a r i ou s i n teres ts, should b e a pp oin ted f o r t he pur pos e of maki ng t h ese s ame deci s i on s i n Ge or g i a . Additionally, t h i s same gr oup or a similar one should b e app oint ed and authorized to rev iew e a ch p iece of fed era l leg islation p ri or t o its i mp l eme n tation i n Ge or g i a, and make certa in procedural recommenda tions . Without positive action t he r e is a po s sib i l ity that Land a nd Water funds will comp letely elude the c ities of Georgia . immediate positive s teps . This situation r e quires �-11- Conclusion The broad shopp i ng market of federal programs portrays a gross amount of money for use locally as the federal government sees fit, and according to its program emphasis o In many cases, the emphas i s on specific prog r ams and projects is determi ned nationally not locally o However, it is believed that many of our cities , large and small, do have the capability of making such determinations and should be allowed the administrative flexibility to determine the level of emphasis that should be placed on specific local programs o If such were the case, a city could submit a comprehensive state- ment of its needs in terms of pri ority and emphasis on local programs and be given a grant with the nec essary flexibility for implementation in accordance to priorities as determi ned locally by that city o Urban Policy Council In conclusion it is fe l t t ha t this state could take a very pos i tive step toward harmonious coord i nation of federal grant-in-aid p r ograms and urban development by e s tab lish ing a s t eering committee or council on urban policy char ged with t he res ponsibility of dev eloping a statement of pol icy for coord i nat i on, dev elopment and administration prog r ams deal ing wit h the total grow t h and development of our communities o be composed of the f ollowing : Such a commi t tee should r e p resentatives of municipal gov ernment t hrough t he Georg i a Municipal Association; r ep r esentatives of county government t h r ough the As so c iation of County Commissioners of Geor gia, rep r e sentatives of stat e gov ernment t h r ough the Executive Off ic e; and r ep r es ent atives of Georgia ' s Congressional Delegation o This commi ttee could hav e t he g iven responsibility for the performance of the fol lowing basic functions: �-12- 1. To analyz e the t r ends , condi tions , needs, and problems affecting local government in Geo r gia ' s rapidly urbaniz i ng s t ate; 2. To def i ne the compl i mentary and cooperative roles of local, state, and federal agenc ies with respe c t to the development and implementation of urban programs; 3. To re commend appropriate policies that would govern the working relationsh i ps bet ween local, state and federal agenc ies in the development, implementation, and coordination of programs to cope with urban growth . � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document @}IlE©~@~ ~ C 1TY C°'<MI SSIO N ER J . STE V E COL U MBU S ©~IT©IT~£& M AYOR M ALC OL M SAVANNAH R. MAYOR J oH N L . C R OMARTIE, G A I NES VILLE W. 4 06 F ULTO N FEDE R AL BUILDI N G• / AT L A NTA . GEORGI A 30303 ELMER GEORGE, / K N I GHT, M A CLE AN, President First Vice President Second Vice President E xecutive Director TE L EPHO NE 2 55 -0 4 2 4 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENT S June 28 , 196 6 CIT Y C O MM I S S IONER JOHN E . Y A RBROUGH I MMED I A TE PA S T PR E S I D E N T ROM E, G A . M AYO R R ANDO LPH MED LOC K S TONE M O U NTA IN, GA . M A Y OR W . 8 . W I THERS M OU L TR I E , G A . C1T v C OMM 1s s10NER C A R L E . PR u E r r TO: GR I F F I N , G A . M A Y OR 8 . F . M E RR ITT , J R . M A CO N , GA . FI R ST GMA BOARD OF DIRECTORS MUNICIPAL EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMI TTEE GMA MUNICIPAL SERVICES REVIEW COMMI TTEE DISTRICT PR E S I D E N T MAYO R J AC K A . LEROY AILE Y D I R E CTO R M AYOR J . W . SN E LL W R I GHT SV I LL E SECOND DISTRICT P RES I D E N T M A YOR W . P . H EN R Y P E L HAM D I RE C T OR M AY OR MAC K E . WI LLI S B A I N BRID G E T H I R D D I S TRICT PRE S I DE N T RI CH A RD B . R AY PERRY D I RE C T OR M A YOR 0 . E . WHI T E P I N E M O U NTA IN F OU R T H It becomes more evident ever y showing stronger and stro n ger fairs. The Intergovernme n tal is a further demonstration of Congre s sio n al wr ote d is tr ibut i o n Po li c y Commi t t e e . day that Wash i ngt on i s interest in l oc a l a fPer sonne l Ac t o f 1966 thi s . D IST R IC T PR E S I D E NT C O U N C IL M A N LI NT O N BROO M E DO RAV ILL E DI REC T OR C OUNC IL MA N C L Y DE J. HI C K S CO NY ERS F I FTH Attached is a report from the May 25, 1966, Record which may be of interest to you. We Senator Muskie, requesting ext r a copies fo r to the GMA Board, the Municipal Educ at io na l Committee and the Municipal Ser vices Rev iew It will be appr e ciated i f you would let u s hear f r om you if y ou have any suggestio ns or rec omme n d a ti o s regarding this Act. DISTRI C T Your s ve ry tru l y, PR ES IDEN T MA Y O R A U B R EY E . GRE E NWAY R OS W E LL D I R E C TOR ALDER M AN E . GREGOR Y GRIGGS A TL AN T A S IXTH DISTR I CT W. Elmer George Exe c u tive Direc t or PR ES I D EN T MA Y OR J . GA R DN ER N E WM A N LAG RAN GE DIRE CTOR MAY O R H E R B E RT H . J O N E S McD O NOU G H SEVE N TH WEG/ r s DISTRICT P RE S I D E N T encl o sure MA Y OR J . C . W OO D S T R I ON D I REC TOR M A Y OR R A LP H R . C L ARK , J R . R I NGGO LD EI G HT H DI S T R ICT P RESIDEN T MA Y O R ELT ON D . B ROO K S DO U G L AS D I R EC TOR MA YO R J AMES T . W I N DSO R , JR . Mc RAE NINTH DISTRICT P R ES I DE NT M AYOR O U ARD 8 . W H I TL OW CARNES VIL L E D I R ECTOR M AYOR M R S . J ESS I E D AH LO NEG A T E NT H L. G A R NE R DI S TR IC T PRES I DENT MAYOR JULIUS F . BIS H OP A T HENS DIREC T OR GEORGE A . S ANC KE N , J R . AUGUS T A DIRECTO R S STATE C O UN CILMAN GE O RGE H . BULLOCK ATHE N S A L DERMAN J . J . S HOOB MAYOR WILLI AM JACK H AM I LTON DECATUR ALDERMAN CECIL TURNER ATLANTA MAYOR JOHN C . EDENFIELD THOMASTON MAYOR LEE E . CARTER AT LARGE SAVANNAH CITY M ANA GER JO HN H . M A R KLAND PRESIDE NT. CI TY MANA G ERS ' SECT IO N DECATUR ADMIN . ASSIST R . TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PRESIDEN T . CITY CLERKS ' S ECTION A L BANY HARTWELL C I T Y ATTORNEY WILLIAM E . S M I TH PRESIDENT , C I TY ATTORNEYS' S EC TION AMERICUS �United States of America Vol. 112 <to grcssi n tRecord PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89 th CONGRES S 1 SECOND 11 SESSION WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 1966 F ederal aid to State and local governments will have more than quadrupledrising from $3.1 billion in 1955 to an estimated $14.6 billion in 1967. And in number, these programs have reached the 170 mark. In relative terms, this growth has been fairly modest. Witness the fact that Federal a id as a percentage of State and local revenue during this 13-year period increased by only appi·oximately 5 percent. But this gradual growth highlights indirectly the extraorTHE STATE AND LOCAL MANPO\VER CRISIS For over three and a half years the dinary effort that State and local govSubcommittee on Intergovernmental Re- ernments have made to resolve their fislations of the Committee on Government cal crisis. During this same 13-year peOperations, which I am priviJeged to riod, State and loca l expenditures will chair, has been examining the critical, h r.ve more than d oubled-rising from but largely misunderstood, topic of Fed- $34.5 billion in 1055 to approximately eral-State-local relations. On the basis $84 billion for fiscal 1967. The increase of the subcommittee's diverse legislative in the number and amount of- Federal and research undertakings, I am now aid available to State and local govconvinced that the success of the Great ernments, then, is not the most signifiSociety programs-and indeed, perhaps cant factor in the total State-local fiscal the future of American federalism- picture, but it has thrust greater burdens largely depends on whether or not we on a n already strained intergovernmenrecognize and overcome the crisis in gov- tal system. State and local employment, for exernmental m anpower, especially as it involves State and local governments. In ample, reached the 8 million mark last his May 11 address at Princeton Univer- year. This represented a half million sity, President Johnson took note of this increase over the 19'64 fi gure, a 2.2 milcrisis and called for a joint effort to sur- lion rise from the 1961 fi gme, and a 4.7 million hike from the 1946 employment mount it. But to date, we at the national level level. By way of contrast, the Federal h ave acted largely as though the crisis Government employed 2.6 million workdoes not exist. During the past five ses- ers in 1965, or 60 ,000 more than in sions of Congress we have developed the 1964. This figure-was 200,000 above that most impressive package of Federal of· 1961, but 100,000 less than in 1946 . legislation since the New Deal to attack These comp&.risons dramatically high.: poverty, ignorance, uneven economic de- light the strenuous efforts State and velopment, discrimination, and urban local governments have made in the blight and sprawl. For the most part past two decades to meet the demand we have utilized the categorical grant- for more public services. A breakdown of the 8 million Statein-aid device as the basic weapon in this many-faceted attempt to achieve a social local employees, by jurisdictional cateand economic betterment of all our peo- gories, is equally striking. State govple. But the grant-in-aid involves joint vernments now account for over oneefforts, not simply Federal efforts. It fourth of the State and local total. involves joint action, not just Federal Counties have one-eighth of all such action. It involves the utilization of employees, while municipalities engage governmental manpower at all levels, nearly one-fourth, and school districts a little less than a third. Townships not merely the F ederal. The grant-in-aid today is the most employ 3.5 percent, and other special striking symbol of cooperative federal- districts, 2 perce1,t of the total. From ism. Yet its effective use constitutes one 1961 to 1965, the States, other special of the greatest challenges to creative districts, townships, school districts, and federalism. And in the final analysis, counties--in that order-experienced our heavy reliance on the grant mech- the greatest increase in employment. Changes in · occupational categories anism has made the gover~ental manpower crisis a crisis of contemporary further highlight the impact of public demand for new or improved·State and federalism. governmental services. From April Most of us are unaware of the extent local 1957 to October 1965, the number of fullto which we have turned to the grant- time State and local highway workers in-aid in our efforts to implement the rose by 24 percent. Employment in poEisenhower program, to chart the New lice protection increased by 30 percent, Frontier, and to establish the Great Society. From 1955 through 1967, total and in public health and hospitals by 41 THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF 1966 Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to enable greater colla boration in personnel matters between and among the levels of government in order to improve t he administration of Federal grant-in-aid programs and to strengthen the public service of the States and their localities. No. 86 percent. The number of full-time public employees in education soared by 60 percent, and those in public welfare, by 62 percent. Much of this massive growth in State and local employment can be attributed to the population explosion and the demand for expanded services generated by it. The physical and social problems stemming from urbanization and suburbanization, however, have been other key factors in developing greater needs for police, fire, housing, sanitation, welfare, and other public services. In addition, one of the byproducts of our a ffluent society is the rise in popular expectations with respect to governmental services. To put it more bluntly, the American citizem-y is not willing to settle for the level and quality of services that were provided three, or even two, decades ago. THE FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY The c1isis in State and local employment, however, also bears a close relationship to expanded Federal programs and activity. Federal programs in highway construction, education, urban ren ewal, housing, water pollution control, and poverty-to mention only a fewh ave produced new and urgent personnel needs at the . State and local levels. Moreover, other new legislation in the fields of primary and secondary education, the aged, and medical assistance-if inadequately planned for-will only aggravate this manpower crisis. Much of the recent Federal aid legislation sets only general goals and provides the funds necessary to achieve them. The job of implementation falls to the States, the counties, and the cities, which then have to "staff up" to accomplish the objectives of this legislation. Further, some Federal aid programs simply make .money available to the States and municipalities for developing their own plans for use of such funds . In these instances, Federal agencies merely play the role of disbursing agent to underwrite plans and projects Initiated and developed at the State and local levels. Finally, many of these Federal efforts generate counterpart efforts at other levels of gove1nment, with many States and localities enacting legislation in program areas similar to those covered in Federal legislation. In these various ways, congressional action directly or indirectly has contributed to the extraordinary growth of public employment at the State and local levels. So, the States now employ more than 2 million workers with a monthly payroll of $850 million, and �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - local governments employ nearly 6 million workers with a monthly payroll of $2.5 billion. We have reached the point where, on a day-to-day basis, intergovernmental relations are primarily administrative rela,tions. As the recent subcommittee survey, "The Federal.System as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," pointed out, the authorizing statutes, the funds, and the legislative oversight which affect Federal-State-local relations come from legislative bodies. Policy directives, budgetary review and control, and administrative rules and regulations come from top management policymakers. Advice, assistance, and support, as well as complaints, criticism, and censure, come from officeholders, individual citizens, and interest groups at all levels. These basic forc es in our pluralistic political system shape and sustain the intricate pattern of today's intergovernmental relations. But the "wheelhorses of federalism" are administrative, professional , and t echnical personnel-the Federal middle-managem ent aid offi. cials, their fieldmen, and their functional counterparts at the State and local levels . We must focus our attention, then , on the largely unexplored topic of intergovernmental m anpower if our eff01ts to achieve a creative f ederalism are to succeed. The various growth figur es I have cited indicate that State and local governments are vigorously attempting to provide the m anpower needed to administer the new joint-action programs as well as their own . They suggest that present Federal efforts in this area are inadequate, since they are geared largely to the needs of certain grant progr ams and to certain categories of specialized personnel administering them. They indicate that the Federal Government has a greater responsibility to provide financial, technical, and other forms of assistance to the States and localities to h elp them mount a broad attack on this manpower crisis. And they indicate the critica l need for the legislation I am introducing today. Economy and efficiency compel our concern, for the wisest use of the Federal grant-in-aid dollar depends upon how well we m eet this challenge. Improved public administration makes it necessary, since the success of these various programs depends on our ability and willingness to solve this crit ical problem. Improved intergovernmental cooperation requires it, for conflict between and among administrators is one of the major sources of friction in contemporary Federal-State-local r elations. Finally, manpower needs of State and local governments in the years immediately ahead clearly dictate that the Federal Government must join with the other levels of government in helping to surmount this crisis. Present estimates indicate that total governmental employment will reach the 13 million m ark by 1975. As in the past t wo decades, nearly all of the increase will be in State and local governmental agencies. Continued population growth and the ·migration of people from rural to urban areas, and from cities to sub- 10983 SENATE urbs, will raise the requirements for public health services, education, police and fire protection, sanitation, street and highway maintenance, welfare, and other services. Consequently, State and local government employment is expected to rise by more than 38 percent between now and 1975 , whereas little change is expected in Federal employment-barring, of course, major unemployment, big wars, or other national catastrophes. There already exists a shortage of welltrained and highly qualified administrative, professional, and technical personnel at all levels of government, and forecasts indicate this gap will grow. Many well-trained and well-qualified employees in State and local governments were hired during the depression years and are now approaching retirement age. More than one-third of all municipal executives fall in this category and will retire within the next decade. · In certain specialized categories, howeve1'., the proportion is even higher. Half of the Nation's municipal health directors, for example, will be eligible for retirement within the next 10 years. And a recent survey of New York City revealed that one out of every five budgeted positions of a professional, managerial, .or technical nature-excluding education-was vacant. Many others were filled with people not fully qualified . More or less similar conditions exist in many other of the Nation's cities. By 1980, local governments will have to recruit approximately 300,000 additional administrative employees to achieve their current program obj ectives. When the long-term implications of r ecently enacted programs are considered, this m anpower gap widens. Witness these facts: That, as of 1964, it was estimated that the Nation's counseling personnel would have to be increased during the subsequent 3 years by approximately 90 percent to m eet the new requirements for public schools, public employment offices, and other governm ental a gencies; that there will be an estimated 3,000 vacancies each year for trained, recreation workers, but only about 600 persons complete preparation for this occupation annually; that there will be 200 traffic engineer vacancies occurring annually, but there are only approximately 50 n ew gradu ates in this specialized area; that there will be at least 2 vacancies for every graduate of a university course in city management; and that between 1960 and 1970, accordIng to t h e Manpower Commission's report, the overall demand for professional and technical personnel at the local level will h ave increased by 40 p ercent. These current and projected estimates of governmental manpower sho1tages have implications extendin g far beyond the individual States, communities, and programs that are affected. They indicate that we can take no great comfort in the fact that State and local employment has reached the 8 million mark. They indicate that State and local governments generally-not just a few of these jurisdictions-are having difficulty in attracting and holding professional, managerial, and technical personnel, and that these levels will experience even greater difficulties in the future. They suggest that decisionmakers at all levels of Government are not yet fully aware of the c1itical nature of this manpower gap, and that long-range planning in this area is in its infancy. They further corroborate John W. Gardner's assessment-in his book on "Excellence"that: • • • The demand for hlg-h-talent manpower is firmly rooted In the level of technological complexity which characterizes modern life, and In the complexity of modern social organization. And more important than either of these is the r ate of Innovation and change In both technological a nd social spheres. In a world that Is rocking with change we n eed more than anything else a high capacity for adjustment to changed circumstances, a en.pa.city for innovation. And finally , these estimates document the need for a national policy on intergovernmental personnel. The legislation I introduce today provides such a policy. CHA RTING A COURSE The proposed Intergovernmental Personnel Act does not purport to solve all the manpower problems faced by State and local governments. There is, of course, no panacea for the absolute shortages in the country in certain prof essional fields. The Federal Government in a variety of ways is now assisting in the professional education of many in these fields. But these measures are geared to specific Federal program n eeds and specific types of personnel. They must be supplemented to meet the particular staffing requirements of State and local public agencies. Personnel administration in the S tates and localities must be equipped to deal with the whole range of State and local job needs. Practical m ethods must be devised for r ecruitment, selection, utilization, and development within the realities of current supply and demand. At the same time, a rational plan for meeting projected n eeds must be devised and initiated. This legislation will encourage the developm ent of such m ethods and plans. The ac t deals direct ly with three major hurdles confronting State and local governments in recruiting and holding qualified employees. A fourth-low salary schedules--is not so directly considered, but it is a topic that cannot be ignored. Generally, State and local salary schedules-though better today than they were a few years ago-are still lower t han those at both the Federal Government and private industry. The Municipal Manpower Commission r eport found: S ala ries are a major source of dissatisfaction among m ore than one-third of a ll mu nicipal executives- And thatnine out of ten believe that their salaries a re not as high as comparable posi tlons I carry I in private business, a nd 60 percent believe that Federal salaries would also be higher. Not so long ago, Clarence B. Randall, the distinguished Chairman of the Panel that President Kennedy appointed to 1·eview Federal salary policy, wrote: Inadequate Federa l pay poses two problems that seriously hamper Federal agencies' operation . It's a tossup in the Federal service whether getting the best people Is more difficult than keeping the good ones. • • • �10984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE The average salary of vocational rehabllltaInadequate compensation ls one of the principal reasons for reluctance to enter Fed- tlon counsellors ranges !rom an annual mln!eral service. In fact, it frequently eliminates mum of $6,051 to a maximum of $7,712. Such groups o! potential candidates !or Federal counsellors are responsible for ln!tlating and positions. On others it Imposes severe fi- carrying out rehabilitation processors for nancial sacrifices . First there are those who p ersons who are physically and mentally have not yet reached the top of their career h andicapped. The position usually requires ladders and who are still faced with such a college degree and some experience 1n the real problems as mortgages and their ch!l- field of vocational guidance, psychology, dren's education. • • • Not so generally social work, personnel work, or industrial known a.re the problems associated with rel ations. filling second echelon positions. • • • The average salary of an administrative I do not contend th at government salaries officer In a State's Civil Defense program should be Identical with those in Industry. ra nges from a minimum of $ 6,893 to a maxiOn the contrary, I never want to see the mum of $0 ,819. An employee In this posimoney seekers go Into government. • • • tion provides administrative assistance In But the present disparity between publlc pay the personn el, budgetary, and fi scal areas to and private pay In the leadership positions is Clvll Defense offices ; the position u sually a scandal. It must be corrected or the r equires a college degree and considerable United States will not be able to fulfill the experience In the fi eld of general adminhigh destiny to which It has bee n called In istration, office m anagement, or a combinathis difficult modern world. tion of both . While Mr. Randall was primarily conIn light of these and other findings , I cerned with Federal pay scales-and it am convinced that the President and the should be noted that his panel's recom- Advisory Commission on Intergovernmendations were ins"trumental in enact- mental Relations should join in launchment of the Federal Salary Refo1m Acts ing a national study of State and local of 1962 and 1964-his r emarks have no salary reform. The issue is that critical. less relevance to the States and their lo- Constitutional barriers and the dictates calities. The report of the Municipal of interlevel comity bar direct consideraManpower Commission and the survey tion of this question in the proposed legof Federal aid officials conducted by the islation. But certain of its provisions Intergovernmental Rela tions Subcom- b ea r indirectly on such reform-includmittee clearly indicate that low pay and ing those sections which seek respectively the resulting high personnel turnover to streng then the merit system , upgrade have served to put m any State a nd loca l classification and salary schedules, and governments at a competitive disadvan- improve training programs in these tage. And the lates t figures-July 1, jurisdictions . 