« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
sistance to State and local govermental bodies in developing solutions to such problems. Such assistance shall include whenever appropriate the dissemination to interested bodies of the results of the studies undertaken pursuant to this section.
(b) The Secretary shall from time to time make such recommendations to the Congress, as a result of the studies to be undertaken under this section and after consultation with appropriate representatives of State and local governments, as he shall determine to be appropriate.
(c) As used in this section the term “State" includes the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFERS
SEC. 4. The President shall submit to the Congress reorganization plans providing for the transfer of such functions from officers or agencies of the executive branch of the Government to the Secretary as the President deems appropriate to assist in accomplishing the purposes of this Act.
COMPENSATION OF PRINCIPAL OFFICERS
SEC. 5. The Secretary, Under Secretary, and Assistant Secretaries shall receive compensation at the rates prescribed for these positions in the other executive departments.
Sec. 6. The Secretary shall cause a seal of office to be made for the Department, of such design as the President shall approve, and judicial notice shall be taken thereof.
DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
SEC. 7. The Secretary may from time to time make such provisions as he deems appropriate authorizing the performance of any of the functions of the Secretary by any other officer, or by any agency employee, of the Department.
SEC. 8. Section 158 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, as amended (5 U.S.C. 1), is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"Eleventh: The Department of Urbiculture."
Sec. 9. The Secretary shall cause to be prepared, published, and transmitted to the Congress an annual report of the activities and accomplishments of the Department.
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
July 17, 1959. Staff Memorandum 86-1-41 Subject: S. 1431 (Clark) : To provide for the establishment of a Commission on
Metropolitan Problems. At the last executive session of the Committee on Government Operations, held on June 18, 1959, S. 1431 was referred to the Subcommittee on Reorganization and International Organizations for consideration. Senator Humphrey, chairman of the subcommittee, has announced that hearings would be held on Friday morning, July 24, 1959, at 10 a.m. in room 3302, New Senate Office Building (Congressional Record, July 9, 1959, p. 11874).
The following is submitted to members of the committee for their information in connection with the hearings:
This bill provides for the establishment of a bipartisan Commission on Metropolitan Problems which would be composed of 18 members, of which 6 would be appointed from the Senate by the President of the Senate, 6 from the House of Representatives by the Speaker of the House (4 from the majority and two from the minority in each case), and 6 would be appointed by the President of the United States to include two from the heads of agencies of the executive branch; 2 Governors, one from each party; and 2 mayors, one from each party. Duties of the Commission
The Commission would be authorized to make a full and complete investigation and study of Federal policies and programs relating to the needs and probe lems of the Nation's metropolitan areas for the purpose of determining
(1) The present and prospective needs of metropolitan areas for public services, planning, highways, transportation, water resources, elimination of air and water pollution, health and welfare services, schools, recreational facilities, urban renewal and housing, ports, airports, and prevention of crime and delinquency;
:(2) capabilities of local governments to meet such needs;
(3) the extent to which the Federal Government is assisting metropolitan areas in meeting such needs;
(4) means for improved coordination of Federal, State, and local policies and programs that affect metropolitan areas; and
(5) such other matters as may be of assistance in solving metropolitan problems and promoting the social and economic well-being of the Nation's
metropolitan areas. The Commission would be required to submit a report to the President and to the Congress on or before February 1, 1961, and shall cease to exist 6 months after submission of its final report and recommendations.
Other provisions of the bill include a definition of the powers of the Commission, appropriation authorization, compensation and expenses of Commissioners and employees, as is usually incorporated in such acts creating study commissions.
NEED FOR STUDY OF METROPOLITAN PROBLEMS Senator Clark, sponsor of the bill, made the following statement in explanation of the purpose and need for such legislation, in the Senate on March 16, 1959 :
"Sixty percent of all Americans live in metropolitan areas. That means more than 100 million individuals.
"If Census Bureau forecasts are correct, the population of this country, now 175 million, will double within the lifetime of most people now living. There is every reason to believe that the percentage of those living in metropolitan areas will increase. Indeed, it is likely that by the year 2000 more than 300 million Americans will be living in such areas.
“Already our cities and suburbs are expanding into the countryside at a rapid rate. Already they are merging with one another. Already one vast metropolitan area stretches along the Atlantic seaboard, embracing parts of 11 States and the District of Columbia.
"Mr. President, 2 years ago the New York Times published an excellent series of articles analyzing the problems created by the explosive growth of metropolitan areas. In that series it listed 24 standard metropolitan areas which in reality constitute a single metropolis reaching from Massachusetts to Virginia and including 27 million people. * * *
"Since 1950 there has been an extraordinary-indeed, an almost explosive additional growth in the suburban regions which are a part of these urban and metropolitan areas, and, consequently, during the years since the 1950 census the populations of those urban regions have grown by an additional 10 million.
"Already this explosive growth has created social, economic, and political problems which are getting out of hand. As President Eisenhower said in 1957 at Williamsburg, Va., “the needs of our cities are glaringly evident. Unless action is prompt and effective, urban problems will soon almost defy solution."
“Those, Mr. President, are words of truth; indeed, if anything, they are conservative. I should like to stress the need for prompt and effective action, as advocated by the President of the United States, before these problems do get so definitely out of hand that their successful solution may become impossible.
“Let us consider the major metropolitan problems.