1965-for specific State and loca l profes ! I) THE MERIT SYSTEM IN GRANT-IN-AID sional and technica l positions, indicate PROGRAMS that, despite some recent improvements, A basic problem in the intergovernsalary schedules are still a critica l problem. A few case studies will illustrate m ental p er sonnel field concerns the m erit principle, and particularly as it my point: The average a nnual sala ry of a State hea r- applies to Fede ral g rant-in-aid proings r efer ee ranges from $7,750 minimum t o g rams. The proposed Intergove rnmen$9,737 ma ximum. Such referee s are respon- t a l Personnel Act deals directly with sible for preparing, conducting, and deciding this controversial issue. My experie nce quasi-judicial h earings Involving questions ::i s a State legisla tor, as Governor of the of statutory compliance, claims, a nd viola State of M a ine. a nd as a U.S. Senator tions of regulations in Issu es between St ate convinces me of the validity of this prindepartments and other parties; they u sually ciple. I s trongly beli eve that an o pen must have an A.B. and a law degree. The average annual sala ry of a n unemploy- system of public empl oym ent, operating ment claims deputy ranges from a mini m um under public rul es and based , among or $5,237 to a maximum of $6 ,604 . This other factors, on competitive exa minatechnical position Involves non-moneta ry tions , equa l pay for equal work, tenure determinations on unemployment Insura nce contingent on successful perfor mance, claims, Includin g the adj udication of ques- and promotion on evalua ted capacity tionable or contested claims; successful ap- a nd se rvice , provides one of th e s urest pllcants must possess considerable prior ex- foundations for the development and perience or college training. The average salary for public ass istance m ai ntenance of a n efficient career civil case worker supervisors ranges from a mini- service based on excelle nce. Equally immum of $5,8 10 to a maximum of $ 7 ,762 . This portant, It m eet s the democratic objecpost involves professional social work a t the tive of equal opportunity. local level and Immediate supervision a nd deThe b eg innings of State a nd local civil velopment of a group Of case workers; It service, b ased on the merit pri nciple, first usuall y requires training In a grad uate appeared in the 1880's, followin g the enschool of social work . The an n u al pay of sanitarians ranges from a c tment of the Federal legislatio n . a mini mum of $5, 142 to a m aximum of $ 6,592. Thanks to the efforts of the National This professional position In environmen tal Civil S erv ice Leag ue and ot hers, addisanitation work Invol ves control of commu- tional jurisdictions subsequently adopted nicable diseases, promotion of health and the s ystem. But widespread acceptance safety, and the solution of environmental did not come until the 1930's. Beginhealth problems; It usually requires a col- n ing with an amendment to the Social lege degree with speclallzatlon In the physical Secu rity Act in 1939, the Federal Govand biological sciences . ernment contributed to this development The mean salary of a public h ealth nurse by specifying standa rds which would ranges from a mlnlmwn of $4 ,778 to a maxlmwn of $6,1 94. T h is position usually re- bind State and local agencies to such quires graduation from an accredited school requirements If ihey received Federal of nursing, State registration, and a program funds under certain grant programs. In spite of these advances and some reof stud y In publlc health nursing, or appropriate public health nursing experience. cent improvements in a fe w of the larger 3 May 25, 1966 States and in some municipalities, only 28 States and only our larger cities today have a merit system covering employees in most of the executive departments ; 22 States and most of the smaller local jurisdictions only apply the principle selectively. In these 22 States, the merit principle applies in all instances to departments administering those few federally aided programs ,subject to merit requirements, but in only some in.stances to employees of one or more other departments. In these States, the impact of those grants-based on approximately nine statutes and administered by the Departments of Health, Education , and Welfare; Labor; and Defense-has been a primary if not exclusive factor in encouraging the merit principle. Is this record adequate? I think not. I am completely aware that formal merit systems based on detailed examination, promotion, dismissal, and other factors may not prevent political sabotage of the p1inciple. I am also aware that a patronage-based system of personnel administration may produce at any given time a competent civil service with high morale. In general, however, I am convinced that the application and extension of the formal requirements have had a salutary effect. And I am convinced that the arguments President Roosevelt advanced in his message calling for application of the merit principle to the social security program are as valid today as they were in 1939: • • • I recommend th at the States be required, as a condition for the receipt o! Federal funds , to establlsh and maintain a merit system for t he selection of personnel. Such a requirement would represent a protection to the States and cl tlzens thereof r ather than an encroachment by the Federal Government, since It would automatically promote efficiency and eliminate the necessity for minute Federal scrutiny of State operations. F or these reasons, I b elieve m erit standards should be added to more grant-in-aid programs as a condition for elig ibility. Title I of the Intergovernm e ntal P ersonnel Act of 1966 provides for this by autho1izing the President to require , insofar as he d eems p ractica ble, that, as a condition f or receiving Fede r a l funds under any grant program , personnel engaged in its a dminis tration mus t be employed under a me1it syst em m eeting Federal standards. This discretionary provision recognizes the difficulties of extending the merit system to all g r a nt-inaid programs. More particul arly, it recognizes the troubles inherent in att empting to apply it to many of the recently enacted p rograms. At the same time, it encourages action in those grant programs which involve s ubstantial Federal funds and are on going, rath e r than experimental , ventures. The Federa l hig hway prog ram immediately comes to mind as an excelle nt candidate. The proposed legislation also seeks to strengthen the merit system by· providing that the grants authorized for improving S t ate personn el administration under title II be used to strengthen or e xtend the career civil service of the State. To sum up, the Federal Govern- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ment, a majority of the States, most of the larger cities, and nearly all of the experts in the field recognize the relationship between attracting and retaining competent public administrators and the presence of · a viable merit system. These provisions of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act are based on this relationship. (2) OVERALL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Aside from the Federal interest in more effective administration of grant programs, there is a clear Federal interest in strengthening the overall personnel management of the States and their localities as partners in the federal system. The absence of an effective system of personnel management contributes to the manpower difficulties now confronting State and local governments. Both the merit principle and modern management techniques require such a system, which calls for imaginative recruitment efforts and sophisticated examination techniques; an intelligent placement system, which fits the man to the job, and a fair and rewarding promotion system; the development and continuous updating of a position classification plan, since the grouping of positions into classes helps to identify questions of pay, lines of promotion, requirements for transfer, and other basic administrative questions; the meaningful development of the time-honored concept of a career service, in which advancement is not limited merely to service in one agency; and planning for the manpower needs of the years ahead. These are but a few of the basic objectives of good personnel management. Concern with the merit system initially prompted the development of examinations and classification plans. And the requirements of modern management and modern government have modified and expanded the original list of personnel administrative functions. Yet, in nearly all of the States and localities that lack a general civil service system, personnel management, in practice, is usually limited to the job classification and salary setting functions. Even in those States possessing a viable merit system, conflicts between the policing efforts of the Civil Service Commission and the management concerns of the Governor-his staff and personnel officer-sometimes have impeded improvements in this area. In general, then, State and local resources for public personnel administration have not kept pace with the growth of the programs they administer. With few exceptions, State and local personnel agencic:; have not been equipped or given additional support for new workloads. The inadequate support of personnel planning and operations has left many personnel agencies short of needed professional personnel, including trained job analysts, personnel psychologists and training staff. For example, only 10 States have as many as 25 professional, administrative, and technical employees in the State civil service or merit system agency to handle their continuing responsibilities, let alone to undertake broadened activities. Yet State and local personnel agencies must cope with new needs and new problems. The Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1966 recognizes these needs and attempts to come to grips with these problems. Title II of the proposed legislation authorizes grants to enable States to strengthen their systems of personnel administration, to provide State personnel services to smaller jurisdictions of local government, and to stimulate projects for the improvement of personnel administration in their lar'ger cities. To qualify, States would need to develop programs of personnel improvement which might cover such topics as: expansion of the coverage of a State merit system; planning for manpower needs; improvement in one or more of the traditional areas of recruitment, examination, position classification plans, and compensation schedules; or possibly research and demonstration projects in the new areas of electronic data processing and motivational research. Title II also seeks to improve the personnel administration of smaller units of local government. Grants are authorized for the development of State plans that might involve broader coverage of local employees under a State merit system, State technical personnel services to such units of government, cooperative research and demonstration projects in this field, or cooperative intergovernmental ·efforts relating to loans, transfers, or promotions of personnel. The title assigns full responsibility to the States for developing their own programs and a coordinating role for their local jurisdictions. There is a need for pioneering efforts in State assistance to nonmetropolitan local governments. At the local level, the smaller jurisdictions are not in a position to establish modern personnel systems that meet the need for broader recruitment for professional personnel or for attracting able young men and women who regard these initial jobs as rungs on the career ladder rather than as blind alleys. Intergovernmental ·c ooperation with the possibility of increased mobility can help meet these prnblems. Self-contained local personnel systems present certain problems of parochialism even in our larger metropolitan governments. They are simply not feasible for the smaller nonmetropolitan governments in terms of either the expense or the availability of technica l services. Hence there is a need for State services to the nonmetropolitan governments. The act provides for a variety of services ranging from merit system coverage to more limited specialized services. Part C of the title authorizes a separate program of Federal assistance for personnel improvement in our larger cities. There is a pressing need for innovative activities in our metropolitan areas. The shortages of professional, administrative, and technical personnel require planned recruitment, selection to assure the Intake of a fair share of young talent, and a long-range staff development pro- 10985 gram covering various occupational fields. Imaginative job analyses can lead to the establishment . of new types of auxiliary jobs to help meet the absolute shortage in many professional and technical fields. They also may open up opportunities for job training and employment for many of the disadvantaged. While public personnel administration is not a social program designed to solve the problem of employn1ent of the disadvantaged, governments, as large employers, can and should show leadership in this· area. The act provides for project grants for metropolitan personnel administration in order to permit a wide range of experimentation and demonstration projects to strengthen personnel administration and meet urgent manpower problems. These grants may be used for personnel planning, for upgrading or establishing personnel agencies, for improving personnel operations in specific functions, or for initiating pilot projects designed to meet current and projected needs. The States are given the initial opportunity to work with the cities in developing project proposals under this section, with special emphasis on the particular problems of our larger metropolitan units of general local government. But if a State fails to submit any projects after one year, individual metropolitan units may then initiate their own projects. This aproach, I feel, recognizes the necessary coordinating role of the States in personel management, while permitting direct Federal-local efforts· in cases of State inaction. Title II, it should be noted, would be administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. More specifically, It is anticipated that HEW's Division of State Merit Systems would assume primary responsibility for its administration. This division has h a d more practical experience with State personnel systems than any other unit in the Federal Government, thanks to the merit requirements of many HEW grant programs. Moreover, it already has a tradition of extending technical assistance to State and local governments which have sought out its assistance in upgrading their civil service. The concurrence of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, however, would be required before HEW could approve projects for metropolitan jurisdictions. In addition to the grants authorized for State and local personnel administration under title II, the proposed legislation provides another means for Improved intergovernmental collaboration In this field. Title V of the act authorizes the Civil Service Commission to join on a shared-cost basis with States or units of general local government, or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under mutually agreeable regulations. Some authorities believe the Commission already pos.5esses this autho11ty, but the same authorities concede that adequate provision is lacking with respect to financing such joint activity. This title provides a statutory �10986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE basis for the Commission's au thority to enter into such cooperative arran gem ents, and it settles t he financial question by adopting the sh ared-cost formula . In these ways, the proposed legislation squarely confronts many of t h e mo re significant personnel m an agement problems confronting S tate a nd local governm ents t oday. The amounts a uthorized a re m odest, a nd the coopera tive arrangem ents are permissive. But t he fun ds will be seed money well spent, a nd t he devices for cooperation will encourage a concerted a t tack on wh a t we must now concede to be a joint problem. ( 3) TRAINING Inextricably linked to t he m erit system a nd personnel m a n agem ent problems is the n eed for more a nd better tra ining op'por tunities. Ideally , such a progra m should in clude provision fo r orienta tion, in-service and out -ser vice training, tuition r efund, a nd educational leave. It should be r ooted in th e car eer service ethic a nd imply future prospects tha t r eward special effo r t on the part of employees. Our concern h ere is training within the service after a ppoint ment, not educa tion for public service prior to appointmen t . T he la t te r, of course, deserves t h e consideration of a ll of us, a n d hopefully title I of t h e H igh er Education Act of 1965 will resolve some of the problems in t his area. T he man power shortages I have described, a long with t h e mou nting technological, social, a n d econ omic ch an ges affect ing t h e a ctivities of S ta te and local governmen ts, u nderscore t h e emphasis tha t a ll of us should give to establish in g and st ren gthening tra ining progra ms at these levels of governm en t. Many legisla tors , administrators, a nd other public officials n ow recognize the need for such programs. Yet only California, New York, Mich igan, a nd a few other States have t raining programs for top m anagement. Others provide some trainin g fo r other key ·p ersonnel. But a ccording to a r ecen t sur vey conducted by t he International City Man agers Association, most of the States have no t raining or development progra ms for administrative, t echnical, a nd professional personnel. And no city h as anything approaching a model training program. Most existing t raining is still designed to improve the skills of routi ne officeworkers, policem en , and firemen. Moreover, training prog rams stimulated by Federal grants-in-aid are largely geared to specific functional specialties. Such inservice training and education al leave are valuable, of course, but they do not meet the growing requirements of S tate a nd local govern ments for more and better administrative, professiona l, and technical talen t . The repor t of t he Municipal Ma npower Commission a nd the survey of th e Federal aid officials by the subcommittee fully document the need for a Federal response to this critical personnel management deficiency, The Intergover nmental P ersonnel Act attacks this problem of training in four ways. First, title III authorizes Federal departments and agencies conducting programs for their professional, admin- lstrative, and tech nical employees to open t h em up to S ta te and local personnel in counterpart agencies. The S tates or localities would initiate t h e r equest to participate, and f ees for a ttendance could be waived for employees in sh ort -supply categories. S econ d, Federal departments or a gen cies a dministering grant -in-a id programs are a ut horized to establish training programs fo r counte rpart State and local personnel in the professional, a dministrative, and tech nical fields. Such a gencies a re authorized to m ake grants to S tates a nd localities from F ederal funds appropria ted for administrative costs of the progra m to cover the expenses of such training. In a ddition, such F ederal agencies are permi tted t o m ake grants from such funds for educa tional lea ve or comparable arra ngements fo r sa laries a nd training expenses of m erit system employees in short-supply a reas, to permit them to a ttend university or other training courses r elated to their progra m. Third, title IV establish es a grant.;!_!1a id progra m f or inservice training of S tate and local employees. This provision is geared to promoting high levels of per form ance of such personnel, pa rticula rly in th e professional, a dministra tive, and technical a reas, and t h e development of employee potential by providing F ederal fun ds for S tate and local governments t o initiate or strength en t raining programs for t h eir own public servants. Such assista nce would be available only in personnel a reas wh ere compa rable a id is not already provided under other Federa l statutes. The pattern of Federal assista nce h ere roughly pa rallels that of title II, except that the Civil S ervice Commission would be the a dministering a gency. T h e S ta tes would be given t he p1im ary r esponsibility for developing pla ns for the training of their employees and the initia l responsibility for joinin g with local governm ents in the developmen t of t raining progra ms for local personnel. Such pla ns would include provisions for a continuing assessment of training needs, for equitable stan dards r elating to the selection and assignment of per sonnel for t raining, a nd fo r efficient utilization of personnel receiving train ing-including contin ued service for a reasonable period of time. Educa tional leave or other a.rra ngements for salary a nd tra ining payments for periods in excess of a month in a ny one ca lenda r year would be permitted only for career personnel employed under a merit system. In addition, a Sta te plan would include guidelines covering t h e selection of universities or other nongovernmental facilities, when such institutions a re to be used for t raining purposes. The title also autho1izes units of general local government in a State, either jointly or separately, to submit a training plan if , within a year from the effective date of the act, the State fails to submit a proposal which includes sub.stantial provisions for training local government employees. Such proj ect applications would have to m eet the same general requirements applying t o State plans and t he administrative regulations 5 May 25, 1966 establish ed by t h e Civil Service Commission. I n addition , the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing a nd Urban Developm ent would also be r equired for project approval, to assure full considera tion of the special training problems of our Na tion's cities . It is impor tant t o underst and what this title does not provide. It does not , for example, distinguish between m etropolitan a nd n onmetro:i,iolitan units of local government, since the problems relating to inser vice t raining differ mat e1ially fr om those falling under the tra dition al h eading of personnel administration. It d oes n ot compete with title VIII of the Housing Act of 1964 which, a mong other things, a uthorizes m a tching g1·ants t o the States for developing and expanding pr ogra ms to provide special training in skills needed for economic a nd efficient community development to technical and profess ional people who a re employed or are being trained for employm ent in a governmental body which h as resp onsibility for such development. That Housing Act title is prim arily concer ned wit h a compar atively n arrow range of voca tional specialties and, it should be n oted, h as yet to be fund ed . Title IV also is not intended to duplica te or compete ,vith title I of t he High er Educa tion Act of 1965. Tha t Act authorizes the Commission er of Education to m ake gra nts t o strengthen community service programs of colleges a nd univer sities. It is geared to institutions of high er education in t h e Stat es, and to the development of an educational program design ed t o assist in the solution of community problems in ru ral, ur ban , or suburban areas, with particular emph asis on urban and suburban problems. To date, only a few project applications submitted un der t itle I of the High er Educa tion Act of 1965 relate t o t h e broad inservice trainin g n eeds of the various cat egories of State and local personnel. In sh ort, t itle IV is residual. Personn el receiving training under oth er F ederal statutes are specifically excluded from its coverage. It does not repla ce or restrict existing F ederal tra ining programs for a wide va riety of professional personnel in grant-aided fields. But more positively, it m eets the t rainin g n eeds of the Stat es and their localities, as these jurisdictions see them. It em ph asizes training n eeds as t h ey a re seen from the a dministra tive firin g line. It is designed to r epla ce the piecemeal method t ha t has to date cha racterized the Federal approa ch. It is geared to a ttacking a problem tha t a dministrator::; a t a ll levels, as well as experts in public a dministration , h ave described as criti cal. . Finally, it full y recognizes t h a t, as President J oh nson sta ted a t P rinceton : The public serva;:i.t toda y moves along p a ths of a d ven t ure wh ere h e Is h elp less wit hout the tools of a d vanced learnin g. The proposed I n tergovernmenta l Pers on nel Act provides still another m eans for improving t he in-service t r aining capability of State and local governments. Title VI gives prior Congr essional consent to interstate compacts or other agreements, not in conflict with �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 10987 Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- grants In any program fin a nced in whole or sent that the text of the bill, together in part by Federa l funds, the personnel engaged in the ad.ministration of the program with a section-by-section analysis, be be employed under a State or local merit inse1ted in the RECORD immediately fol- system meeting Federal standards. He is lowing my remarks, and that the bill authorized to approve for this purpose standlie on the table for 10 days so that other ards for a merit system of personnel administration. The Federal Government, howSenators may join in cosponsoring it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill ever, shall exercise no authority over the selection, tenure, or compensation of ind ividwill be received and appropriately re- uals ferred; ,and, without objection, the bill system.employed in accordance with such will be printed in the REconD , and will lie TITLE II-GRANT6 FOR s X. ATE AND LOCAL at the desk, as requested by the Senator PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION from Maine. Declaration of Purpose The bill <S. 3408) to strengthen interSEC. 201. The purpose of this title is to governmental cooperation and the ad- provide Federal grants-in-aid to enable each ministration of grant-in-!!id programs, State to strengthen its system of p erson n el to extend State merit systems to addi- ad ministr ation, to provide State personnel CONCLUSION tional programs financed by Feder.al ser vices in nonmetropolita n units of loca l Improved merit systems, improved funds, to provide grants for improvement government, a nd to stimulate projects for State and local personnel management, of state and local personnel administra- the improvement of personnel administration and improved in-service training pro- tion, to authorize Federal assistance in in metropolita n areas. Appropria tion Authorization grams--these are the three basic con- training State and local employees, to SEC. 202. There is hereby authorized to be cerns of the Intergovernmental Personnel provide grants to Sta,te and local governAct of 1966. Put more simply, greater ments for training of their employees, to appropriated for the fisc a l year ending June career competence is the paramount authorize interstate compacts for per- 30, 1967, and each of the four succeeding years, the following sums: (a) $10 ,theme of this legislation. Through a sonnel and training activities, and for fiscal 000,000 for payments to States which h ave judicious combination of grant funds, other purposes; introduced by Mr. Mus- plans for State personnel administration aptechnical assistance, and new devices for KIE, was received, read twice by its title, proved under section 204; (b) $8,000,000 for intergovernmental cooperation in the referred to the Committee on Govern- payments to States which h ave plans -for personnel area, the proposed legislation ment Operations, and ordered to be provision of State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of general loca l governprovides a variety of ways to strengthen printed in the RECORD, as follows: ments approved under section 206; and (c) the professional standing and prestige of s. 3408 $15,000,000 for payments to States or metropersonnel at the State and local levels. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of politan units of general loca l governments The Advisory Commission on Intergov- Representatives of the United States of which have projects for metropolitan p erAmerica in Congress assembled, That this Act ernmental Relations went on record at its sonnel administration approved under secmay be cited as the "Intergovernmental PerApril meeting as favoring the objectives tion 208. of this legislation. And at Princeton, son n el Act of 1966." Part A . Grants for State personnel Declaration of Policy President Johnson called for a program administration of assistance to "State and local governSEC. 2. The Congress hereby finds a nd SEC. 203. (a) From the sums a ppropriated ments seeking to develop more effective declares : under section 202(a) the Secretary of Heal th , That effective State and loca l governmen- Education, and Welfare (hereinafter referred career services for their employees." tal institutions are essential in the mainte- to as the Secretary) sh all make annually Prof. Charles Adrian has pointed out n a nce and development of the Feder al sys to States wh ich h ave plans for State that conflict in our cooperative federal tem in a n increasingly complex and grants personnel ad.ministration approved by him system does not stem today from the interdependent society. under section 204. relations between the levels of governTh at, since numerous governmental activ (b). The sum availabl e a nnually for grants ment as such, but that "friction results ities administered by the Sta te and loca l under this section s h a ll be a llotted among governments are related to national purpose whenever the administrative personnel the States under a formula approved by the at a particular level for a particular and are fin a nced in part by F edera l funds, a Secretary which shall give weight to the national interest exists in a high calib er of number of employees under the merit sys function are not fully professionalized." public service in State a nd local governments. tem and the financial ability of the State The findings in our survey, "The Federal Th at intergovernmental cooperation in as indicated by its r ela tive per capita inSystem as Seen by Federal Aid Officials," State personnel administration on a merit come, except th at each State will receive clearly illustrate the administrative diffi- basis has contributed to greater efficiency not less than $25,000. culties produced by such friction. in various federally a ided programs ·and Requirem ents of State Plans We n eed greater expertise at these should b e extended generally to such proSEC . 204. A S tate plan for State personnel grams. levels, then, because its absence is now administration to be approved by the SecThat F ederal financial and technical assis- retary mustone of the primary sources of tension and tance to State and local governments for conflict in intergovernmental relations. (a) des ignate the appropriate S tate perstrengthening their personnel administra - sonnel agency for the administration of the We need it because t he success of the tion will Improve the effectiveness of the pla n; Great Society programs depends on re- public service and is in the n ational interest. (b) provide for a merit system conform ducing these antagonisms. We need it That the continuing training and developto the Federal sta ndards established because we live in an age of administra- ment of career employees, particularly in ing under this Act for a Merit System of Per tive federalism ; in an age of more, not professi onal, administrative , and technical sonnel Administration; · less, use of grants-in-aid; in an age of fields, are critical to the success of joint Fed(c) set forth a program for the improve more, not less, contact among the ad- eral-State-loca l programs and that the Fed- ment and s trengthening of State personnel eral Government should encourage and assist ministrative officials at all levels of administration which m ay include, among government. We need it if the States in such training for State and local em- other features : ployees. ( 1) expansion of the coverage of S tate and their localities are to be vigorous TITLE I-EX PAN S ION OF MERIT SYSTEM I N employees under the State m er it system; members in the great partnership that FED ERALLY AID ED PROGRAMS (2) assessment of m anpower need s in was established in 1789. We need it if we developing programs and methods for m eet Declara tion of Purpose are--in the President's words-to "dethem; SEc. 101. The purpose of this title is to Ing(3) velop a creative federalism to best use improvement in one or more a reas of achieve greater efficiency in the administra- personnel administration such as r ecruit the wonderful diversity of our institu- tion of programs financed In whole or in ment, examinations, classificat ion, and comtions and peoples to solve the problems, part by Federal funds extending the a pplicafulfill the dreams of the American tion of personnel standards on a merit b asis pensation pla.ns: (4) research and demonstration projects people." in the a dministration of such programs. for the use of valid personnel methods, inThis is precisely what the IntergovPersonnel Sta ndards cluding electronic data processing techernmental Personnel Act of 1966 is a-11 SEC. 102. The President is authorized to niques; about. And that is precisely why I am require, insofar as he deems practicable, that (5) development of a uxiliary or support as a condition for the receipts of Federal types of positions to perform appropriate introducing this measure today. any law of the United States, for cooperative efforts and mutual assistance relating to the administration of personnel and training programs for State and local employees. The New England Governors' Conference already has launched a survey of the possibilities of regional collaboration with respect to personnel training programs. Building on the precedent set in the Housing Act of 1961-which gave prior congressional approval to interstate compacts establishing metropolitan agencies in multistate urban areas--this provision hopefully will encourage expanded efforts to develop training programs on a regional basis. ' �10988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - functions currently performed in occupations in which there are now shortages; and (6) interdepartmental and intergovernmental cooperation in personnel administration; (d) provide for financial participation by the State in the costs of merit system administration at least equal in amount to the Federal grants, and further provide that the operation of the plan wlll not result in a reduction In State expenditures for such administration or the substitution of Federal for State funds previously available for merit system administration; and (e) provide that the State agency will m ake such reports in such form and containing such Information as the Secretary m ay from time to time require, and shall keep and make available such records as he m ay r equire for the verification of such reports. Part B. Grants for State personnel services to nonmetropolitan units of local government SEC. 205(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202(b) the Secretary shall m a ke annually gra nts to States which have plans a pproved by him under section 206 for services to nonmetropolitan units of gener a l local government. (b) The sum available annually for grants under this section shall be allotted under a formUln approved by the Secretary which shall give weight to (1) the number of employees and number of local governments served, (2) the scope of State services provided, and ( 3) the financial ablll ty of the State as indicated by i ts r elative per capita income, except that each State sh all receive not less than $25,000. Requirements of Sta te plan SEC. 206. A plan for State services on personnel administration to nonmetropolltan units of general local government to· be approved by the Secretary must( a) designate the State agency, which may be the agency des ignated under section 204, for the administration of the plan; (b) set forth a program for Improvement and strengthening of personnel administration of such local governments by one or more of the following means : ( 1) the c:>veragc of lc,c1l employees under the State mertt system; (2) technical services In one or m ore areas or personnel admJnlstratlon s uch as recruitm e nt. exnmlnations, classification and compensation pla ns; (3 J cooperative resear ch and demon stration projects for the u se of valid personnel m ethods ; or (4) intergovernmental cooperntlve arra n gem ents between the Sta te and local governments or among local governments, Including facili tating Inter jur isdictional loans, transfers or promotions or personnel; (c) provide for financial participation by State or such local governments, or both, In the costs of providing services a t least equa l In runount to the F ed er al grants, a nd provid e further thn t the opera tlon of the pla n will not result in a r eduction In State and local expenditures or a eubstitutlon of Federal for State or loca l funds for personnel admin is tration; and (d) provide that the State agency will m a ke such reports in such form and containing su ch information as t he Secretary may from time to time r equire and shall keep and m a ke available such records as he may require for the verification of such reports, Part C. Grants for personnel administration in m etropolitan areas Soc. 207(a). From the sums appropriated under section 202 ( c ) the Secretary shall m a ke an nually payments to States or m&tropolitan units of general loca l government which have projects approved by him under section 206. SENATE (b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, shall establlsh such standards for the distribution of grants under this section among the States a nd among such metropolitan units as will most effectively carry out the purposes of this Act, and shall estabJlsh regulations for financial participation by States or such units, or b oth, in an amount equal to at least one-third of the costs of each project, including the reasonable value of facliities a nd personnel services made avaliable by the State or such loca l government for the administration of the project. Project requirements SEC. 208, Projects to be approved for grants unde r section 207 shall conform to ,criteria established in regUlations which shall be Issu ed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Grants wiU be used, in accordance with such regulations, for projects for strengthening personnel administration on a merit basis in order to meet increasingly critical problems of administration In metropolitan units of general loca l government. Projects may Include, but are not limited to-( 1) assessment of m anpower needs In developing programs and methods for meeting them; (2) Improvement of classification and compensatioh plans, and recruitment and examinations, particularly for profeeslonal, administrative and technical personnel In shortage ca tegorles; (3) application of psychological and other research in personnel administration directed toward improvement of selection and development of members of disadvantaged groups whose capacities are not being fully used; (4) plans for establishing auxiliary or support types of positions to perform a ppropriate functions currently performed In occupations In which there are now shortages; (5)research and demonstration relating to t echniques, such as electr onic d a ta processing, for Improving the speed and quality of personnel operations; and ( 6) cooperative activities in recruitment and examining by governmental Jurisdictions operating In metropolitan areaa. Exceptlon--Submittal of Local Projects SEC. 209. After the expiration of one year from the date or enactment of this Act, if a State h as n ot submitted any proje{:ts under section 208 of this title which have received approval, the metropolitan units of general local government may submit proj ects for approval , a nd such projects may be approved If they comply with the reqUlrements or section 208. Administration SEC. 210. The provisions of this title shall be adminis tered by the Secr etary, who Is authorized to furnish such technica l assistance to States or units or general local governments and to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title , Suspension of Grants SEC. 2 11. Whenever the Secretary, after giving reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or local agency administering a plan approval under this title, finds ( 1) that s uch plan has been so changed that it no longer complies with the provisions of thls title, or (2) that 1n the administration of the plan there Is a failure to comply substantially with any s uch provision, the Secr etary shall notify such agency o! h!s findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or in his discretion further pay- 1 May 25, 1966 ments wlll be limited to projects pnder, or portions of, the plan not affected by such failure), until he ls satisfied that there will no longer be a ny failure to comply. TITLE III-AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING D eclaration of Purpose SEC. 301. The plll'pose of this title is to foster the training of State and local employees by permitting their attendance at Federal courses, and by authortzing Federal departments or agencies administering grantin-aid progrruns to conduct training and to permit Federal grants to States and localities to be used for training and educational leave. Participation In Federal Programs SEC. 302. Any Federal department or agency conductlng training programs for professiona l, administrative, or technical employees In the Federa l service is a uthorized to include In such programs , under conditions imposed by the head of such agency, State and local officers and employees in sim_Uar or related functions, on the request of the State or local government. Fees for attendance at any such training program may be received by the Federal agency conducting It and expended In the same manner as fees r eceived for attendance of Federal employees, or the payment of fees may be waived in occupational categories d etermined by the head of the Federa l department or agency to be in short supply. Training In Grant-Aided Programs SEC. 303 , Any Federal department or agency administering a program of gr ants or financia l assistance to States and localities is au thorized (a) to conduct training for State and local officers and employees in professional, administrative, and technical fields r elated to such programs: (b) to make grants to State and localities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administrative expenses of the program, unc!er the usual terms and conditions of such grants, for the conduct of training for S tate and local officers and employees In such progra m: and (c) to make grants to State and loca lities from Federal funds appropriated for State or local administra tive expenses of the progr am , under the usual terms a nd conditions of s u ch grants, for education a l leave or comparable arrangements for sala ries a nd training expenses or employees In professiona l, administrative, and technica l fields who h ave been employed under a merit system of personn el administration in State or local agencies ad ministering the federally aided program, In order for . them to attend university or other training courses related to the program. S aving Provis ion SEC. 304. The a uthorizations in this title are not a limita tion on exis ting authority u nder la w for Federal d epartments or agencies to conduct training or to make grants for training or edu cational leave. TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Declaration of Purpose SEC. 401. The purpose of this title Is to promote higher levels of performance of employees In the public service, particularly in professional, administrative, and techn ica l fields , and the development of employee potentia l by providing Federal assistance to State and local gov er nm en ts to ins ti tu t c and carry out programs for the training of their employees ln fields where such Federal assistance is not already provided under grant-in s.Id or other statutes. Appropriation Authorization SEC. 402. There Is h ereby authorized to be appropriated the following sums for payments to States and units of general local government which h a ve plans approved un der this title for the training of their employees: tl0,000,000 for fiscal year 1967, $25,- �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - 000,000 for fiscal year 1968, and $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 1969, 1970, and 1971. Grants Authorized SEC. 403(a). From the sums appropriated under section 402 the Civil Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission). shall make annually grants to States or units of general local government which have plans approved by It under sections 404 and 405, respectively. , (b) The sums available annually !or grants under this section shall be allotted among the States, and between States a nd units of general local government In a State, under formulas to be approved by the Commission which shall gi ve weight to the number of State and local employees, the number of local governments p a rticipating, the scope of training to be provided , and the financial ab lllty of th e State as indicated by Its relative per capita Income , excep.t that each State will receive not Jess than $25,000 for fiscal year 1967 and $50,000 annually therea fter. Requirements of State plans SEC. 404. A State plan for training of officers and employees to be approved mus t ( 1) designate the State agency for the admini stration of the plan; ( 2) set forth a program for the training of omcers and employees of States and units of general loca l government which will meet the objectives of this title and provide for training personnel of agencies not r ece iving assis tance under other Federal program s ; (3) provide for continuing assessment of trai ning needs ; (4) set for th equitable standards for the selection and assignment of personnel for training; (5) provide fo r the efficient utillzation of p ersonnel who h ave been given such training, a nd for their continued service for a reasonable p eriod of time; (6) provide that educational leave or other arra n gements for p aymP.nt of salary and training expenses for period s In excess or one month in a ny one year sh a ll be allowed only for career personnel empl oyed in accordance with a merit system; (7) set forth, when training ls to be given through univers ity or other nongovernmental facilities t h e policies with respect to the selection of such facilities and the types of agreements to be entered Into for th e training ; and (8) provide for financl ,t l p:nticlpation by the States. the uni ts of genera l loca l government thereof, or from private sources. in a n amount equal to one-fourth of the cost or the training, In cluding the reasonable value of facilities and personal se rvices made available for admini stration of the training, provided that the operation of the plan wlll not r esu lt in a reduction in State and local expenditures or substitution of Federal for State or loca l funds !or training . Exception-Submitta l of Loca l Plans SEC. 405. I! after one year from the effective date of this Act, a State has not sub mitted and had approved a plan under sec tion 404, Including provision for training o! local governmental emr-'oyees Involving expenditures at Ins t equ iv alent to the expendi tures for training of State government employees, one or more units of general loca l government In the State Jointly or severally may submit a plan for such training during the following fiscal year, designating a single local agency for adm ini stration and otherwise conforming to the requirements of section 404 under regulations which sha ll be prescrl bed by the Commission with the concurrence or the Secretary o! Housing and Urban Development. Administration SEC. 406. The provisions of this title shall be admlnlstered by the Commission, which SENATE 10989 Is authorized to furnish such technical assistance to States or units of general iocal government a nd to prescribe such regulations as m ay be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title. Suspension of Grants SEC. 407. Whenever the Commlssion, after giving reasona ble notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or other agency administering any plan app~oved under this title, finds (a) that a State or other plan has been so changed that It no longer compiles with the provis ions of th.ls title, or (b) that in the administration of the plan there ls a !allure to comply s ubstantially with any such provision', the Commission shall notify such agency of !ts findings and no further payments will be made to the State or other recipient under this title (or In !ts discretion further payments wlll be llmlted to projects under, or portions of, the plan not affected by such !allure) until It ls satisfied that there will no longer be any failure to comply. Metropolltan Unit of General Local Government SEC. 703. "Metropolltan un!t(s) of general local government" mea ns any city or comp a ra ble general-purpose political subdivision of a State with a population of 100,000 or more, as determined by the most recent Federal census, or any county or parish with such population which Includes a city or comparable subdivision with a population of 50,000 or more, as determined by such census. Non-metropolltan Unit qf General Loca l Government SEC. 704. "Non-metropolltan unlt(s) of general local government" means any city, county, p al\ish, town, village or other generalpurpose polltlca l subdivision of a State, except such units of general local government as are included In section 703 of this Act. TITLE V-COOPERATION JN PERSONNEL RECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE INTER- SEC. 501. The Commission Is authorized to Join, on a shared-cost basis, with State or units of general local government or both, in cooperative recruitment or examinations under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon . SEC. 502. The Commission Is authorized, upon written request from a State, a unit of general loca l government thereof, or both, and under such regulations as may be Jointly agreed upon , to certify to such agencies, from appropriate registers, a llst of ellglble personnel who h av e successfully completed such examinations a nd satisfied such requirements as the Commiss ion has prescribed, upon the pay ment by the unit of government making the request, of the salaries and such other costs for performing such service. SEC. 503. The terms of reimbursement for the service authorized under section 502 shall be d etermined by the Commission. All mon eys received by the Commission In payment for furnishing such serv ice a uthorized s hall be deposited to the credit of the a ppropriation of the Commission. There being no objection, the bill and the section-by-section analysis was ordered to be printed in the RECORD , as follows: GOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL ACT OF Section 1. Short title. Section 2. Declaration of Polley. 1966 Under our federal system and In an Increasingly complex society, effective State and local governments are Indispensable. Their efficiency a nd administrative competence Is of nationa l concern, p articularly since many programs they administer are federally financed . The appllcatlon of merit systems of p ersonnel administration In certain federally aided progra ms h as contributed to their efficiency, and such systems should b e extended to other grant programs. Federa l fin a ncia l a nd technical assistance should a lso be made avallable to State and local governments to strengthen their overall personnel administration. The Federal Government should encourage and assist in the continuing training and development of State and local employees, particularly in professional, administrative and technical fields , in order to Improve the capab!llty of the public service. The Act recognizes that the success o'f the Joint-action programs enacted by the Congress and the State legislatures Is vitally affected by the caliber of State a nd loca l personnel a dministering them. It recognizes TITLE VI-AUTHORITY FOR INTERSTATE COMPACTS that a ll levels of government Involved · In SEC. 601. To promote higher personnel these Joint ventures-Including the Federal standa rds and mobillty of quallfied person- Government-have not only a right but a n el, particularly profession a l , administrative, duty to take steps to see that such progra ms and tech nical personnel In s hortage cate- are efficiently a dministered and that the -gorlcs, the consent of the Congress Is hereby fund s provided a re u sed effectively to accom give n to any two or more States to enter Into plish the purposes prescribed by Jaw . The compacts or other agreements, not In conflict Act, then, Is designed to assist State and with any law of the United States, for co- loca l governments in strengthening their opernLlve efforts and mutual assistance (In- partners hip role In the federal system. cluding the establishment of such agencies, States and Iocall ties are facing cri tlca l Joint or otherwise, as they deem desirable) for the admin is tration of personnel and problems In the recruitment, selection. and training programs for officers and employees retention of well-qualified personnel for new and expanded programs. This shortage Is of State a nd local governments. acute In the upper levels, both In the public TITLE VII-DEFINITIONS and pri vate sectors of the economy. The When used tn this Act, State and loca l flnanclal and technical resources for publlc personnel a dministration State SEC. 701. The term "State" means any of and staff development, however, h ave not the several States of the United States, the kept pace with the growth of the programs District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, any terri- they administer. Yet, qualified personnel tory or possession of the United States, or and sound personnel policies are absolutely any agency or lnstrumentallty of a State, but essential to effective governmental operadoes not Include the governments of the po- tions . The Act proposes to bulld on the Interlltical subdivisions of any State. governmental personnel experience in certain Merit System grant-In-aid programs. It would make SEC. 702. "Merit system" means a planned matching grants and technical services availState or local operation to develop and main- able to State and local governments for the tain an efficient career service, under publlc improvement of their overall personnel adrules, which among other provisions Include ministration . It would encourage cooperaappointment through competitive examina- tive efforts In recruitment and training on tion, nondiscrimination in race, polltlcs or an lnterle vel and Interstate basis. It would rellglon, equal pay ror equal work, tenure make available Federal training facilities contingent on successful performance, and and also provide grants and technical assistpromotion on evaluated capacity and service. ance for training. Thus, It balances the need �10990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE t o f ost er dynamic p ersonnel systems f o r r ecrui t m e nt of Sta te ana local staffs of high ca p a.c lty with an effort to assis t In their continuous development. TITL E I - EXT E N S ION OF THE M ERIT SYS T EM I N F E DERALLY AIDED PROGRAM S This title a uthorizes the Preside n t, In orde r to achie v e grea ter efficiency in a dministr ation of p rogr a m s fina nce<!. with F ed e ral funds , t o extend to additional programs the r equire m ent that Sta te and local personne l in s uch progra ms be employed unde r a S tate or local merit system meeting Fede r a l standa rds. No F ed er a l authority would be exercised over the selection, tenure of office , or compe n sation of a ny individua l employed in a ccord.a nce with such systems. This p n.ttern o f administration Is n ow applicable In the va rious public assis t a n ce, child h ealth a nd weifare, public h ealth, employment service a nd une mployment Ins urance, ci vil defense , and aging programs . The merit system r equirement was originally enacted for program s under the Social S ecurl ty Boa rd. This action was t a ke n b y Congress in 1939 a f ter some three yea rs ' e xpe rie n ce with out s uch a requireme n t d e m o n str ated the n eed for it to assure pro gra m effectiven ess a nd economy. It h as b een e xpanded ove r t h e years, most r ecently b y the 89t h Con gress i n t h e m edical assis t ance tit le of t h e Socia l Security Ac t and in t h e Olde r Ame ricans Act of 1965 .' The Division of State Merit S ystems of HEW has served f o r more than a quarter of a century as the Fedet"al Interdepartmental unit concerned wi t h State and local p ers onnel a dm1nlstra tion. Under commo n F eder a l standard s f or t he a pplica tion of t h e merit syst em in various gran t programs administer ed b y t h e D ep a r t m e nts of HEW, L a b or and D efense, It h as pr ovided coordinated F ederal technical a nd advisory ser vices on S tate and l ocal personnel m a n agement. Under t h is t itle, the Preside nt, at his dis cretion, would d e t erntlne if and whe n to e x tend t h e m erit system r equire m ent to oth e r programs. H e would b e free to take i n to accou nt su ch f actors as h e deemed r elevant. S u ch c riter ia m ight i nclude the proport1on of F eder al funds i n volved or the exp erimen tal n atu re of t he program. T I TLE II- GRANTS FOR STATE AND LOCAL PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION Section 201 expr esses t h e threef old obj ect! ve of t h Is ti tie to provide Feder a l gra n ts to enable each Sta te t o 1) s tren gth e n Its system of personnel admlrulsr atlon, 2) p rov ide State p e r so nnel services to nonmetr opolitan local governments, a n d 3) stimulate projects for t h e improvement of personnel administration In metropolitan units of general local gover nmen t (as defined In Sectio·n 703 of this Act). Section 202 a u thorizes $8 mi111on , $10 million, a nd $15 million, r espectivel y, to car ry out the purpoees of this title. Grants f or State personnel administration Section 203 p r ovid es that grants will be made to States which have approved p la n s for State personnel administration under a n allotment formula which gives weight to the number of emp1oyees under the State merit system and the financial a bility of the State. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Is assigned the responsibility of administering this program in recognition of the f act that HEW's D iv ision of S tate Merit Systems has the gree.test experience In the area of State personnel admlnlstratlon. Section 204 lists the major elements a State plan must have to be approved. These 1 Cf. U .S.C. Title 42, Sec. 302(a) (5), Sec. 503(a) (1), Sec. 703(a) (3) , Sec. 712(a) (3), Sec. 723(a)(2), Sec. 1202(a)(5), Sec. 1352 (a) (5) , Sec. 2674(a) (5); and U.S.C. Title 50, Sec. 2236(a)(4). include d esign a tion of a State agency, conformity with Federal standards, provision for Sta te ~ a tchl ng funds and a d escription of ~he program f or Improving and strengt henm g p ersonnel administration. The progr a m m ay Include expa nsion of the s cope of the m erit sys t em; pla n s t o meet m a npower needs In new a nd exp a nding S tate program s; improveme nt of ser vices in recruitment e xamin a tions, classifica t ion a nd p a y pla n s; d e velo pm ent of a u x iliary types of pos itions to supple m e nt professiona l staff In short supply; r esear c h a nd d emons tration projects; a nd In terdepa r t m e nta l and int ergovernmental cooperation m ~rsonnel a dminlstrntlon Grants fo r State per sonnel services to non m etropoli tan local governments Section 205 p rovides tha t the Secr etary of H ealth, Educatio n , and Welfa re s h a ll m a ke gran ts a nnually to Sta tes which h a ve a p proved plans f or S ta te personnel services to nonmetropolltan local governments under a n a llo tmen t f ormula. w hich gives weight to the number o f local governments and employees to be ser ved, t h e scop e of the services to be provided, a nd t h e financial a bility of t he Stat e. · Sec tion 206 lis t s the major elem en ts a State pla n f o r s erv ices to nonmetrop olitan local governme n ts must h a ve to b e a pproved, including S t a te or local matching fu n d s. It provides tha t these services to local governments m a y include: covera ge of local e mployees under the State merit sys tem;. teclmlcal services f rom the State In such areas a s recruitment, examinations classlficntlon a nd compe n sation plan s; cooperative r esearch a nd d e mons tra~lo n pro jects ; a nd coop erative a rrang eme nts (Including inter c h a n ge of p ersonnel) amon g units o f local go.J1e1nments or b e t ween State and local governmen ts. The S tates and loca lities could s tre n gth e n p ersonnel oper a tions for nonmetropolltan units of go vernment in a variety of ways. The plan may not only va ry from S tate t o State, but may p rovide f o r differe n tiated ser vices w ithin a Stat e d ep e nding on t he s ize a nd needs of the local governrne n ts. The services m ay va ry from complete coverage o f local e m p loyees under the State m erit system to liml t ed ser vices t o m eet ,;p ecliic local n eeds. T h e . latter migh t Include recrmtme nt of specialized p ers onnel or d emon s tra tion pro ject s .fo r Improved classifica tion plans . Gran t s f or personnel admini st ra t ion in metropolit a n areas Section 207 provides t h at t h e Secr etary of the D ep a r tment of Health, Education, a nd Welfare sh a ll m ake p aymen ts annu ally to S t ates ( a nd a lternatively u n d er . Section 209 t o l ocal governmen ts in m etr opolitan areas ) w hich h ave approved pro jects for personnel administra tio n , with State or local financia l participation to the ext ent o f one-t hird o f t h e costs of the p ro jects. Sta nda rds governi ng the d istribu t ion of s u ch gran ts shall be made by the Secretary o f HEW w l th t h e concu rrence of the Secret ary of Housi ng a nd Urban Development. Section 208 provides that app roved projects may incl ude man power p lanni ng and u t ilization; Improvement of classification and compensation p lans and of recruitment and exantlnlng; research for the Improvement o f the selec tion and the developmen t of tllsadvantaged persons whose capacities are not being used; developing .aux lllary positions in shortage occu pations; improvement of management techniques, s u ch as electronic data processing, in p ersonnel operations; and d eveloping cooperative activities in such areas as recruiting and examining by government Jurisdictions in a metropolitan are&. Metropolitan governments are facing new and acute problems with lintlted resources May 25, 1966 in pe rsonnel a dminis tration . This t it le Is designed to provide for innovative projects of various kinds to meet special n eeds. This m a y Involve t he application of tested personnel m ethods or the d emonstrat ion o f new t echniques . Local governments vary g reatly in both their organization f or p er sonn el administration a nd t he level of i ts e!Iec tlven ess. Ma n y factors exp lain this , including the administrative a nd p o litical traditions of the juris diction, the stat utory b ase a nd the _fina n cia l support for n ersonnel a dministra tion, a nd public a ttftudes. Since the s cope and quality of personnel oper a tions va ry, the Act p ermits projects to be d esigned realis tically to m eet specific needs for improvement. Sect ion 209 provides tha t if a S tate has not s ubmitted a ny projects (unde r section 208) r eceiving a pproval w ithin one yea r a fter the en actme nt of this l egisla tion, the metropolita n unit of gen e ral local go'iernment m a y submit projects for a ppr oval. Section 210 provides tha t this title will be administer ed b y the Secretary of H ealth, Educa tio n , a nd Welfa re. The criteria for m e tropolita n p roj ects, a s was n oted previously, would be established with t he concurrence of t he Secretary o f Housing a nd Urba n D evelopm ent. The inten t o f t his s ection Is t o u t ilize the e xperie n ce in In tergovernmen tal pers onnel r ela tion s of the Depa rtme nt of Heal t h, Education, a nd Welfa re's Division of Sta te Merit Sys tems In various gra nt-In-a id . progra ms. At the s a me time, the responslb!llt y of the Department of Housing a nd Urba n Developm e n t with resp ect to urba n per sonnel adminis tration would b e recognized b y i ts required concurren ce i n the d evelopment o f criter ia for m etropolitan personnel pro jects. The F ed er a l appr oach would b e coordina ted, t a king i n t o account t h e Federal interest In the various grant program s a nd t h e d iffer ential n eed s for S tate a nd for local nonmetropollta n a nd m etr o politan a dmin istra tion. T echnical s er vices, a s well as fin ancia l ass ist a nce, would b e a va ilable t o str engthen S tate a nd local personnel adm in istration. Section 211 provides f or w it h holding of f unds after notice a nd h earing for noncomplia n ce with a p proved plans or p roject,;;. TIT L E I I I -AUTHORIZATION FOR TRAINING This tit le permits, u pon requ est of the r espective S tate a nd local governmen ts, the attenda nce of State and local em ployees ·at F ed era l t raining courses; it a u t h orizes F eder a l agen cies administering grant programs to con duct training for S tate and local profess ional, administrative, and technical p er ~ sonnel; and it provides that Fed er al f u nds granted to State and local governments for t h e a d ministration of Joint programs may b e u sed to cond uct training or for education a l leave. Cooperative relationships in the field o f t r a ining h ave, in recent years , d eveloped to s u c h a n ex tent that t h ey are becoming common p ractice. Even so, most of the m are limited to p a r ticu lar types of training o f fered by one Federal department or agency t o e m pl oyees In counterpart State and local agencies. That the F .B.I. Academy provides cer tain training f or law enforcement officers for both State and local governments Is well known. Not so well known is the fact t h at many other Federal d epartments and agen cies al so offer train i ng to S tate and local officers and employees. Among these are the D epartment of Agricul ture, the Food a.nd Dru g Administration, the Forest Service, the Internal Revenue Service, the Public Health Service, and many more. This title builds on these precedents and extends authority to all Federal departments and agencies to make their training programs ava!lable to ·counterpart State and local officers and employees. It d oes not limit existing training authorizations. �May 25, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE TITLE IV-GRANTS FOR TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL EMPLOYEES Section 401 states the purpose of t his title: to promote higher levels of performance In the publ!c service and to develop employee potential through Fed eral assistance to Sta t e and local governmen ts for Initiating and ca rrying out training programs in fields where s u ch Federal assistance Is not already provided under exis ting grantin-aid or other statutes. Secti on 402 authorizes $10 million for fiscal 1967, $25 million for 1968, and $50 million each for 1969, 1970, and 1971 to carry out the stated purpose of this title. Secti on 403 provides that the Civil Service Commission shall make grants to S tates (and, alternatively under Section 405, t o local governments) which h ave approved plans for t raining under an a llotment formula which gives weight to the n umb er of State and/ or local employees and governments to be ser ved, t he scope of the services to be provided, and the financia l ab!l!ty of the S tate. Section 404 lists the major elem ents a State plan for training must h ave to be approved under Section 403. These Include: designating the State agency to a dminister the training plan; settin g forth t he program of tralnlng, with educa tional leave for periods of over one month limited to ca reer personnel; providing for continuing assessment of training needs; es tabllsh!ng s tandards for the s election of personnel for trainIng and their subsequ ent u t ilization; a nd Issuing policies a nd standards for the sel ection of univer sity or ot h er nongovernmental f ac!llties a n d for the t ypes of agreements to be entered Into for such tra ining; providing f or fina ncia l p a rticipation f rom State, loca l or priva t e sources to the extent of onefourth of the total training costs. Section 405 provides t hat If within a year after t he enactment of this legislation a State has not received approval for projects which provide at least a s much training for l ocal employees as for State employees, then the local govern m en ts may submit pJa ns for such t r a in ing . Section 406 au t h orizes the U .S . Civil Service CommlS&ion t o administer the provisions of this title and to furnish t ech n ical assistance to State or local governments. The Commission Is assigned t h is responslbll!ty because of the exten sive experience It has acquired · throu gh Its own career development training program f or F ederal employees . The Commission Is a lso authorized to prescribe t h e regulations necessar y to ca rry out t he p urposes of this title. Local pla ns for tra ln1ng m u st be consistent with criteria est a blished In regulations Issu ed with the concurrence of the Secretar y of Hou sing a nd Ur ban Development. Section 407 provides for the withholding of f und s after notice and hearing f or n oncomplia n ce with a p p r oved plans. ently fea red that It might be Improperly used. Thus, It was further assumed that each proposed compact would be carefully examined and debated as a part of the consent procedure. This procedure often Is no longer fully a dhered to. The Congress has on numerous occasions given prior consent, and In 1948 when the Southern Regional Education Compact was under consideration, the point was m a de that no formal consent was r equired for two or more States to perform cooperatively an a ctivity that each h as the power to perform Individua lly. TITLE VII-DEFINITION This title provides definitions of the terms "Sta te," "m erit system," "m etropolitan unit of general local government," a nd "nonmetr opolitan unit of general loca l governm ent." TITLE V---<:O OPERATION IN PERSONNEL R ECRUITMENT AND EXAMINATION This title a u thorizes the U.S. Civil Ser vice Commission to cooperate with State or l ocal governments on a shared-cost basis In cooperative recruitment or examinations. TITLE VI- AUTHORITY FOR PACTS INTERSTATE COM - T his t itle a uthorizes any two or more Sta t es to enter Into compacts br other agreements for cooperative effort s and mutua l assistance for the adin1nistrat1on of person nel a n d t raining prograins for officers and employees of State and local governmen ts. The purpooe Is to promote higher personnel standards and moblllty of qualified personnel , particularly professional, administrative, and techn1cal personnel In shortage categories. When the compact clause of the Constitution was framed and adopted, It was appilr- ,o 10991 �~ /V&k ~ ·~:c:. ,~~2~ @}~@~®~ ~'CQJ~IT©IT~£& COLUMBUS M A YOR MA LCOL M // R. MAC L EA N, ,u .A A First Vi ce President ~-L// SAVANNAH MAYOR J o H N L. C ROMARTIE, GA IN ESVILLE ~ ~ © © ~~ IT©~ VV . EL~·t E R GEORGE, 4 06 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING• / ATL A NTA . GEORGIA 30303 / Second V ice President Executive Director TELEPHONE 255-0424 June 3, 1966 ACT I V E PAST PR E SID E NT S C I T Y COMM I SS I ONER J O H N E . YA RB R OUGH I MMED I ATE P AST P R ES I D E N T ROME , GA . MA Y OR R ANDO L P H M EDL OCK S T ONE M O UNTAIN , G A . MAYOR W . 8. W ITHE R S M OULT RI E , GA . Mr. Dan E. Sweat, Associate Administrato :ti EOA, Inc. /__ 101 Marietta Street Building, Room 400 ( _ _ Atlanta, Georgia 30303 CIT Y CO MM I S SIONER C A RL E . PRU E TT GR I F FIN , GA . Dear Dan: M AY OR 8 . F. ME RRITT , JR . MAC O N , GA . FIRST DISTR I CT PRES I DENT MAYOR J AC K A . LER O Y AILEY I am calling a meeting of the GMA Services Evaluation Committee for Thursday, June 9, 1966. The meeting will begin at 12:00 Noon in Elmer George's office, and after luncheon together, we will wind up at approximately 3:00 P. M. D I R ECTOR MAYOR J . W . SNE L L WRIGHTS V I L L E S E CO ND P RES I DENT MAYOR W . PE LH AM DIST RI CT P. H EN R Y D I REC T OR M AY O R MACK E . W ILLI S B A I N B R I DGE THI RD Elmer and Jim Burgees have been working up several important items for consideration by the committee and these have been documented, to save time. D I ST RI CT PRESIDENT R ICHARD 8 . RAY PERR Y DIRE C TOR MA Y OR 0 . E . WH I T E P I NE MOUNTA I N F O URTH I do not believe there will be a more important GMA program this year than the one being undertaken by our committee and it will be appreciated if you will be pre sent. Before it is over, we may have to involve Federal agencies, the National League of Cities, our Congressional delegation, the Governor, State Legislature and county officials. DISTR IC T PRES I DEN T C O U NCILMAN LI NT O N BROOME DO RAV ILLE DI R ECTOR CO U NCILMAN C L Y DE J. H IC KS CONYERS FIFTH DISTRICT PR ES I DEN T MAYOR A U BRE Y E . GREENW A Y ROSWE LL D I RECT O R ALDERMAN E . GR E GOR Y GR I G GS AT LANTA SIXTH Please advise on the attached postal card if you can attend this first meeting of our committee. DISTRICT PRES I DEN T MA Y OR J . GARD N ER NE W MA N L AG RAN G E D I R E CTOR MA Y OR HE R BERT H . JONES Sinc e r e l y, Mc DONO UGH SEVENTH ~ DISTRICT PRE S I DEN T MAYO R J . C . WOODS TR I ON D I RE C T O R MA Y O R R A L P H R . C LA R K, JR . John Cromartie, Chairman GMA E valuation C ommittee R I NGGO LD EIGHTH DISTRICT PRE S I DE N T MAYOR E LT ON D . B ROO K S DOU GL A S J C:rg Enclo s u r e D I R ECTOR MA YOR JAM ES T . WI ND S OR , JR . McRA E NINTH DISTRICT PAES I OE N M A.YO R 0U A R D B. W H ITL OW C_A Rf"ESVl l,.L E D I RE C T O R MA YOR MR6 . JE SS I E L . GA R NES COUNC IL MAN GEORGE D A HLON E GA T l! N T H D I ST RI CT PRES I DE NT MA YO R JULIU S ATHENS F. B I SHOP D I RECTOR GEORGE: A . SANCKEN. J R . A U G USTA H. BULL O CK ATHENS D IR E C T OR S STATE AT LARGE M ,,,.YO R W I LLIAM JA C K DE C ATUR ALPERMAN ,J , J , S HOOS SAVANNAII H A M I LTO N MAYOR JOHN C . E DENFIELD THOMASTON AL OC RM AN CCIL. T U R N Crt ATLANTA MAYOR LEE E . CARTER HARTW E LL C ITY M A NAGER -'OHN H , MA R K l AND PRFSIDE'NT, CITY MA.NAGFRS ' SECTION DECA TU R ADMIN ASSIST R TRAVIS HIGGIN80THAM PRE SI DENT . C I TY CLERKS ' SECTION ALBANY CITY ATTORN E Y WILLIAM E SMITH PRESIDENT , CITY ATTORN EYS' SECTION AMERIC U S �ce~®~®rr£. ~'(QJ~Il©Il~£& ~~©©Il£.~Il©~ CITY CO MM IS SIONER J . STE VE KNIGHT, C OLUMBUS MAYOR MALCOLM SAVANNAH MACLEAN, MAY OR J OHN L. CROMARTIE, GAINESVll.LE W. 406 FULTON FEDERAL BUILDING• / R. ATLANTA . GEORGIA 30303 ELMER GEORGE, President First Vice President Second Vice President Executive Director / TELEPHONE 255-0424 May 31, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS CITY COMMISSIONER JOHN E . YARBROUGH IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT ROM E, GA . MAYOR RANDOLPH MEDLOCK S TO NE MO U NTA IN , GA . MAYOR W . B . WITHERS MO ULTRIE , GA . CITY COMMISSIONER C ARL E . PRUEl"r GRIFFIN, GA . MAYOR B . F. MERRITT, JR. MACON, GA . FIRST Mr . Dan Sweat Federal Programs Coordinator City Hall Atlanta, Georgia DISTRICT PRE SIDENT MA YOR JACK A . L E RO Y AILE Y DIRE CTOR MAYOR J. W. SNELL WRIGHTSVILLE SECOND DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR W. P . HENRY PELHAM DIRECTOR COUNCILMAN J. C , MINTER CAIRO THIRD DISTRICT Dear Dan : I appointed a committee during the l ast board meeting in At lanta for the purpose of evaluating the role of the Georgia Munic ipal Association as relates to the part the Association should pl ay in relation to the metropolitan local councils of government and to area planning and development commissions . PRESIDENT RICHARD B . RAY PERRY DIRECTOR MAYOR 0 . E . WHITE PINE MOUNTAIN FOURTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT COUNC IL MAN LINTON BROOME DORA VI LLE DI RECTOR C OUNCILMAN CLYDE J . HICKS CON YE RS FIFTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR AUBREY E. GREEN WAY ROSWELL DIRECTOR ALDERMAN E . GREGORY GRIGGS ATLA NTA SIXTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYO R J . GARONER NEWMAN LAGRANGE DIRECTOR MAYOR H ERBERT H . JONES McDONOUGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR J . C . WOODS TRION DIRECTOR MAYOR R ALP H R . CLARK, JR . RINGGOLD EIGHTH DISTRICT Under Section 701- G of the 1965 Housing Act , certain grants may be made to metropolitan loca l councils of government for studies and data collection, etc . It has occurred to the GMA. staff that a relationship might be developed between the local council s and the Association which would have the eff ect of (1) providing the already existing resources of the Association to local councils, thereby avoiding unnecessary duplication and competition of GMA. programs which have been over 33 years in the making and (2) providing a strong liaison between the larger urban a reas in the evaluation of programs which are directed, or should be directed, toward our large cities and/ or their respective metropolitan areas . Since counties are involved in the metropolitan loc al councils of government , it might be of benefit to work with the Assoc iation of County Commissioners in developing joint policy in support of our l arge urban areas, recognizing at the same time , that local decision-making mus t not be interfered with, nor any joint programs pursued, except with the consent of l ocal officials. PRESIDENT MAYOR ELTON D . BROO K S DOUGLAS D I REC T OR MA YO R J AMES T . WINDSOR , JR . MCRAE NINTH Another area for possible considerati on by the committ ee is the problems of the local community out side the metropolitan areas . DISTRICT PRESIDENT MAYOR OUARD 8 CARNESV ILLE . WHITLOW DIRECTOR MAYOR MRS . JESSIE L . GARNER DAHLONEGA TENTH COUNCILMAN GEORGE H . BULLO CK ATH E NS ALDERMAN J . J . S H OOS S A VAN NA H MAYOR WILLIAM JAC K H AM ILTON DE C ATUR ALDERMAN C EC IL T UR NER ATLA N TA MAYOR JOHN C . EDENFIELD THOMASTON MAYOR LE E E . CAR T E R HARTWE LL DI STR ICT PRES I DEN T MAYOR JULIUS F . BISHOP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORGE A . SANC K EN , JR . AUGUSTA DIR ECTORS STATE AT L A RGE CITY MANAG E R JOH N H . MAR K LAND P RE S IDE N T , C I T Y MA NA G E RS ' SE C TION D E C AT U R A D MI N . AS SI ST . R . TRAVIS HIGGINBOTHAM PR E S IDEN T . CI T Y C L E R KS· SEC TION ALB A NY CI T Y ATT OR N E Y W I LLI AM E . S MI TH PRESIDENT , C IT Y ATTOR N EYS ' S EC TION A M E RI C US �Mr. Dan Sweat - 2- May 3l, l 966 There are some problems developing in relation to programs of area planning and development commissions whi ch serve communities outside metropolitan areas. There are federal programs being developed for municipalities under 5,500 population, administered by the Farmers Home Administration and other agencies of the Federal Department of Agriculture. These deserve serious review. For the citie s of over 5,500 population outside standard metropolitan statistical areas, there are other problems, or opportunities . In addition, there are other problems in relation to new and/ or changing federal grant and loan programs which need t o be studied. It has t aken the Georgia Municipal Associ ation 33 years to devel op a coordinated program to assist our cities and towns at the political l evel, as well as at the servic e level. We need to evaluate the role of the Association with the new metropolitan local councils of government, the area commissions and our total membership. The committee, as appointed, is as follows: Mayor John Cromartie, Gainesville, Chairman Mayor Howard Atherton, Marietta, Vice- Chairman Mayo r J ack LeRoy, Ailey J ames B. Blackburn, City Attorney Savannah Dan Sweat , Federal Programs Coordinator, Atlanta Pl ease r eturn the attached card, advising of your acceptance . Sincerely, J. Steve Knight President JSK/ r s cc: Malcolm Maclean enclosure �J. CITY C o:vtM ISSI ONER C OLU?lo·£DU S MAY O R MA L COLM R. S TEVE KNIG H T, MACLEA N , President Fi rst V ice President SAVANNAH MAYO R J mrn L. CROMARTm , GAINESVIL L E W. 406 FULTON FEDER A L BUIL D ING• / AT L AN TA. GEO R GIA 30303 / Second Vice President E xecut ive D irector E LM ER G EORGE , TELEPHONE 2 5 5 -0 4 24 May 17, 1966 ACTIVE PAST PRESIDENTS C I TY CO MM I SS I ONER JOH N E . YARBROUGH I MM EDI A T E PAST PRES I DE N T RO M E , GA . MAY O R R ANDO LPH ME DLOCK S TONE MO U NTA I N , G A . MAYOR W . B . W I THERS MOULTRIE , GA . CITY COMM IS S IO NER C AR L E . PRUEl"r GR I FF I N , GA . MAYOR B . F. MERR IT T , J R . MA C ON , GA . FIRST DISTRICT Mr. Dan Sweat Coordinator of Governmental Liaison City Hall Atlanta, Georgia PR E S I D EN T M AYOR J ACK A . L ERO Y A ILE Y Dear Dan : DIRE CTOR MAYO R J . W . SNELL WR I GHT S V I LL E SECOND DISTRICT PRES I DENT MAYOR W . P . H ENRY PELH A M DI R EC TOR M AYOR M A C K E . W I LLIS BA I N BR I DGE THIRD DISTRICT PRESIDE N T R I CH A RD 8 . RAY PERR Y D I REC T OR MA Y OR 0 . E . WHI TE PI N E MOUNTAIN FOURTH Enclosed are copies of a draft memorandum on the urban pol:icy council. I have included in the memorandum the statements and thoughts that you had on the Economic Opportunity Program . I would appreciate your review of the memorandum and any suggestions that you may have for its improvement . Any other ideas or changes that you feel should be covered in a memorandum of this nature would be most welcome . DISTRICT PRE SI D EN T COUN C IL M A N L I N TO N BROOM E DORAVILLE DIRECTO R I look forward to hearing from you . Please do not hesitate to call on us whenever we can be of service or assistance. COUNCIL M AN CLYDE J . HIC KS CONYERS FIFTH Sincerely yours , DISTRICT P RE S I DENT M AYO R A U B REY E . GREENWAY RO SWE LL DI RE C TO R A L DERMAN E . GREGORY GR I GGS ATLAN TA SIXTH Jr. D I STRICT PR E SIDE N T MAYOR J . GARDNER NEWMAN L AGRA N GE DIRECTOR MAYOR HERBERT H . JONES JVBJr/ rs McDO N O UGH SEVENTH DISTRICT PRES I DENT enclosures MA Y OR J. C . WOODS TRI O N D I RECTOR MAYOR RA L PH R . CLAR K, JR . R I NGGOLD EI GH TH D I S TRICT PRES I DENT M A YOR ELTON D . BROOKS DOU G L A S D I RE C TO R MAYOR J AME S T . WI NDSOR , JR . MC RAE NINTH D I S T R ICT PRESID ENT MA Y OR DU A R D B . WH I TLOW CARNE S VI L LE DIRECTOR MA Y OR M R S . J ESSIE L . GA R N E R COUNCILMAN G EOR G E H . B U LLO CK DAH LO NE GA T E NTH AT H ENS DI S TRICT PRESIDENT M AYOR JULIU S F. B I S H OP ATHENS DIRECTOR GEORG E A. S ANCK E N. J R . AUGUSTA DI R ECTO R S STATE M A YOR WI L L IAM J ACK H AM ILTON DECATU R AL DERMAN J . J . S HOOS SA VANNA H A LDERMAN CECIL T U R NER AT L AN T A AT LARGE MAYOR JOHN C . E DENF IEL D T HOMAST ON M AYOR L EE E . CARTER HARTWEL L CI T Y MANA G ER JOHN H. MAR K LAND PRES I DE NT . C IT Y M ANAGER S' SECTION DECAT UR AOMIN A SSIS T . R . TR AVIS HI G GINBOTHAM PRES I D E NT , C I TY CLERK S ' S EC TION ALBANY C I TY ATTORNEY WIL L IAM E SM I TH PRESIDENT. CIT Y A T T OR NEY S ' S E C TION AMER I CUS �DRA F T M EMO RA NDUM URB A N P OL I CY COUN CI L �MEMORANDUM URBAN POLICY COUNCIL The purpose of this memorandum is to present a statement of the need for establishing a steering committee or Council on Urban Policy in this state to consider formulation of policy recommendations with regard to local government involvement in the development of federal grant-in-aid legislation as affecting urban program development in Georgia . As a bas i c premise it is felt that local government off icials and administrators should play an active part in the initial formulation of federal grant-in-aid legislation that affects the growth, development, administration, and operation of local gover nment in Georg i a. Local govern- ment off icial s and administrator s should also b e cons u lted in the dev e lopment of implementing administrative regulations for such l e gislation . Many fe deral grant- in- aid programs app ear to be f ounded to a l a r ge degree upon criter i a or standards of app lication as de t e r mined almost ent i rely a t the federal leve l . An example is curr ent leg islation in Congress to es t ablish communi ty development dis tr i c ts, the make up and c omposit ion of which is proposed to be approv ed by a cabinet officer based upon prede t ermined criter ia . Intergovernmen tal Cooperation There is strong proba bility that future urban programs, of even our larger c ities , wil l as a p rerequisi t e to fe deral a pp rova l , have t o be reviewed by regional organizations or area p fanning and development commissions. The Intergovernmental Coop eration Act of 1965 (S . 561) which passed the Senate and not the Hou se would have required review by a metropolitan planning agency before the federal government would act. �-2- Regional organizations composed of public officials are now recognized by federal law. These organizations have come into being to meet the need for dealing with problems of urban develop~ent that transcend established political and jurisdictional boundaries and cut across entire regions. These organizations will play a vital role in total coordinated urban development. Only recently were these organizations recognized by the federal government to be more than mere planning agencies. Future federal policy con- templates grants to these agencies conditioned upon mandatory not voluntary membership. Also being considered in some quarters is the evolvement of this regional voluntary association of local governments into an instrumentality, either operating regional type functions or serving as the control center over other regional, functional units. Thus, our traditional gen- eral purpose cities and counties of today may be defining tomorrow's regional general purpose network of government. It should be apparent that these developments are restructuring our intergovernmental relationships in the urban area. Workable Program Part of the problem of local inflexibility and lack of administrative coordination perhaps lies with the over involvement of federal staff personnel in the development and implementation of federal grant-in-aid programs. There has not been enough involvement by local administrators and decision-makers in federal aid program development and implementation . There are many examples of past legislative grant-in-aid enactments by the Congress that often hamstring local government administrative machinery because of the inflexibility of black and white implementing �-3- federal rules and regulations which apply to all units of government regardless of size. development. A good example is the workable program for community This program as a prerequisite to involvement in certain federal programs is lacking in flexibility, in its application, and imposes standards laid down without regard to the fact that local ability to implement and execute programs varies between large and small cities . The requirement of a long range capjtal improvements budget is certainly desirable as a basis for scheduling of projects. However, many local units of government do not even have annual operating budgets. Con- sequently, the reality of a blanket requirement of a long range capital improvements program without requiring operating budgets is open toquestion. The arbitrary requirement that the workable program be recertified each year regardless of size of city results in local administrative falsifying each year. There is a real question of whether the large city should be required to recertify the workable program each year -- why not every five years or every ten years? One large city produced a model workable program and was so claimed by the federal administrator to be one of the best workable programs in the nation. The next year the workable program of that city was not recerti- fied because the federal administrator had said that it had not changed enough over the previous year as reflected by the city's progress reports . Another city was refused recertification because the administrator said the city needed four additional housing inspectors over the previo us year's commitment . Yet no standards or justification were stated as to why these requirements were imposed . �-4- In large cities, specific programs do not necessarily reflect dramatic changes on a yearly basis . Thus, recertification of the workable program for many cities is certainly jeopardized unless that city can "pad" its progress reports in order to convince the federal administrator of progress (not given units of progress but progress) and thus secure recertification. There is involvement in the initial drafting and development of federal legislation because of NLC, USCM, and NACO activities, committee hearings, etc. Yet it appears that broad discretion is given to federal administra- tors with regard to program implementation of legislation . This can be seen in the writing and drafting of agency regulations for implementation. The preparation of such regulations should involve the local public official or administrator in order to bridge the gulf between policy makers and practitioners. Quite often the administrative regulations seem to go much further than the intent of legislation. Urban Renewal In the case of urban renewal, real estate acquisition is supposed to be based upon a program of local determination. The criteria on rehabili- tation are extremely rigid on what a city is allowed to do . The same cri- teria apply to a large agency with large projects as we ll as to a small agency working on a single project. The large agency with the larger pro- jects need more flexibility in the planning, direction , and execution of such projects than would be the case of a small agency . Urban renewal regulations make reference to specific noncash credit items such as a 100% credit for a street serving the project, 50% for a boundary street, 25% for sewer line, etc. However, specific noncash items cannot always be apportioned in specific terms to a given urban renewal �-5- project . As an al t ernative, why not allow an over all total grant with credit given fo r noncash items i n a prog r am sense rathe r t han i n specifics so that the local credit items could be reflected in an overall urban renewal plan, as opposed to spe cific items on a project basis . Specific criteria and prerequisite standards are a pplied in the development of urban renewal projects . Yet similar requirements for streets, highways, and other physical facilities _may be programmed with a total disregard for city 's master plan . Economic Opportunity Program The followi ng is a discussion of areas where cit i es (particularly, mayors) have encountered local problems i n a dmin is t r a tion of the Economic Opportunity Program . Ma ny ma yors would have l iked to have ha d some say in t he initial developme nt of VI STA (Vo lunteers In Se rvic e To Ame rica ), or dome st ic peace corp s program. Apparent ly, many mayor s we r e not i nvolved in the i n i t i al devel op- ment of t his p r ogram , a nd consequent l y, fo und i t ne ces s a ry to refuse part i cipat i on in the VISTA program or were re quired t o use their influence to cancel VISTA pr ograms op erating within t h eir communities . An understanding of the extent of the role of VISTA with in the political area is a demand the mayors could assert . However, this would be in opposition t o the philosophy of VI STA in gra nt ing great flexib ility and freed om. Thu s, EOA, b earing in mind th e problems wh ich could be created for the mayor and the city council by completely unhindered volunteers, has had to demand that VISTA volunte e r s be tie d down to s pec i f i c a ssignments . This has been par ticularly true of the program in Atlanta . �-6- The question of the mayors veto of OEO projects is continuously raised. Certainly obstructionist politicians should not be able to deny necessary and reasonable prog r ams for their citizens o Yet, neither the federal gov- ernment nor any other agency should be in a position to institute programs utilizing tax resources in a political subdivision with complete disregard of the elected leaders of that subdivision . The OEO philosophy demands involv~ment of the poor at the local level by CAP agencies in planning and in conducting CAP programs o However, this philosophy of involvement does not apparently apply at the Washington level. Many programs have originated from Washington with fairly stringent guidelines in which there have been no participation by municipal officials or other interested gro ups at the local level . Many of these programs are under the guise of demonstration programs such as the Foster Grandparents Demonstration project (as conducted in Atlanta) and many of them are actually designed to be on-going projects . Recent changes in the requ irements of the Small Business Development Center program under Ti tle IV of the Economic Opportunity Act is an indication of lack of consideration on the part of local officials in making sweeping changes in the intent and content of a prog r am . The or iginal Title IV p r ovis i on was des i gned to help increase employment by p roviding low inter est loans to small businessmen who would gua r an t ee creation of additional jobs wh i ch co ul d be filled by the poor as well as the creation of new entrepreneurs under low i ncome groups o The initial guidelines have now been so changed that the program simply i s be ing conducted to see how many loans can be g r an ted t o persons who are no t now in business and who are in poverty o The SBA makes it clea r that it is inter ested in making a s many loans as poss i ble to Negroes t o start small businesses . �-7- Recreat i on Rec ent Congre ss e s of t h e Uni ted States, recogn i z i ng the growing demand by citizens for recreation and parks, have passed considerable legislation affecting these movements . The recreation profess i on, although pleased to see the vast interest in recreation and parks on the Federal level of government, does hold some reservations about it . Specifically, the Federal governm~nt has classified all recreation and parks under one heading -- "Outdoor Recreation" . tributes to a narrow view of recreation . This fact alone con- Recreation, as it is conducted in Georgia cities, includes every facet of leisure pursuits for the development of the citizenry . The area of "Outdoor" recreation is only one com- ponent of the field of recreation . It is the feeling of many persons in the field that future wording in Federal legislation should state plainly -- "Recreation" in its broadest sense and not "Outdoor Recreation" . Current Federal laws , such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund Bi ll, th e Housing and Ur ba n Dev e lopment Act of 1965, t he Older Ame r i cans Act , the Economic Oppo r tun ity Ac t of 1965, and many o the r s hav e aff ec ted the gr owth and development of r e c rea tion i n the nation . Bas i c ally sound legislation h a s los t t he ma i n emphas i s on t he p ro gr ams t h r ough gui delines e stabl i shed by t he various Fede ral de partmen t s admini s tering t he p ro g r ams < Bas ic p r og r ams orig i n a l ly i n c l ude d in t h e leg i sla tio n have be en g iven s uch low prior ity t h a t app r oval of a n a ppl ic a t ion i s almo s t i mp oss i bl e . Rec ent Fede r al legis l ation re lating t o recrea t i on and pa r ks wi l l have a g re a t i mpact upo n the r e c r ea tion an d pa r ks moveme n t in t h e Uni t e d States . The r e a r e, however, many a r eas of t h e pr esent l egi slat i on which cou ld be i mp r oved t o b etter s erve t h e communit i e s . �-8- These are : 1. The Feder al government or t he Federal departments administer i ng the legislation has plac ed guidelines on the prog r ams which mak e them quite diffi cult fo r many communi t i e s to take advantage . (a) Practically all the curr ent programs require deta i led communitywide planni ng o Although this requirement is bas ically good, it makes many of our smaller communities inelig i ble from lack of proper finances fo r planning . Federal agencies admi n i stering the programs should be giv en leadway in approving applications from small communities who do not fully meet the guideli nes established by the Federal departme nt . (b) The community leader shi p should be permitted to bes t determine the mo r e sui table locat i on fo r a ny program or facil i ty . It should not be r est ric ted en t ire l y to poverty areas . (c) St ate governments s hould be given the authority to r enew, recomme nd, and approv e appl i cations pr i or to submiss i on t o the Fe deral government . St ate ag en cies are awa r e of th e needs of commun i t ies in t heir res pective s tate s and wi ll a c t wi th sp e e d and e f fi ciency . Cur rently many pr ograms by-pass the stat e al t og e ther . I n suc h i n- s tance s th i s rend er s the a r ea planning and dev elopme n t commi ss i ons and similar groups less effective in guid ing orderly planning a nd deve l opment . By t h e same token, s t a te agencie s c ap a b le of a ssis t - i ng communities with v arious deve lopme n ts, are seldom consul t ed. ( d) Pr e sent p rogr am app lications are by far too difficul t for t he a verage community t o comp l ete and fi le with the proper agency . Pres ent methods almost requ i re the full-time services of a person trained for this pur pose . Many of our smal ler communities cannot aff ord to employ such a person . �-9- (e) Guidelines should be set forth in common terms understandable by all communities o Presently, it is the case where some of the fed- eral employees with the a dministering department s do not agree on t he requirements o This simply causes confusion and misunderstand- ing on the part of local gov e r nments o (f) Federal employees should be qualified to interpret and supervise Federal programs in which they work o It is inconceivable that a person trained in forestry, agriculture, and hort iculture can do the total job necessary for recreation and parks o Recreation is a new profession with personnel trained in this field . Personnel possessing the b ro ad concept of recreation and parks should administer Federal programs o The Land and Water Conser v ation Fund Bill is designed to provide matching funds up to 50 % to states and their political subd ivisions for planning, acquisition and deve lopment of out door recreation areas o State pla nn i ng is essential . Each state, in order to be eligible (Georgia could receive up t o $2 million annually in th i s 25-year program) must prepare a state plan wh i c h must be approved by t he Bureau of Outdoor Recreation " As of May 1 , 1966, comprehensive statewide out doo r re reation plans have been a pp r ov ed exc ept Georg i a, Iowa, North Caro lina, Ut ah , and Wyoming . Proje c ts will no t be approv ed unt i l the s t a t e plan i s app r oved . This law stat es spec if ically that matching funds "may be made available to political subdivi s i ons" o Upon maki ng furth er inquiries as to how the communities a c tually fit int o the plan and how t hey will parti cipa t e in the prog r am , no clear cut answers were a vailable o Actually, local communities do no t now know t o �-10- what ex tent they will be i ncluded in the program . The contention of ma ny i s t hat a state plan canno t be a comprehensive one unless it i nclude s the needs and capabil i t i es of communitie s . After all, the masses of the people are loc ated largely in the urban areas . Al- though the Georgia plan now being developed might include the communities, this does not seem to be the case since inquiries point to the fact that no community has been requested to participate in the planning . It seems, in this light, plans cannot be made for communities without the communities' assistanc e . This piec e of legislat i on is vital to all c i ties and consequently, they should hav e a v o ice i n the make-up of the program in Georgia . In other s t a t es a tt emp t s hav e been made to remove the L&WFB from politics and t o i nsure that project s are considered on the basis of need . In one st_a te, fo r ex ample, ov e r 100 car efully selected leaders were b r ought t og ethe r i n t he form i ng of a c ouncil fo r th e purpose of es tabl i shi ng guidelines fo r t h e prog r am . It wa s t heir r esponsib i l i ty to determ i ne a r eal basi c point -- what percent a ge of the funds would be al l o ca t ed t o l ocal communit i e s, s tate parks, and f ed eral agenci e s wi t hin the s tate . A l ay group , rep resent i ng v a r i ou s i n teres ts, should b e a pp oin ted f o r t he pur pos e of maki ng t h ese s ame deci s i on s i n Ge or g i a . Additionally, t h i s same gr oup or a similar one should b e app oint ed and authorized to rev iew e a ch p iece of fed era l leg islation p ri or t o its i mp l eme n tation i n Ge or g i a, and make certa in procedural recommenda tions . Without positive action t he r e is a po s sib i l ity that Land a nd Water funds will comp letely elude the c ities of Georgia . immediate positive s teps . This situation r e quires �-11- Conclusion The broad shopp i ng market of federal programs portrays a gross amount of money for use locally as the federal government sees fit, and according to its program emphasis o In many cases, the emphas i s on specific prog r ams and projects is determi ned nationally not locally o However, it is believed that many of our cities , large and small, do have the capability of making such determinations and should be allowed the administrative flexibility to determine the level of emphasis that should be placed on specific local programs o If such were the case, a city could submit a comprehensive state- ment of its needs in terms of pri ority and emphasis on local programs and be given a grant with the nec essary flexibility for implementation in accordance to priorities as determi ned locally by that city o Urban Policy Council In conclusion it is fe l t t ha t this state could take a very pos i tive step toward harmonious coord i nation of federal grant-in-aid p r ograms and urban development by e s tab lish ing a s t eering committee or council on urban policy char ged with t he res ponsibility of dev eloping a statement of pol icy for coord i nat i on, dev elopment and administration prog r ams deal ing wit h the total grow t h and development of our communities o be composed of the f ollowing : Such a commi t tee should r e p resentatives of municipal gov ernment t hrough t he Georg i a Municipal Association; r ep r esentatives of county government t h r ough the As so c iation of County Commissioners of Geor gia, rep r e sentatives of stat e gov ernment t h r ough the Executive Off ic e; and r ep r es ent atives of Georgia ' s Congressional Delegation o This commi ttee could hav e t he g iven responsibility for the performance of the fol lowing basic functions: �-12- 1. To analyz e the t r ends , condi tions , needs, and problems affecting local government in Geo r gia ' s rapidly urbaniz i ng s t ate; 2. To def i ne the compl i mentary and cooperative roles of local, state, and federal agenc ies with respe c t to the development and implementation of urban programs; 3. To re commend appropriate policies that would govern the working relationsh i ps bet ween local, state and federal agenc ies in the development, implementation, and coordination of programs to cope with urban growth . � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 20, Complete Folder Box 14 Box 14 Folder 20 Folder topic: Urban Policy Council | 1966 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/645997da61388d3453e49909b89df38e.pdf 980a89c5e7d3c0d538b48a7ac961937c Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. L DISCUSSION PAPER Chicago Confe rence Mobilizing Urban Coalitions Chicago Circle Center, University of Illinois October 17th , 1967 Introduction With any new national effort such as that being undertaken by The Urban Coalition, it may be expected that organizational structure me thods will continue ~o undergo change. For this reason The Urban Coalition is under- standably following a flexible course of action. The ideas s e t forth in this discussion paper may be expected to undergo fur t her change a s the y are subject to continuing review by both national and local leadership. The views of those interested in The Urban Coalition are invited and welcome. Goals Based upon the Statement of Principles, Goals and Commitment s adopted at the August Emergency Convocation, The Urban Coalition's program may be restated as follows: 1. To encourage the Congress to respond affirmativ ely t o the n e eds of the cities. 2. To encourage public concern with the needs of the c it ies? 3. To stimulate greater private initiative and effort in deali~g with the problems of the cities, including both inv e s t me n t and technical assistance. \ 4. To stimulate greater support for and interest in ongoing effo r ts to meet such needs as : -- job development and manpower training p r og rams --open housing efforts -- urb an r enewa l and r econstr uctio n . �Page·Two --anti-poverty programs --programs to overcome educational disparitieso \I Methods Among the methods that may be followed by The Urban Coalition are the following: 1. Be supportive, not operational.· It is expected that The Urban Coalition will support ongoing efforts at both the local and national levels. It may stimulate new undertakings. It will cooperate with sue~ majo~ new efforts as the $1 billion investment allocation of the insurance industry f ·o r center city development. 2. It will give support to local urban coalitions. Stimulate interest in successful examples of action. Through its Task Forces The Urban Coalition will identify, work with, and publicize successful efforts to expand employment, extend lower income housing and equal housing opportunities, new educational programs and the like. Task Forces hope to serve as catalysts and convenors. The They will serve as clearinghouses of local action. 3. Work with the mass media. Through its Task Force on Communications and Public Support and through counterpart committees at the local level , it is hoped that the mass media can te encouraged to focus greater attention on the ne e ds of cities . Broad public understanding of the need for greater resources, of the complex ities of the problems involved and the n eed for urgent action are essential if the goals of The Urb a n Coalition are to be achieved. �Page·Three 4. To coordinate a national legislative campaign. The Urban Coalition has called upon Congress for action across a broad front to meet the urban ~ crisis. Interpreting and emphasizing the need for national action is as ~uch a local obligation as it is a commitment of the National Steering Committee. Discussions with members of Congress is as much a hometown affair as are appearances before Congressional coITLmittees. Structures The National Steering Committee at the present time consists of thirty-six members. They are broadly representative of business, labor, local govern- ment, religion, civil rights and education. It is expected that two addit- ional members of the Steering Committee will be selected by the Council of Urban Coalitions. As local coalitions are formed they will be invited to designate two representatives to serve on the Council and through this Council provide the National Steering Committee with advice and guidance on matters of national concern. The National Steering Comrni~tee has established seven Task Forces and it is expected that local coalitions will develop counterpart units. guidelines. These are identified and discussed in the attach ed Under consideration for future development is the establishment of a Council of Urban Economic Advisors to assist the Coalition in analyzing the impact of Federal eco~omic, fisc~l, tax, and budgetary policies of cities . A second Council of University Urban Studies Centers is being contemplated as a means of channeling the best research ideas concerning urban development into the discussions and plans of both the National Steering Committee and �Page Four and local coalitions. Further additions and modifications in the organization and structure of The Urban Coalition may be expected as experience is gained. "' * * � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document r DISCUSSION PAPER Chicago Conference Mobilizing Urban Coalitions Chicago Circle Center, University of Illinois October 17th, 1967 Introduction With any new national effort such as that being undertaken by The Urban Coalition, it may be expected that organizational structure methods will continue to undergo change. For this reason The Urban Coalition is under- standably following a flexible course of action. The ideas set forth in this Metaiées paper may be expected to undergo further change as they are subject to continuing review by both national and local leadership. The views of those interested in The Urban Coalition are invited and welcome. Goals Based upon the Statement of Principles, Goals and Commitments adopted at the August Emergency Convocation, The Urban Coalition's program may be restated as follows: 1. To encourage the Congress to respond affirmatively to the needs of the cities. 2. To encourage public concern with the needs of the cities, 3. To stimulate greater private initiative and effort in dealing with the problems of the cities, including both investment and technical assistance, ‘ ‘ 4. To stimulate greater support for and interest in ongcing efforts to meet such needs as: --job development and manpower training programs --open housing efforts --urban renewal and reconstruction \ Page :-Two --anti-poverty programs --programs to overcome educational disparities. Methods Among the methods that may be followed by The Urban Coalition are the following: 1. Be supportive, not operational. It is expected that The Urban Coalition will support ongoing efforts at both the local and national levels. It may stimulate new undertakings. It will cooperate with such major new . efforts as the $1 billion investment allocation of the insurance industry for center city development. It will give support to local urban coalitions. 2a Stimulate interest in successful examples of action. Through its Task Forces The Urban Coalition will identify, work with, and publicize successful efforts to expand employment, extend lower income housing and equal housing opportunities, new educational programs and the like. The Task Forces hope to serve as catalysts and convenors. They will serve as clearinghouses of local action. BY Work with the mass media. Through its Task Force on Communications and Public Support and through counterpart committees at the local level, it is hoped that the mass media can be encouraged to focus greater attention on the needs of cities. Broad public understanding of the need for greater resources, of the complexities of the problems involved and the need for urgent action are essential if the goals of The Urban Coalition are to be achieved. Page: Three p 4, To coordinate a national legislative campaign. The Urban Coalition has called upon Congress for action across a broad front to meet the urban crisis. Interpreting and emphasizing the need for national action is as much a local obligation as it is a commitment of the National Steering Committee. Discussions with members of Congress is as much a hometown affair as are appearances before Congressional committees. Structures The National Steering Committee at the present time consists of thirty-six members. They are broadly representative of business, labor, local govern- ment, religion, civil rights and education. It is expected that two addit- ional members of the Steering Committee will be selected by the Council of Urban Coalitions. As local coalitions are formed they will be invited to designate two representatives to serve on the Council and through this Council provide the National Steering Committee with advice and guidance on matters of national concern. The Gatioral Steering Committee has established seven Task Forces and it is expected that local coalitions will develop counterpart units. These are identified and discussed in the attached guidelines. Under consideration for future development is the establishment of a Council of Urban Economic Advisors to se sieu the Coalition in analyzing the impact of Federal auonomié, fiscal, tax, and budgetary policies of cities. A second Council of University Urban Studies Centers is being contemplated as a means of channeling the best research ideas concerning urban development into the discussions and plans of both the National Steering Committee and Page Four and local coalitions. Further additions and modifications in the organization and structure of The Urban Coalition may be expected as experience is gained.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 17, Document 4 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 17 Folder topic: Urban Coalition statement of local coalition | 1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/0a65b9fa2d995fe8d520ae2ccb1338fe.pdf f370a08cf23b3f71237118b6b632f815 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. DRAFT STATEMENT OF ATLAN TA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE DURING THE LAST TWO DECADES ACCELERATED MIGRATION FROM THE FARMS, VASTLY INCREASED LIVING STANDARDS, THE AUTOMOBILE, AND OTHER SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS HAVE CHANGED OUR NATION FROM RURAL TO URBAN. THREE-FOURTH3OF AMERICA 1S 190 MILLION CITIZENS NOW LIVE IN CITIES. THIS RAPID URBANIZATION IS UNPARRELLED IN ANY NATION IN WORLD HISTORY. AND THE PROBLEMS FORCED UPON COMMUNITIES UNPREPARED FOR THIS DRAMATIC CHANGE IS LIKEWIS E UNMATCHED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL POP ULATIONS . FOR TEN YEARS OR MORE ECONOMISTS, SOCIOLOGISTS, POLITICAL SCIENTISTS , AND OTHERS HAVE URGED ACTION BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS TO PLAN AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS TO MEET THIS CHANGING ENVIRONMENT. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS - URBAN CITIES - POSSESSED NEITHER THE FISCAL N_OR HUMAN RESOURGES IN SUFFICIENT QUANITY AND QUALITY TO DO MORE THAN BRACE THE DIKE AGAINST THE ON-RUSHING . TIDE. �PAGE TWO .. STATE GOVERNMENT TURNED A DEAF EAR. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT E X PRESSED CONCERN, ESTABLISHED SOME PROMISING PROGRAMS AND FORMED A NEW DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO DEAL WITH CITY PROBLEMS. BUT THE CONGRESS FAILED TO REGISTER THE SENSE OF URGENCY OF THE URBAN CRISES, AND OBLIVIOUS TO THE IMPENDING DOOM ALLOCATED THE NATIONAL DOLLAR TO THE RACE FOR SPACE, AGRICULTURAL SUPPOR TS A ND DE FE NS E . THE RESULT IS NOW A TRAGIC CHAPTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY. RIO T S, RACIAL DIS T UR B ANCES, CIVIL DISOBE DIENCE IN CITY A FTER CITY THR O UGHO UT ALL PAR TS O F THE C OUNTRY HA VE CAST A LAS T I NG IMPRIN T OF INACTION AND I NDIFFER ENCE . AND I N EAC H TR O UBLED AREA THE ST O RY IS THE S AME : P OOR P E OPLE. L A CK OF JOB S K I LLS. I NADEQUATE PARKS , SCH O OLS . SER VICES. UNE M P L OYMENT. U NSOUND H OUSING. ABSENCE O F REALISTIC MUNICIPAL LACK OF MOTIVATION. LOSS O F FAITH AND OF HOPE . \ W HAT C AN BE D O NE? NOT HING S H OR T O F A TOTA L COMMITME N T O F ALL COMM UNITY RESOURCES AND A REASSESSMENT O F PRIOR I TIES BY OUR NATIONA L �PAGE THREE \l GOVERNMENT CAN PRODUCE RESULTS ON A SCALE LARGE ENOUGH TO SUFFICIENTLY CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITIES~ IT ISN'T ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE A CITY GOVERNMENT OF CONCERN AND COMPASSION FOR THE PROBLEMS OF THE POOR AND · DISADVANTAGED. THIS SAME CONCERN AND COMPASSION MUST BE FELT BY BUSINESS AND BY LABOR, BY EDUCATION AND BY OUR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND OUR CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERSHIP. THE NECESSITY FOR COOPERATION AND COORDINATION OF RESOURCES HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY LEADERS OF THESE SECTORS OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL. AS A RESULT AN URBAN COALITION HAS BEEN FORMED TO SEEK WAYS TO MOBILIZE THE UNUSED RESOURCES THROUGHOUT THE URBAN CITIES AND TO DO BATTLE WITH URBAN BLIGHT. THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION HAS CALLED UPON OUR BUSINESSMEN, OUR CHURCHMEN, OUR EDUCATORS AND OUR LABOR UNIONS TO JOIN WITH OUR MAYORS AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO· DEVEL.O P AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS WHICH WILL PROVIDE JOBS, DECENT HOUSING, EDUCATION AND A BETTER LIFE FOR THOSE TRAPPED IN THE CURRENT OF THE URBAN CRISES . �PAGE FOUR THE COALITION MET IN AN EMERGENCY CONVOCATION AND ADOPTED A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES OF GREAT PROMISE. IT CALLED UPON LOCAL GOVERNMENT, BUSINESS, LABOR, RELIGION AND CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS TO CREATE COUNTERPART LOCAL COALITIONS TO SUPPORT AND SUPPLEMENT THIS DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES. WE BELIEVE THE VERY ESSENCE OF SUCCESS OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION LIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRONG LOCAL COALITIONS. PAST AND PRESENT EFFORTS IN ATLANTA TO BUILD A GREAT CITY AND TO MEET THE NEEDS OF URBAN GROWTH HAVE RESULTED DIRECTLY FROM AN UNSTRUCTURED COALITION OF LEADERSHIP IN ALL AREAS OF COMMUNITY LIFE. WE BELIEVE OUR CHANCES FOR CONTINUED AND EXPANDED SUCCESSES CAN BE MADE POSSIBLE ONLY THROUGH MOBILIZ ATION AND FULL UTILIZATION OF ALL RESOURC ES AVAILABLE TO US. WE, THEREFORE, PLEDGE OURSELV ES TO WORK TOGETHER IN AN ATLANTA URBAN COALITION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF QJ R COMMUNITY, AND URGE ALL GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS TO JOIN US IN OUR EFFORTS. �PAGE FIVE . WE FURTHER ENDORSE THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES OF THE NATIONAL COALITION AND PLEDGE TO LEND OUR TALENTS AND OUR LABORS TO THEIR FULFILLMENT. IVAN ALLEN, JR. MAYOR OF ATLANTA AUGUSTUS H. STERNE, PRESIDENT ATLANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SAMUEL WILLIAMS CO-CHAIRMAN SUMMIT LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ROBERT J. BUTLER PRESIDENT ATLANTA LABOR COUNCIL REV. BEVEL JONES, PRESIDENT CHRISTIAN COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN ATLANTA, INC. DR. JOHN W. LETSON SUPERINTENDENT ATLANTA PUBLIC SCHOOLS ERWIN STEVENS, PRESIDENT CITIZENS CENTRAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ATLANTA, INC. \ � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document DRAFT STATEMENT OF ATLANTA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE DURING THE LAST TWO DECADES ACCELERATED MIGRATION FROM THE FARMS, VASTLY INCREASED LIVING STANDARDS, THE AUTOMOBILE, AND OTHER SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS HAVE CHANGED OUR NATION FROM RURAL TO URBAN, THREE-FOURTHSOF AMERICA'S 190 MILLION CITIZENS NOW LIVE IN CITIES, THIS RAPID URBANIZATION IS UNPARRELLED IN ANY NATION IN WORLD HISTORY. AND THE PROBLEMS FORCED UPON COMMUNITIES UNPREPARED FOR THIS DRAMATIC CHANGE IS LIKEWISE UNMATCHED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL POPULATIONS, FOR TEN YEARS OR MORE ECONOMISTS, SOCIOLOGISTS, POLITICAL SCIENTISTS, AND OTHERS HAVE URGED ACTION BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS TO PLAN AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS TO MEET THIS CHANGING ENVIRONMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS - URBAN CITIES - POSSESSED NEITHER THE FISCAL NOR HUMAN RESOURGES IN SUFFICIENT QUANITY AND QUALITY TO DO MORE THAN BRACE THE DIKE AGAINST THE ON-RUSHING. TIDE, PAGE TWO ® STATE GOVERNMENT TURNED A DEAF EAR, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EXPRESSED CONCERN, ESTABLISHED SOME PROMISING PROGRAMS AND FORMED A NEW DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO DEAL WITH CITY PROBLEMS, BUT THE CONGRESS FAILED TO REGISTER THE SENSE OF URGENCY OF THE URBAN CRISES, AND OBLIVIOUS TO THE IMPENDING DOOM ALLOCATED THE NATIONAL DOLLAR TO THE RACE FOR SPACE, AGRICULTURAL SUPPORTS AND DEFENSE, THE RESULT IS NOW A TRAGIC CHAPTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY, RIOTS, RACIAL DISTURBANCES, CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN CITY AFTER CITY THROUGHOUT ALL PARTS OF THE COUNTRY HAVE CAST A LASTING IMPRINT OF INACTION AND INDIFFERENCE, AND IN EACH TROUBLED AREA THE STORY IS THE SAME: POOR PEOPLE, LACK OF JOB SKILLS, UNEMPLOYMENT, UNSOUND HOUSING, INADEQUATE PARKS, SCHOOLS, ABSENCE OF REALISTIC MUNICIPAL SERVICES, LACK OF MOTIVATION, LOSS OF FAITH AND OF HOPE, ‘ WHAT CAN BE DONE? NOTHING SHORT OF A TOTAL COMMITMENT OF ALL COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND A REASSESSMENT OF PRIORITIES BY OUR NATIONAL PAGE THREE GOVERNMENT CAN PRODUCE RESULTS ON A SCALE LARGE ENOUGH TO SUFFICIENTLY CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITIES, IT ISN'T ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE A CITY GOVERNMENT OF CONCERN AND COMPASSION FOR THE PROBLEMS OF THE POOR AND “DISADVANTAGED, THIS SAME CONCERN AND COMPASSION MUST BE FELT BY BUSINESS AND BY LABOR, BY EDUCATION AND BY OUR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND OUR CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERSHIP, .THE NECESSITY FOR COOPERATION AND COORDINATION OF RESOURCES HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY LEADERS OF THESE SECTORS OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, AS A RESULT AN URBAN COALITION HAS BEEN FORMED TO SEEK WAYS TO MOBILIZE THE UNUSED RESOURCES THROUGHOUT THE URBAN CITIES AND TO DO BATTLE WITH URBAN BLIGHT. THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION HAS CALLED UPON OUR BUSINESSMEN, OUR CHURCHMEN, OUR EDUCATORS AND OUR LABOR UNIONS TO JOIN WITH OUR MAYORS AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO: DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS WHICH WILL PROVIDE JOBS, DECENT HOUSING, EDUCATION AND A BETTER LIFE FOR THOSE TRAPPED IN THE CURRENT OF THE URBAN CRISES, PAGE FOUR THE COALITION MET IN AN EMERGENCY CONVOCATION AND ADOPTED A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES OF GREAT PROMISE, IT CALLED UPON LOCAL GOVERNMENT, BUSINESS, LABOR, RELIGION AND CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS TO CREATE COUNTERPART LOCAL COALITIONS TOSUPPORT AND SUPPLEMENT THIS DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES, WE BELIEVE THE VERY ESSENCE OF SUCCESS OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION LIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRONG LOCAL COALITIONS, PAST AND PRESENT EFFORTS IN ATLANTA TO BUILD A GREAT CITY AND TO MEET THE NEEDS OF URBAN GROWTH HAVE RESULTED DIRECTLY FROM AN UNSTRUCTURED COALITION OF LEADERSHIP IN ALL AREAS OF COMMUNITY LIFE, WE BELIEVE OUR CHANCES FOR CONTINUED AND EXPANDED SUCCESSES CAN BE MADE POSSIBLE ONLY THROUGH MOBILIZATION AND FULL UTILIZATION OF ALL RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO US, WE, THEREFORE, PLEDGE OURSELVES TO WORK TOGETHER ‘ IN AN ATLANTA URBAN COALITION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF GIR COMMUNITY, AND URGE ALL GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS TO JOIN US IN OUR EFFORTS, PAGE FIVE . WE FURTHER ENDORSE THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES OF THE NATIONAL COALITION AND PLEDGE TO LEND OUR TALENTS AND OUR LABORS TO THEIR FULFILLMENT, IVAN ALLEN, JR. MAYOR OF ATLANTA AUGUSTUS H, STERNE, PRESIDENT ATLANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SAMUEL WILLIAMS CO-CHAIRMAN SUMMIT LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ROBERT J. BUTLER PRESIDENT ATLANTA LABOR COUNCIL REV. BEVEL JONES, PRESIDENT CHRISTIAN COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN ATLANTA, INC, DR, JOHN W, LETSON SUPERINTENDENT ATLANTA PUBLIC SCHOOLS ERWIN STEVENS, PRESIDENT CITIZENS CENTRAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ATLANTA, INC, ‘  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 17, Document 3 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 17 Folder topic: Urban Coalition statement of local coalition | 1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/8581b468b74de3541503d871df09bcc1.pdf ccb532c0cf86f530083825cb79b43a2d Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. \, ATLANTA November 8, 1967 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Mayor City Hall At Ian ta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mayor Allen: In request to your letter of October 26, 1967 I am happy to report that the Executive Board of the Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta is pleased with the draft prepared by Mr . Dan Sweat and has no suggested changes o Pl ease feel fre e to call upon us if there is any way we might support more fully this outstanding piece of pioneer service to our community . Sincerely you rs, Exe cut ive Di rector H DM :msb OR. L . BEVEL JONE S PRESIDENT WELFARE 11: S OCIAL SERVICES 8 73-2108 GA . A SSO C . F O R PASTORAL CARE 523-4711 • EXT . 207 872 - 5678 DR . HARMON D . MOORE EXECUTIVE DIR E CTOR 872-5678 RAD I O AND TV 87~ - 567 8 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document CHRISTIAN COUNCIL, “lh |ROPOUITAN ATLANTA oe tall /’ / Ne Se ee 53 SIXTH STREETS N"E., ATLANTAs"GEORGIA 39308, PHONE 872-5678 ae —_ November 8, 1967 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Mayor City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mayor Allen: In request to your letter of October 26, 1967 | am happy to report that the Executive Board of the Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta is pleased with the draft prepared by Mr. Dan Sweat and has no suggested changes. Please feel free to call upon us if there is any way we might support more fully this outstanding piece of pioneer service to our community. Sincerely yours, Sis drmon eee Ve a ns Director HDM:msb Offering the 31d Dimension to 5 Growing Counties DR. L. BEVEL JONES WELFARE & SOCIAL SERVICES GA. ASSOC. FOR PASTORAL CARE DR. HARMON D. MOORE PRESIDENT 873-2108 523-4711 - EXT. 207 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 872-5678 872-5678 RADIO AND TV 872-5678  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 17, Document 2 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 17 Folder topic: Urban Coalition statement of local coalition | 1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/b4a8b0ce49082a66368f17cfc22d8708.pdf 6cb4f287b13a1df2621f44f4f64581a1 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. l ' STATEMENT ATLANTA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE OCTOBER 29, 1967 During the last two decades accelerated migration from the farms, vastly increased living standards, the automobile, and other social and economic factors have changed our nation from rural to urban. Three -fourths of America I s 200 million citizens now live in cities. This rapid urbanization is unparrelled in any nation in world history. And the problems forced upon communities unprepared for this dramatic change is likewise unmatched in the development of national populations. For ten years or more economists, sociologists, political scientists, and others have urged action by local, state and federal governments to plan and implement programs to meet this changing environment. In urban areas local governments possessed neither the fiscal nor human resources in sufficient quanity and quality to do more than brace the dike against the on-rushing tide. State government turned a deaf ear. The federal government expressed concern, established some prom1s1ng programs and formed a new Department of Housing and Urban Development to deal with city problems. But the Congress in too many instances failed to register the sense of urgency the urban crises demand, with an apparent unawareness of the critical dimensions .of the p":roblem, the nation's resources have been allocated to the rac e for space, agricultural supports and defense - but little to the needs of the cities. The result is now a tragic chapter in American history. Riots , racial disturbances, civil disobedien ce in city after city throughout all parts of the country have cast a lasting imprint of inaction and indifference . And in each troubled area the story is the same: Poor people. Lack of job skills. Unemployment . Unsound housing . Inadequate parks , schools. Absense of r ealistic municipal services . Lack of motivation. Loss of faith and of hop e. What can be done? N o thing short of a total commitment of all community re sourc es and a r e assessment of priorities by our national government can produc e results �Page Two on a scale large enough to sufficiently change the direction of our cities. It isn't enough that we have a city government of concern and compassion for the problems of the poor and disadvantaged. This same concern and compassion must be felt by business and by labor, by education and by our religious institutions and our civil rights leadership. The necessity for cooperation and co0rdination of resources has been recognized by leaders of the se sectors of our environment at the national l evel. A s a result an Urban Coalition has been formed to seek ways to mobilize the unused resources throughout the urban areas of the nation and to do battle with urban blight. The Steering Committee of the national Urban Coalition has called upon our businessmen, our churchmen,: our educators and our labor unions to join with our mayors and public officials to de ve lop and implement programs which will provide jobs, decent housing, education and a better life for those trapped in the current of the urban crises. The Coalition met in an emergency convocation and adopted a stateme nt of principles of great promise. It called upon local gove rnment, business , labor, r e ligion and civil rights groups to create counterpart local coalitions to support and supplement this declaration of principles. We believe the very essence of success of the national Urban Coaliti on lies in the development of strong local coalitions. Past and pre sent efforts in Atlanta to build a great city and to meet the needs of urban growth have r esulted directly from an unstructured coalition of leade rship in all areas of community life. We b eli eve our chances for continued and expande d successes can b e made possible only through mobilization and full utili zation of all resources available to us. We , therefore, ple dge ours e lves to work together in an Atlanta Urban Coalition for the betterment of our community, and urge all groups and organizations to join us in our e fforts. �Page Three We further endorse the declaration of principles of the national Coalition and pledge to lend our talents and our labors to their fulfillment. Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of Atlanta Al Bows, Vice President Atlanta Chamber of Commerc e R obert J. Butler, President Atlanta Labor C o uncil Dr. John W. Letson Superintendent Atlanta Public Schools Dr. Harmon Moore, E xe cutive Director Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta, Inc. Erwin Stevens , President Citizens Central Advisory Council Economic Opportunity Atlanta , Inc. Reverend Samuel Williams C o- Chairman Summit Leadership Conferenc e � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document STATEMENT ATLANTA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE OCTOBER 29, 1967 During the last two decades accelerated migration from the farms, vastly increased living standards, the automobile, and other social and economic factors have changed our nation from rural to urban. Three-fourths of America's 200 million citizens now live in cities. This rapid urbanization is unparrelled in any nation in world history. And the problems forced upon communities unprepared for this dramatic change is likewise unmatched in the development of national populations, For ten years or more economists, sociologists, political scientists, and others have urged action by local, state and federal governments to plan and implement programs to meet this changing environment. In urban areas local governments possessed neither the fiscal nor human resources in sufficient quanity and quality to do more than brace the dike against the on-rushing tide. State government turned a deaf ear. The federal government expressed concern, established some promising programs and formed a new Department of Housing and Urban Development to deal with city problems. But the Congress in too many instances failed to register the sense of urgency the urban crises demand, with an apparent unawareness of the critical dimensions of the problem, the nation's resources have been allocated to the race for space, agricultural supports and defense - but little to the needs of the cities. The result is now a tragic chapter in American history. Riots, racial disturbances, civil disobedience in city after city throughout all parts of the country have cast a lasting imprint of inaction and indifference, And in each troubled area the story is the same: Poor people. Lack of job skills. Unemployment. Unsound housing. Inadequate parks, schools. Absense of realistic municipal services, Lack of motivation. Loss of faith and of hope. What can be done? Nothing short of a total commitment of all community resources and a reassessment of priorities by our national government can produce results Page Two on a scale large enough to sufficiently change the direction of our cities. It isn't enough that we have a city government of concern and compassion for the problems of the poor and disadvantaged. This same concern and compassion must be felt by business and by labor, by education and by our religious institutions and our civil rights leadership. The necessity for cooperation and coordination of resources has been recognized by leaders of these sectors of our environment at the national level. As a result an Urban Coalition has been formed to seek ways to mobilize the unused resources throughout the urban areas of the nation and to do battle with urban blight. The Steering Committee of the national Urban Coalition has called upon our businessmen, our churchmen, our educators and our labor unions to join with our mayors and public officials to develop and implement programs which will provide jobs, decent housing, education and a better life for those trapped in the current of the urban crises. The Coalition met in an emergency convocation and adopted a statement of principles of great promise, It called upon local government, business, labor, religion and civil rights groups to create counterpart local coalitions to support and supplement this declaration of principles. We believe the very essence of success of the national Urban Coalition lies in the development of strong local coalitions, Past and present efforts in Atlanta to build a great city and to meet the needs of urban growth have resulted directly from an unstructured coalition of leadership in all areas of community life. We believe our chances for continued and expanded successes can be made possible only through mobilization and full utilization of all resources available to us. We, therefore, pledge ourselves to work together in an Atlanta Urban Coalition for the betterment of our community, and urge all groups and organizations to join us in our efforts. Page Three We further endorse the declaration of principles of the national Coalition and pledge to lend our talents and our labors to their fulfillment. Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of Atlanta Al Bows, Vice President Atlanta Chamber of Commerce Robert J. Butler, President Atlanta Labor Council Dr. John W. Letson Superintendent Atlanta Public Schools Dr. Harmon Moore, Executive Director Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta, Inc. Erwin Stevens, President Citizens Central Advisory Council Economic Opportunity Atlanta, Inc. Reverend Samuel Williams Co-Chairman Summit Leadership Conference  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 17, Document 1 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 17 Folder topic: Urban Coalition statement of local coalition | 1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/99d5c11b0877b50f729ae9f2c561134e.pdf 4a6f56a23ec8a08780bda5b4bc47a162 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. l ' STATEMENT ATLANTA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE OCTOBER 29, 1967 During the last two decades accelerated migration from the farms, vastly increased living standards, the automobile, and other social and economic factors have changed our nation from rural to urban. Three -fourths of America I s 200 million citizens now live in cities. This rapid urbanization is unparrelled in any nation in world history. And the problems forced upon communities unprepared for this dramatic change is likewise unmatched in the development of national populations. For ten years or more economists, sociologists, political scientists, and others have urged action by local, state and federal governments to plan and implement programs to meet this changing environment. In urban areas local governments possessed neither the fiscal nor human resources in sufficient quanity and quality to do more than brace the dike against the on-rushing tide. State government turned a deaf ear. The federal government expressed concern, established some prom1s1ng programs and formed a new Department of Housing and Urban Development to deal with city problems. But the Congress in too many instances failed to register the sense of urgency the urban crises demand, with an apparent unawareness of the critical dimensions .of the p":roblem, the nation's resources have been allocated to the rac e for space, agricultural supports and defense - but little to the needs of the cities. The result is now a tragic chapter in American history. Riots , racial disturbances, civil disobedien ce in city after city throughout all parts of the country have cast a lasting imprint of inaction and indifference . And in each troubled area the story is the same: Poor people. Lack of job skills. Unemployment . Unsound housing . Inadequate parks , schools. Absense of r ealistic municipal services . Lack of motivation. Loss of faith and of hop e. What can be done? N o thing short of a total commitment of all community re sourc es and a r e assessment of priorities by our national government can produc e results �Page Two on a scale large enough to sufficiently change the direction of our cities. It isn't enough that we have a city government of concern and compassion for the problems of the poor and disadvantaged. This same concern and compassion must be felt by business and by labor, by education and by our religious institutions and our civil rights leadership. The necessity for cooperation and co0rdination of resources has been recognized by leaders of the se sectors of our environment at the national l evel. A s a result an Urban Coalition has been formed to seek ways to mobilize the unused resources throughout the urban areas of the nation and to do battle with urban blight. The Steering Committee of the national Urban Coalition has called upon our businessmen, our churchmen,: our educators and our labor unions to join with our mayors and public officials to de ve lop and implement programs which will provide jobs, decent housing, education and a better life for those trapped in the current of the urban crises. The Coalition met in an emergency convocation and adopted a stateme nt of principles of great promise. It called upon local gove rnment, business , labor, r e ligion and civil rights groups to create counterpart local coalitions to support and supplement this declaration of principles. We believe the very essence of success of the national Urban Coaliti on lies in the development of strong local coalitions. Past and pre sent efforts in Atlanta to build a great city and to meet the needs of urban growth have r esulted directly from an unstructured coalition of leade rship in all areas of community life. We b eli eve our chances for continued and expande d successes can b e made possible only through mobilization and full utili zation of all resources available to us. We , therefore, ple dge ours e lves to work together in an Atlanta Urban Coalition for the betterment of our community, and urge all groups and organizations to join us in our e fforts. �Page Three We further endorse the declaration of principles of the national Coalition and pledge to lend our talents and our labors to their fulfillment. Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of Atlanta Al Bows, Vice President Atlanta Chamber of Commerc e R obert J. Butler, President Atlanta Labor C o uncil Dr. John W. Letson Superintendent Atlanta Public Schools Dr. Harmon Moore, E xe cutive Director Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta, Inc. Erwin Stevens , President Citizens Central Advisory Council Economic Opportunity Atlanta , Inc. Reverend Samuel Williams C o- Chairman Summit Leadership Conferenc e �\, ATLANTA November 8, 1967 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Mayor City Hall At Ian ta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mayor Allen: In request to your letter of October 26, 1967 I am happy to report that the Executive Board of the Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta is pleased with the draft prepared by Mr . Dan Sweat and has no suggested changes o Pl ease feel fre e to call upon us if there is any way we might support more fully this outstanding piece of pioneer service to our community . Sincerely you rs, Exe cut ive Di rector H DM :msb OR. L . BEVEL JONE S PRESIDENT WELFARE 11: S OCIAL SERVICES 8 73-2108 GA . A SSO C . F O R PASTORAL CARE 523-4711 • EXT . 207 872 - 5678 DR . HARMON D . MOORE EXECUTIVE DIR E CTOR 872-5678 RAD I O AND TV 87~ - 567 8 �DRAFT STATEMENT OF ATLAN TA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE DURING THE LAST TWO DECADES ACCELERATED MIGRATION FROM THE FARMS, VASTLY INCREASED LIVING STANDARDS, THE AUTOMOBILE, AND OTHER SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS HAVE CHANGED OUR NATION FROM RURAL TO URBAN. THREE-FOURTH3OF AMERICA 1S 190 MILLION CITIZENS NOW LIVE IN CITIES. THIS RAPID URBANIZATION IS UNPARRELLED IN ANY NATION IN WORLD HISTORY. AND THE PROBLEMS FORCED UPON COMMUNITIES UNPREPARED FOR THIS DRAMATIC CHANGE IS LIKEWIS E UNMATCHED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL POP ULATIONS . FOR TEN YEARS OR MORE ECONOMISTS, SOCIOLOGISTS, POLITICAL SCIENTISTS , AND OTHERS HAVE URGED ACTION BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS TO PLAN AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS TO MEET THIS CHANGING ENVIRONMENT. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS - URBAN CITIES - POSSESSED NEITHER THE FISCAL N_OR HUMAN RESOURGES IN SUFFICIENT QUANITY AND QUALITY TO DO MORE THAN BRACE THE DIKE AGAINST THE ON-RUSHING . TIDE. �PAGE TWO .. STATE GOVERNMENT TURNED A DEAF EAR. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT E X PRESSED CONCERN, ESTABLISHED SOME PROMISING PROGRAMS AND FORMED A NEW DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO DEAL WITH CITY PROBLEMS. BUT THE CONGRESS FAILED TO REGISTER THE SENSE OF URGENCY OF THE URBAN CRISES, AND OBLIVIOUS TO THE IMPENDING DOOM ALLOCATED THE NATIONAL DOLLAR TO THE RACE FOR SPACE, AGRICULTURAL SUPPOR TS A ND DE FE NS E . THE RESULT IS NOW A TRAGIC CHAPTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY. RIO T S, RACIAL DIS T UR B ANCES, CIVIL DISOBE DIENCE IN CITY A FTER CITY THR O UGHO UT ALL PAR TS O F THE C OUNTRY HA VE CAST A LAS T I NG IMPRIN T OF INACTION AND I NDIFFER ENCE . AND I N EAC H TR O UBLED AREA THE ST O RY IS THE S AME : P OOR P E OPLE. L A CK OF JOB S K I LLS. I NADEQUATE PARKS , SCH O OLS . SER VICES. UNE M P L OYMENT. U NSOUND H OUSING. ABSENCE O F REALISTIC MUNICIPAL LACK OF MOTIVATION. LOSS O F FAITH AND OF HOPE . \ W HAT C AN BE D O NE? NOT HING S H OR T O F A TOTA L COMMITME N T O F ALL COMM UNITY RESOURCES AND A REASSESSMENT O F PRIOR I TIES BY OUR NATIONA L �PAGE THREE \l GOVERNMENT CAN PRODUCE RESULTS ON A SCALE LARGE ENOUGH TO SUFFICIENTLY CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITIES~ IT ISN'T ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE A CITY GOVERNMENT OF CONCERN AND COMPASSION FOR THE PROBLEMS OF THE POOR AND · DISADVANTAGED. THIS SAME CONCERN AND COMPASSION MUST BE FELT BY BUSINESS AND BY LABOR, BY EDUCATION AND BY OUR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND OUR CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERSHIP. THE NECESSITY FOR COOPERATION AND COORDINATION OF RESOURCES HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY LEADERS OF THESE SECTORS OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL. AS A RESULT AN URBAN COALITION HAS BEEN FORMED TO SEEK WAYS TO MOBILIZE THE UNUSED RESOURCES THROUGHOUT THE URBAN CITIES AND TO DO BATTLE WITH URBAN BLIGHT. THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION HAS CALLED UPON OUR BUSINESSMEN, OUR CHURCHMEN, OUR EDUCATORS AND OUR LABOR UNIONS TO JOIN WITH OUR MAYORS AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO· DEVEL.O P AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS WHICH WILL PROVIDE JOBS, DECENT HOUSING, EDUCATION AND A BETTER LIFE FOR THOSE TRAPPED IN THE CURRENT OF THE URBAN CRISES . �PAGE FOUR THE COALITION MET IN AN EMERGENCY CONVOCATION AND ADOPTED A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES OF GREAT PROMISE. IT CALLED UPON LOCAL GOVERNMENT, BUSINESS, LABOR, RELIGION AND CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS TO CREATE COUNTERPART LOCAL COALITIONS TO SUPPORT AND SUPPLEMENT THIS DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES. WE BELIEVE THE VERY ESSENCE OF SUCCESS OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION LIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRONG LOCAL COALITIONS. PAST AND PRESENT EFFORTS IN ATLANTA TO BUILD A GREAT CITY AND TO MEET THE NEEDS OF URBAN GROWTH HAVE RESULTED DIRECTLY FROM AN UNSTRUCTURED COALITION OF LEADERSHIP IN ALL AREAS OF COMMUNITY LIFE. WE BELIEVE OUR CHANCES FOR CONTINUED AND EXPANDED SUCCESSES CAN BE MADE POSSIBLE ONLY THROUGH MOBILIZ ATION AND FULL UTILIZATION OF ALL RESOURC ES AVAILABLE TO US. WE, THEREFORE, PLEDGE OURSELV ES TO WORK TOGETHER IN AN ATLANTA URBAN COALITION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF QJ R COMMUNITY, AND URGE ALL GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS TO JOIN US IN OUR EFFORTS. �PAGE FIVE . WE FURTHER ENDORSE THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES OF THE NATIONAL COALITION AND PLEDGE TO LEND OUR TALENTS AND OUR LABORS TO THEIR FULFILLMENT. IVAN ALLEN, JR. MAYOR OF ATLANTA AUGUSTUS H. STERNE, PRESIDENT ATLANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SAMUEL WILLIAMS CO-CHAIRMAN SUMMIT LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ROBERT J. BUTLER PRESIDENT ATLANTA LABOR COUNCIL REV. BEVEL JONES, PRESIDENT CHRISTIAN COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN ATLANTA, INC. DR. JOHN W. LETSON SUPERINTENDENT ATLANTA PUBLIC SCHOOLS ERWIN STEVENS, PRESIDENT CITIZENS CENTRAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ATLANTA, INC. \ �L DISCUSSION PAPER Chicago Confe rence Mobilizing Urban Coalitions Chicago Circle Center, University of Illinois October 17th , 1967 Introduction With any new national effort such as that being undertaken by The Urban Coalition, it may be expected that organizational structure me thods will continue ~o undergo change. For this reason The Urban Coalition is under- standably following a flexible course of action. The ideas s e t forth in this discussion paper may be expected to undergo fur t her change a s the y are subject to continuing review by both national and local leadership. The views of those interested in The Urban Coalition are invited and welcome. Goals Based upon the Statement of Principles, Goals and Commitment s adopted at the August Emergency Convocation, The Urban Coalition's program may be restated as follows: 1. To encourage the Congress to respond affirmativ ely t o the n e eds of the cities. 2. To encourage public concern with the needs of the c it ies? 3. To stimulate greater private initiative and effort in deali~g with the problems of the cities, including both inv e s t me n t and technical assistance. \ 4. To stimulate greater support for and interest in ongoing effo r ts to meet such needs as : -- job development and manpower training p r og rams --open housing efforts -- urb an r enewa l and r econstr uctio n . �Page·Two --anti-poverty programs --programs to overcome educational disparitieso \I Methods Among the methods that may be followed by The Urban Coalition are the following: 1. Be supportive, not operational.· It is expected that The Urban Coalition will support ongoing efforts at both the local and national levels. It may stimulate new undertakings. It will cooperate with sue~ majo~ new efforts as the $1 billion investment allocation of the insurance industry f ·o r center city development. 2. It will give support to local urban coalitions. Stimulate interest in successful examples of action. Through its Task Forces The Urban Coalition will identify, work with, and publicize successful efforts to expand employment, extend lower income housing and equal housing opportunities, new educational programs and the like. Task Forces hope to serve as catalysts and convenors. The They will serve as clearinghouses of local action. 3. Work with the mass media. Through its Task Force on Communications and Public Support and through counterpart committees at the local level , it is hoped that the mass media can te encouraged to focus greater attention on the ne e ds of cities . Broad public understanding of the need for greater resources, of the complex ities of the problems involved and the n eed for urgent action are essential if the goals of The Urb a n Coalition are to be achieved. �Page·Three 4. To coordinate a national legislative campaign. The Urban Coalition has called upon Congress for action across a broad front to meet the urban ~ crisis. Interpreting and emphasizing the need for national action is as ~uch a local obligation as it is a commitment of the National Steering Committee. Discussions with members of Congress is as much a hometown affair as are appearances before Congressional coITLmittees. Structures The National Steering Committee at the present time consists of thirty-six members. They are broadly representative of business, labor, local govern- ment, religion, civil rights and education. It is expected that two addit- ional members of the Steering Committee will be selected by the Council of Urban Coalitions. As local coalitions are formed they will be invited to designate two representatives to serve on the Council and through this Council provide the National Steering Committee with advice and guidance on matters of national concern. The National Steering Comrni~tee has established seven Task Forces and it is expected that local coalitions will develop counterpart units. guidelines. These are identified and discussed in the attach ed Under consideration for future development is the establishment of a Council of Urban Economic Advisors to assist the Coalition in analyzing the impact of Federal eco~omic, fisc~l, tax, and budgetary policies of cities . A second Council of University Urban Studies Centers is being contemplated as a means of channeling the best research ideas concerning urban development into the discussions and plans of both the National Steering Committee and �Page Four and local coalitions. Further additions and modifications in the organization and structure of The Urban Coalition may be expected as experience is gained. "' * * � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document STATEMENT ATLANTA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE OCTOBER 29, 1967 During the last two decades accelerated migration from the farms, vastly increased living standards, the automobile, and other social and economic factors have changed our nation from rural to urban. Three-fourths of America's 200 million citizens now live in cities. This rapid urbanization is unparrelled in any nation in world history. And the problems forced upon communities unprepared for this dramatic change is likewise unmatched in the development of national populations, For ten years or more economists, sociologists, political scientists, and others have urged action by local, state and federal governments to plan and implement programs to meet this changing environment. In urban areas local governments possessed neither the fiscal nor human resources in sufficient quanity and quality to do more than brace the dike against the on-rushing tide. State government turned a deaf ear. The federal government expressed concern, established some promising programs and formed a new Department of Housing and Urban Development to deal with city problems. But the Congress in too many instances failed to register the sense of urgency the urban crises demand, with an apparent unawareness of the critical dimensions of the problem, the nation's resources have been allocated to the race for space, agricultural supports and defense - but little to the needs of the cities. The result is now a tragic chapter in American history. Riots, racial disturbances, civil disobedience in city after city throughout all parts of the country have cast a lasting imprint of inaction and indifference, And in each troubled area the story is the same: Poor people. Lack of job skills. Unemployment. Unsound housing. Inadequate parks, schools. Absense of realistic municipal services, Lack of motivation. Loss of faith and of hope. What can be done? Nothing short of a total commitment of all community resources and a reassessment of priorities by our national government can produce results Page Two on a scale large enough to sufficiently change the direction of our cities. It isn't enough that we have a city government of concern and compassion for the problems of the poor and disadvantaged. This same concern and compassion must be felt by business and by labor, by education and by our religious institutions and our civil rights leadership. The necessity for cooperation and coordination of resources has been recognized by leaders of these sectors of our environment at the national level. As a result an Urban Coalition has been formed to seek ways to mobilize the unused resources throughout the urban areas of the nation and to do battle with urban blight. The Steering Committee of the national Urban Coalition has called upon our businessmen, our churchmen, our educators and our labor unions to join with our mayors and public officials to develop and implement programs which will provide jobs, decent housing, education and a better life for those trapped in the current of the urban crises. The Coalition met in an emergency convocation and adopted a statement of principles of great promise, It called upon local government, business, labor, religion and civil rights groups to create counterpart local coalitions to support and supplement this declaration of principles. We believe the very essence of success of the national Urban Coalition lies in the development of strong local coalitions, Past and present efforts in Atlanta to build a great city and to meet the needs of urban growth have resulted directly from an unstructured coalition of leadership in all areas of community life. We believe our chances for continued and expanded successes can be made possible only through mobilization and full utilization of all resources available to us. We, therefore, pledge ourselves to work together in an Atlanta Urban Coalition for the betterment of our community, and urge all groups and organizations to join us in our efforts. Page Three We further endorse the declaration of principles of the national Coalition and pledge to lend our talents and our labors to their fulfillment. Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor of Atlanta Al Bows, Vice President Atlanta Chamber of Commerce Robert J. Butler, President Atlanta Labor Council Dr. John W. Letson Superintendent Atlanta Public Schools Dr. Harmon Moore, Executive Director Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta, Inc. Erwin Stevens, President Citizens Central Advisory Council Economic Opportunity Atlanta, Inc. Reverend Samuel Williams Co-Chairman Summit Leadership Conference CHRISTIAN COUNCIL, “lh |ROPOUITAN ATLANTA oe tall /’ / Ne Se ee 53 SIXTH STREETS N"E., ATLANTAs"GEORGIA 39308, PHONE 872-5678 ae —_ November 8, 1967 The Honorable Ivan Allen, Mayor City Hall Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mayor Allen: In request to your letter of October 26, 1967 | am happy to report that the Executive Board of the Christian Council of Metropolitan Atlanta is pleased with the draft prepared by Mr. Dan Sweat and has no suggested changes. Please feel free to call upon us if there is any way we might support more fully this outstanding piece of pioneer service to our community. Sincerely yours, Sis drmon eee Ve a ns Director HDM:msb Offering the 31d Dimension to 5 Growing Counties DR. L. BEVEL JONES WELFARE & SOCIAL SERVICES GA. ASSOC. FOR PASTORAL CARE DR. HARMON D. MOORE PRESIDENT 873-2108 523-4711 - EXT. 207 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 872-5678 872-5678 RADIO AND TV 872-5678 DRAFT STATEMENT OF ATLANTA URBAN COALITION STEERING COMMITTEE DURING THE LAST TWO DECADES ACCELERATED MIGRATION FROM THE FARMS, VASTLY INCREASED LIVING STANDARDS, THE AUTOMOBILE, AND OTHER SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS HAVE CHANGED OUR NATION FROM RURAL TO URBAN, THREE-FOURTHSOF AMERICA'S 190 MILLION CITIZENS NOW LIVE IN CITIES, THIS RAPID URBANIZATION IS UNPARRELLED IN ANY NATION IN WORLD HISTORY. AND THE PROBLEMS FORCED UPON COMMUNITIES UNPREPARED FOR THIS DRAMATIC CHANGE IS LIKEWISE UNMATCHED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL POPULATIONS, FOR TEN YEARS OR MORE ECONOMISTS, SOCIOLOGISTS, POLITICAL SCIENTISTS, AND OTHERS HAVE URGED ACTION BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS TO PLAN AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS TO MEET THIS CHANGING ENVIRONMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS - URBAN CITIES - POSSESSED NEITHER THE FISCAL NOR HUMAN RESOURGES IN SUFFICIENT QUANITY AND QUALITY TO DO MORE THAN BRACE THE DIKE AGAINST THE ON-RUSHING. TIDE, PAGE TWO ® STATE GOVERNMENT TURNED A DEAF EAR, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EXPRESSED CONCERN, ESTABLISHED SOME PROMISING PROGRAMS AND FORMED A NEW DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO DEAL WITH CITY PROBLEMS, BUT THE CONGRESS FAILED TO REGISTER THE SENSE OF URGENCY OF THE URBAN CRISES, AND OBLIVIOUS TO THE IMPENDING DOOM ALLOCATED THE NATIONAL DOLLAR TO THE RACE FOR SPACE, AGRICULTURAL SUPPORTS AND DEFENSE, THE RESULT IS NOW A TRAGIC CHAPTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY, RIOTS, RACIAL DISTURBANCES, CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN CITY AFTER CITY THROUGHOUT ALL PARTS OF THE COUNTRY HAVE CAST A LASTING IMPRINT OF INACTION AND INDIFFERENCE, AND IN EACH TROUBLED AREA THE STORY IS THE SAME: POOR PEOPLE, LACK OF JOB SKILLS, UNEMPLOYMENT, UNSOUND HOUSING, INADEQUATE PARKS, SCHOOLS, ABSENCE OF REALISTIC MUNICIPAL SERVICES, LACK OF MOTIVATION, LOSS OF FAITH AND OF HOPE, ‘ WHAT CAN BE DONE? NOTHING SHORT OF A TOTAL COMMITMENT OF ALL COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND A REASSESSMENT OF PRIORITIES BY OUR NATIONAL PAGE THREE GOVERNMENT CAN PRODUCE RESULTS ON A SCALE LARGE ENOUGH TO SUFFICIENTLY CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF OUR CITIES, IT ISN'T ENOUGH THAT WE HAVE A CITY GOVERNMENT OF CONCERN AND COMPASSION FOR THE PROBLEMS OF THE POOR AND “DISADVANTAGED, THIS SAME CONCERN AND COMPASSION MUST BE FELT BY BUSINESS AND BY LABOR, BY EDUCATION AND BY OUR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND OUR CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERSHIP, .THE NECESSITY FOR COOPERATION AND COORDINATION OF RESOURCES HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY LEADERS OF THESE SECTORS OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, AS A RESULT AN URBAN COALITION HAS BEEN FORMED TO SEEK WAYS TO MOBILIZE THE UNUSED RESOURCES THROUGHOUT THE URBAN CITIES AND TO DO BATTLE WITH URBAN BLIGHT. THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION HAS CALLED UPON OUR BUSINESSMEN, OUR CHURCHMEN, OUR EDUCATORS AND OUR LABOR UNIONS TO JOIN WITH OUR MAYORS AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS TO: DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS WHICH WILL PROVIDE JOBS, DECENT HOUSING, EDUCATION AND A BETTER LIFE FOR THOSE TRAPPED IN THE CURRENT OF THE URBAN CRISES, PAGE FOUR THE COALITION MET IN AN EMERGENCY CONVOCATION AND ADOPTED A STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES OF GREAT PROMISE, IT CALLED UPON LOCAL GOVERNMENT, BUSINESS, LABOR, RELIGION AND CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS TO CREATE COUNTERPART LOCAL COALITIONS TOSUPPORT AND SUPPLEMENT THIS DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES, WE BELIEVE THE VERY ESSENCE OF SUCCESS OF THE NATIONAL URBAN COALITION LIES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF STRONG LOCAL COALITIONS, PAST AND PRESENT EFFORTS IN ATLANTA TO BUILD A GREAT CITY AND TO MEET THE NEEDS OF URBAN GROWTH HAVE RESULTED DIRECTLY FROM AN UNSTRUCTURED COALITION OF LEADERSHIP IN ALL AREAS OF COMMUNITY LIFE, WE BELIEVE OUR CHANCES FOR CONTINUED AND EXPANDED SUCCESSES CAN BE MADE POSSIBLE ONLY THROUGH MOBILIZATION AND FULL UTILIZATION OF ALL RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO US, WE, THEREFORE, PLEDGE OURSELVES TO WORK TOGETHER ‘ IN AN ATLANTA URBAN COALITION FOR THE BETTERMENT OF GIR COMMUNITY, AND URGE ALL GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS TO JOIN US IN OUR EFFORTS, PAGE FIVE . WE FURTHER ENDORSE THE DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES OF THE NATIONAL COALITION AND PLEDGE TO LEND OUR TALENTS AND OUR LABORS TO THEIR FULFILLMENT, IVAN ALLEN, JR. MAYOR OF ATLANTA AUGUSTUS H, STERNE, PRESIDENT ATLANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE SAMUEL WILLIAMS CO-CHAIRMAN SUMMIT LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ROBERT J. BUTLER PRESIDENT ATLANTA LABOR COUNCIL REV. BEVEL JONES, PRESIDENT CHRISTIAN COUNCIL OF METROPOLITAN ATLANTA, INC, DR, JOHN W, LETSON SUPERINTENDENT ATLANTA PUBLIC SCHOOLS ERWIN STEVENS, PRESIDENT CITIZENS CENTRAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ATLANTA, INC, ‘ r DISCUSSION PAPER Chicago Conference Mobilizing Urban Coalitions Chicago Circle Center, University of Illinois October 17th, 1967 Introduction With any new national effort such as that being undertaken by The Urban Coalition, it may be expected that organizational structure methods will continue to undergo change. For this reason The Urban Coalition is under- standably following a flexible course of action. The ideas set forth in this Metaiées paper may be expected to undergo further change as they are subject to continuing review by both national and local leadership. The views of those interested in The Urban Coalition are invited and welcome. Goals Based upon the Statement of Principles, Goals and Commitments adopted at the August Emergency Convocation, The Urban Coalition's program may be restated as follows: 1. To encourage the Congress to respond affirmatively to the needs of the cities. 2. To encourage public concern with the needs of the cities, 3. To stimulate greater private initiative and effort in dealing with the problems of the cities, including both investment and technical assistance, ‘ ‘ 4. To stimulate greater support for and interest in ongcing efforts to meet such needs as: --job development and manpower training programs --open housing efforts --urban renewal and reconstruction \ Page :-Two --anti-poverty programs --programs to overcome educational disparities. Methods Among the methods that may be followed by The Urban Coalition are the following: 1. Be supportive, not operational. It is expected that The Urban Coalition will support ongoing efforts at both the local and national levels. It may stimulate new undertakings. It will cooperate with such major new . efforts as the $1 billion investment allocation of the insurance industry for center city development. It will give support to local urban coalitions. 2a Stimulate interest in successful examples of action. Through its Task Forces The Urban Coalition will identify, work with, and publicize successful efforts to expand employment, extend lower income housing and equal housing opportunities, new educational programs and the like. The Task Forces hope to serve as catalysts and convenors. They will serve as clearinghouses of local action. BY Work with the mass media. Through its Task Force on Communications and Public Support and through counterpart committees at the local level, it is hoped that the mass media can be encouraged to focus greater attention on the needs of cities. Broad public understanding of the need for greater resources, of the complexities of the problems involved and the need for urgent action are essential if the goals of The Urban Coalition are to be achieved. Page: Three p 4, To coordinate a national legislative campaign. The Urban Coalition has called upon Congress for action across a broad front to meet the urban crisis. Interpreting and emphasizing the need for national action is as much a local obligation as it is a commitment of the National Steering Committee. Discussions with members of Congress is as much a hometown affair as are appearances before Congressional committees. Structures The National Steering Committee at the present time consists of thirty-six members. They are broadly representative of business, labor, local govern- ment, religion, civil rights and education. It is expected that two addit- ional members of the Steering Committee will be selected by the Council of Urban Coalitions. As local coalitions are formed they will be invited to designate two representatives to serve on the Council and through this Council provide the National Steering Committee with advice and guidance on matters of national concern. The Gatioral Steering Committee has established seven Task Forces and it is expected that local coalitions will develop counterpart units. These are identified and discussed in the attached guidelines. Under consideration for future development is the establishment of a Council of Urban Economic Advisors to se sieu the Coalition in analyzing the impact of Federal auonomié, fiscal, tax, and budgetary policies of cities. A second Council of University Urban Studies Centers is being contemplated as a means of channeling the best research ideas concerning urban development into the discussions and plans of both the National Steering Committee and Page Four and local coalitions. Further additions and modifications in the organization and structure of The Urban Coalition may be expected as experience is gained.  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 17, Complete Folder Box 14 Box 14 Folder 17 Folder topic: Urban Coalition statement of local coalition | 1967 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/c4658c5b330d4aed23e160723e74b9af.pdf 9fcfdc1298bfc30f3f34719dd829289f Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human r elations could do greater damage than the loss of mater ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in l aw and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The r epor t is a good point of r eference and basis for discussion and action. We are convinced that n either studies nor r e solutions nor good intentions alone will suffi ce. We b elieve that all of the r eligious l eaders of metropolitan Atl anta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst -which create despair , contribut e t o human degradation and fuel violence. We, ther efore, c ommit ou rselve s t o assist in the t ask of t ransfor ming our urban area that, in s ofar a s our abilities and resources permit , we sh all endeavor t o respond to this urban cri si s and help create a city where there i s personal safet y for all p ers ons and pr operty and whe r e there is re a s on for hope and opportunity for individu al growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, t here are many th ings which we believe mu st be done. There must be a pooling of all resources - a c oordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens , by l eaders in religion and education, in business and the professions, in industry and labor , in government, and in all walks of life to meet our citizens needs in the following areas: Police Protection Every citizen is entitled to be secure in his person and property and to fair treatment by law enforcement officials; and, in turn, e¥)Ch citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. �Education Every citizen must have the opportunity for equal educational opportunity - lmowledge of one I s rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the es,sentials to a society of law and order and human progress. Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must be an end to discrimination against qualified per son s ba sed on sex , race, age or handicap. As we see it, we mu st create new attitudes even more than we need to create new programs, but both are needed! To establish new attitudes we must begin with ourselves , our families, our churche s and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern. 2. P reach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 3. Adopt and carr y out special projects which contribute t o the b etterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas , and encourage such things a s positive support for day care center s, l ow cost hou sing corporations, health clinics, and t raining employment programs. In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action, we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlant a I s political, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Atlanta urban �area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment. We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: 1. To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area for coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. 2. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. 3. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. 4. And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee de aling with these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our stateme nt of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to t r ansform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on This Day, Tue sday 2nd of April , 1968 I � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do greater damage than the loss of mater - ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The report is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action, We are convinced that neither studies nor resolutions nor good intentions alone will suffice. We believe that all of the religious leaders of metropolitan Atlanta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst which create despair, con- tribute to human degradation and fuel violence, We, therefore, commit ourselves to assist in the task of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilities and resources permit, we shall endeavor to respond to this urban crisis and help create a city where there is personal safety for all per- sons and property and where there is reason for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe must be done. There must be a pooling of all resources — a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leaders in religion and education, in business and the professions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life — to meet our citizens needs in the following areas: Police Protection § Every citizen is entitled to be secure in his person and property and to fair treat- ment by law enforcement officials; and, in turn, each citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. Education. Every citizen must have the oppor- tunity for equal educational oppor- tunity - Inowledge of one's rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the essentials to a society of law and order and human progress, Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must be an end to discrimination against qualified persons based on sex, race, age or handicap. As we see it, we must create new attitudes even more than we need to create new programs, but both are needed! To establish new attitudes we must begin with ourselves, our families, our churches and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern, 2. Preach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 3. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such things as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporations, health clinics, and training employment programs, In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action, we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlanta's political, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve ih the Atlanta urban  area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment, We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: b To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area for coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects, And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealing with these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our. statement of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to transform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on This Day, Tuesday 2nd of_April, 1968  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 15, Document 10 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 15 Folder topic: Clergymen's conference | 1968 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/a38b296ef45fcd1f00d67d76b5cebaec.pdf 38b411ccf1f62766d346f3da8d353afb Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting \riolence ! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do greater damage than the loss of mater ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission , we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The report is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action. We are convinced that neither studies nor resolutions nor good intentions alone will suffice. We believe that all of the r eligious leaders of metropolitan Atlanta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst which create de spair, contribute to human degradation and fuel violence. · We, therefore, commit ourselves to assist in the task of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilities and resources permit, we shall endeavor to-respond to this urban crisis and help create a city where there is personal safety for all persons and property and where there is reason for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe must be done. There must be a pooling of all resources - a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leaders in religion and education, in business and the pr ofessions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life to meet our citi zens needs in the following areas: Police Protection Every citizen is entitled to be secu r e in his person and propert y and to fair treat- ment by l aw enforcement offic ials; and, in turn, e ach citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperat e with police officials . �Education Every citizen must have the opportunity for equal educational opportunity - knowledge of one I s rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the ess~ntials to a society of law and order and human progress. Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must be an end to discrimination against qualified persons based on sex , race, age or handicap. As we see it, we mu st create new attitudes even m ore than we need to cr eate new programs, but both are needed! To est ablish new attitudes we must begin with ours el ves, our families, our chur ches and synagogues. Therefore , we commit ourselves to an effort to : 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern. 2. P r each and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas . 3. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such things as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporations, health clinics, and training employment programs. In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action, we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlanta I s politic 81, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Atlanta urban �area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment". We , by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: 1. To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area for coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. 2. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available · resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. 3. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. 4. And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealing with these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our st ateme nt of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to t r ansform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on This Day, Tuesday l 2nd of Ap ril , 19 68 � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do greater damage than the loss of mater - ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The report is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action. We are convinced that neither studies nor resolutions nor good intentions alone will suffice. We believe that all of the religious leaders of metropolitan Atlanta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst which create despair, con- tribute to human degradation and fuel violence, We, therefore, commit ourselves to assist in the task of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilities and resources permit, we shall endeavor to respond to this urban crisis and help create a city where there is personal safety for all per- sons and property and where there is reason for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe must be done. There must be a pooling of all resources — a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leaders in religion and education, in business and the professions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life = to meet our citizens needs in the following areas: Police Protection -~ Every citizen is entitled to be secure in his person and property and to fair treat- ment by law enforcement officials; and, in turn, each citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. Education. Every citizen must have the oppor- tunity for equal educational oppor- tunity - knowledge of one's rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the essentials to a society of law and order and human progress. Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must be an end to discrimination against qualified persons based on sex, race, age or handicap. As we see it, we must create new attitudes even more than we need to create new programs, but both are needed! To establish new attitudes we must begin with ourselves, our families, our churches and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1, Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern, 2. Preach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 8. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such things as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporations, health clinics, and training employment programs, In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action, we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlanta's political, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Atlanta urban area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment, We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: 1. To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area fér coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. 2. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. 3. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. 4, And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealing with these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our statement of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to transform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on This Day, Tuesday 2nd of_April, 1968  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 15, Document 9 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 15 Folder topic: Clergymen's conference | 1968 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/abd69e1501482e1c10be570dfe3c0fbf.pdf a080e06ec140e6036bf405372c996e47 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do gre ater damage than the loss of mater ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently rel eased Report of the Nati onal Advis ory Comm i s sion on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestion s for action which m erit consider ation. The repor t is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action. We are convince d that neither studies nor resolutions nor good int entions alone will suffice . We b elieve that all of the r eligious l eaders of met r op olitan Atlanta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst which create despair, con tribute to human degradati on and fuel violence . We, therefore , commit oursel ves to assist in the task of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilitie s and resources permit , we shall endeavor -to-respond to this urban crisis and help create a city where there is personal safety for all persons and pr operty and whe r e there is reason for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe mu st be done. There must be a pooling of all resources - a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leader s in religion and education, in busine ss and the pr ofessions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life to meet our c itizen s needs in the following areas: Police Protection Ever y citizen is entitled t o b e secure in his person and property and t o fair t reatment by l aw enforcement officials; and, in turn, eaeh citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. �Education Every citizen must have the opportunity for equal educational opportunity - lmowledge of one I s rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the,, essentials to a society of law and order and human progress. Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he c an afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other job s in our changing technology, and the r e must be an end to discrimination again st qualified per sons based on sex , race, age or handic ap. As we see it, we mu st cre ate new attitudes even m ore than we need t o create new programs , but both are needed! To e stablish new attitude s we must begin with ourselves, our families , our churches and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern. 2. Preach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 3. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such things as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporation s, health clinics, and training emp l oyme nt pr ogr ams. In order to devel op wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our pl an of action, we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, J r. to issue invitations to Atlanta' s political, economic and religious leaders , and t o citizens repres entative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Atlanta urban �area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment. We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: 1. To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area for coordinated effort in meeting the needs . of every individual. 2. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. 3. To support a call for broader mini st erial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. 4. And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealin g with these cr itical areas. Finally , we invite all c iti zens to join with us in a com mit ment t o ou.r. statement of pur pose and our plan of act ion, and we a sk the help of Alm i ghty God in this endeavor to tran sform and r edeem our entire ur ban are a. Signed on This Day, Tuesday 2nd of April, 1968 I � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do greater damage than the loss of mater - ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The report is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action, We are convinced that neither studies nor resolutions nor good intentions alone will suffice. We believe that all of the religious leaders of metropolitan Atlanta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst which create despair, con- tribute to human degradation and fuel violence. We, therefore, commit ourselves to assist in the task of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilities and resources permit, we shall endeavor to respond to this urban crisis and help create a city where there is personal safety for all per- sons and property and where there is reason for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe must be done. There must be a pooling of all resources — a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leaders in religion and education, in business and the professions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life — to meet our citizens needs in the following areas: Police Protection § Every citizen is entitled to be secure in his person and property and to fair treat- ment by law enforcement officials; and, in turn, each citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. Education. Every citizen must have the oppor- tunity for equal educational oppor- tunity - knowledge of one's rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the essentials to a society of law and order and human progress, Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must . be an end to discrimination against qualified persons based on sex, race, age or handicap. As we see it, we must create new attitudes even more than we need to create new programs, but both are needed! To establish new attitudes we must begin with ourselves, our families, our churches and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern, 2. Preach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 3. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such things as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporations, health clinies, and training employment programs, In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action 3 we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlanta's political, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Atlanta urban area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment, We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: 1. To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area for coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. 2. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. 3. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. 4. And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealing with these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our. statement of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to transform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on This Day, Tuesday 2nd of _ April, 1968  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 15, Document 8 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 15 Folder topic: Clergymen's conference | 1968 https://ivanallen.iac.gatech.edu/mayoral-records/traditional/files/original/b18789fdcc29aaf517450f07af541f1d.pdf 8ddaa1e4903235932dc4efbf5c380d79 Scripto Transcription A written representation of a document. A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do gre ater damage than the loss of mater ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commis sion on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The report is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action. We are convinced that neither studies nor resolutions nor good intentions alone will suffice. We believe that all of the religious leaders of metropolit an Atlanta should act now t o bring an end to conditions in our midst which c reat e despair , cont ribute to human degradation and fuel violence . We, therefore, com mit our selves to assist in the t a sk of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilities and r esour c es permit, we shall endeavor t o re spond to this urban cr i sis and h elp create a city where there is p ersonal safety for all pers ons and property and where there i s re a s on for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe must be done. There must be a pooling of all resources - a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leaders in religion and education, in business and the professions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life to meet our citizens needs in the following areas: Police Protection Every citizen is entitled to be secure in his person and property and to fair treatm ent by law enforcement official s ; and, in turn, ench citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. �Education Every citizen must have the opportunity for equal educational opportunity - Imowledge of one's rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the essentials to a society of law and order and human progress. Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must be an end to discrimination against qualified persons based on sex, race, age or handicap. As we see it, we must create new attitudes even more than we need to create new programs, but both are needed! To establish new attitudes we must begin with ourselves, our families, our churches and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern. 2. Preach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 3. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such tb.ings as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporations, health clinics, and training employment programs. In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action, we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlanta's political, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Atlanta urban �area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment. We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: 1. To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area for coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. 2. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. 3. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. 4. And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealing with ·these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our . stateme nt of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to t r ansform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on Thi s Day, Tue sday 2nd of Ap ril , 1968 ' � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document A STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND A PLAN OF ACTION FOR ATLANTANS CONCERNED ABOUT RIOTS, THEIR CAUSES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES We, the undersigned Atlantans, are deeply concerned about the riots which have occurred in our nation with increasing frequency and with mounting violence! We are concerned about the consequences of continued rioting and believe that the deterioration of human relations could do greater damage than the loss of mater - ial things if we fail to bring an end to the riots and the conditions which spawn them. We commend to every thoughtful citizen who believes in law and order and in human progress the recently released Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. Whether one would agree absolutely with its methodology or the conclusions of the commission, we believe the report contains food for thought and suggestions for action which merit consideration. The report is a good point of reference and basis for discussion and action. We are convinced that neither studies nor resolutions nor good intentions alone will suffice. We believe that all of the religious leaders of metropolitan Atlanta should act now to bring an end to conditions in our midst which create despair, con- tribute to human degradation and fuel violence, We, therefore, commit ourselves to assist in the task of transforming our urban area that, insofar as our abilities and resources permit, we shall endeavor to respond to this urban crisis and help create a city where there is personal safety for all per- sons and property and where there is reason for hope and opportunity for individual growth and dignity for every citizen. To do this, there are many things which we believe must be done. There must be a pooling of all resources — a coordinated effort by rich and poor, by affluent and depressed citizens, by leaders in religion and education, in business and the professions, in industry and labor, in government, and in all walks of life — to meet our citizens needs in the following areas: Police Protection § Every citizen is entitled to be secure in his person and property and to fair treat- ment by law enforcement officials; and, in turn, each citizen has a duty to obey the law and support and cooperate with police officials. - / eaneabion > Every citizen must have the aeons tunity for equal educational oppor- tunity - knowledge of one's rights and duties, education for employment, and for living - the essentials to a society of law and order and human progress, Housing Every citizen must have access to decent housing. This goal adopted long ago has not been achieved, and there is yet to be obtained a climate in which every person will have equal opportunity for housing that he can afford. Employment There must be training for new jobs and retaining for other jobs in our changing technology, and there must be an end to discrimination against qualified persons based on sex, race, age or handicap. As we see it, we must create new attitudes even more than we need to create new programs, but both are needed! To establish new attitudes we must begin with ourselves, our families, our churches and synagogues. Therefore, we commit ourselves to an effort to: 1. Carry on mutual interchanges in our churches with ministers and layman of all races discussing these critical areas of concern, 2. Preach and give courses within our own churches dealing with these areas. 8. Adopt and carry out special projects which contribute to the betterment of conditions in each of the foregoing areas, and encourage such things as positive support for day care centers, low cost housing corporations, health clinics, and training employment programs, In order to develop wide acceptance of our stated purpose and our plan of action we respectfully urge Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. to issue invitations to Atlanta's political, economic and religious leaders, and to citizens representative of all areas of our urban community to attend a meeting sponsored by the undersigned with the Mayor serving as host. The purpose of the meeting will be to achieve in the Aflanta urban area an agreement on our stated purpose, and to arrange for a coordinated use of all possible resources. We seek a true and new commitment and to develop a simple connectional structure to carry out this commitment, We, by signing this resolution, do declare ourselves to be an inter-faith . committee, and authorize our designated representatives to visit the Mayor of the City of Atlanta and other local leaders of this area for the following purposes: Le To offer the full support of ourselves as representatives of the religious community of the urban area fér coordinated effort in meeting the needs of every individual. To fund a luncheon for leaders and representatives of both races at which time we could hear from Mayor Allen his suggestions as to how all available resources might be coordinated to achieve our objectives. To support a call for broader ministerial and lay leadership in subsequent meetings and projects. And to offer ourselves for service on any Council or Committee dealing with these critical areas. Finally, we invite all citizens to join with us in a commitment to our. statement of purpose and our plan of action, and we ask the help of Almighty God in this endeavor to transform and redeem our entire urban area. Signed on This Day, Tuesday 2nd of April, 1968  Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Box 14, Folder 15, Document 7 Box 14 Box 14 Folder 15 Folder topic: Clergymen's conference | 1968