"Perhaps the most serious is transportation. The question is, How can people be moved cheaply and quickly into, out of, and around our metropolitan areas? Millions of people must travel daily from their homes to their places of employment and back, and must move around their home areas for dozens of other proper purposes. While mass transit and suburban rail traffic wither on the vine, we are committed to a vast federally sponsored urban highway program, with
costs running in at least one instance as high as $17 million a mile. Think of that, Mr. President, $17 million to build 1 mile of highway on the Federal system through a congested urban area. Meanwhile, automobile and truck traffic congestion clogs our existing urban roads and threatens the slow economic strangulation of our cities."
On March 24, 1959, the chairman of the committee requested comments and recommendations of the major departments and agencies of the Government, the Bureau of the Budget and from the General Accounting Office. As of this date (July 16, 1959) only one agency, the General Accounting Office, has responded by pointing out that certain changes or amendments to the bill might be considered by the committee, as follows:
“There are however two matters concerning the bill that we would like to bring to the attention of the committee. Section 5(b) provides that the members of the Commission shall receive no compensation for their services as such, but shall be reimbursed for travel, subsistence, and other necessary expenses incurred in the performance of duties vested in the Commission. This provision places no restriction upon either the type or amount of travel expenditures for which the Government would be obligated to reimburse Commission members, nor does it permit the payment of either travel or subsistence on a commuted basis. The Travel Expense Act of 1919, as amended (5 U.S.C. 835– 842), provides general authority for the heads of all agencies and establishments to pay a commuted allowance of $12 per day in lieu of actual expenses for subsistence and other necessary travel expenses unless such allowance would be much less than the actual and necessary expenses, in which event the head of the establishment may authorize reimbursement, not to exceed $25 per day, on an actual expense basis.
"We suggest that the bill would provide more satisfactory guidelines from the standpoint of both administration and audit and at the same time not result in a loss of monetary benefits if section 5(b) were to be amended as follows:
“'(b) Members of the Commission shall receive no compensation for their services as such, but, while away from home or regular place of business and engaged in the actual performance of duties vested in the Commission, shall receive travel and subsistence expenses in accordance with the Travel Expense Act of 1919, as amended, and the Standardized Government Travel Regulations.'
"The second matter that we would like to point out, is that section 5 (c) as now written would authorize the Commission to appoint and fix the compensation of employees without regard to the civil service laws and the Classification Act of 1949, as amended. It may be that the committee will want to add to this section a proviso similar to that contained in section 161(d) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 949), with a view toward placing a maximum limitation on the salaries that may be paid employees of the Commission."
The staff has been informally advised that the Joint Federal-State Action Committee recently considered this bill and reported as follows:
"The committee also discussed the Clark bill (S. 1431) to establish a temporary National Commisssion on Metropolitan Area Problems. There was likewise no committee endorsement of this measure and it was agreed that the staff would analyze the report on this legislation. In this connection, the committee also agreed to examine further the possibility of including representatives of local governments in the work of the committee."
VIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS OR ASSOCIATIONS
A number of individuals, organizations, and associations have communicated with the chairman of the committee or with the sponsor of S. 1431 in support of the bill.
By letter dated March 20, 1959, the U.S. conference of mayors submitted the following comment in support of the bill to Senator Clark:
"The U.S. conference of mayors has over a period of years been keenly interested in the systematic study on a nationwide basis of this matter. I believe that your proposal offers a real opportunity to bring some of the pressing problems of local government to the attention of national leaders. * * *
"The U.S. conference of mayors stands ready to help in every appropriate way in securing the adoption of your proposal. *
"The establishment of a Federal Commission on Metropolitan Area Problems is clearly consistent with the program and policies of the U.S. conference of mayors. At the 1958 annual conference in Miami Beach last September a resolution was adopted calling for a complete study and examination of the problems growing out of the Nation's increasing urbanization. Senator Clark's bill merits. the support of those who would seek solutions to the problems of metropolitan areas."
The National Housing Conference endorsed the objectives of this bill by letter dated April 20, 1959, which is quoted, in part, as follows:
"The Federal Government long ago recognized the importance of research study and planning to resolve problems of the Nation's agriculture. This bill represents a beginning move to deal in a like manner with our urban problems. The transition of America from a rural population to an urban nation is bringing with it problems of whose length and breadth we have only an inkling. The population surge and suburban sprawl in certain areas are beginning to reveal that problems of transportation, schools, water supply, sewage facilities, roads, housing, etc., transcend and make artificial some of our political boundaries. The Commission proposed in S. 1431 would help to fill a research need that has been badly neglected for almost a decade.
"The National Housing Conference in its role as a clearing house for some 40 national organizations, religious, labor, education, welfare, women's, veterans and others, endorses and supports S. 1431 and trusts your committee will give it favorable consideration."
The American Municipal Association also favors enactment of this bill and stated that it views this area as posing one of the greatest challenges the Nation has had to face. The executive director of the association submitted the following letter to the chairman of the committee:
"The American Municipal Association which represents nearly 13,000 cities, towns, and villages throughout the United States is very favorably disposed toward the bill recently introduced by Senator Clark, S. 1431, to create a Presidential Commission on Metropolitan Problems. As you will see from our national municipal policy statement (see "Metropolitan Problems—Exhibit A," and “Urban Policies of the Federal Government”) we view this area as posing one of the greatest challenges the Nation has yet had to face.
“We are particularly encouraged by the fact that Senator Johnson has shown such a keen interest on problems of urban areas. We commend the bill to you and hope that you will find it possible to schedule early hearings."
Mr. Gerald H. Coleman, executive secretary of the Supervisors Inter-County Committee has forwarded a resolution to the committee in which it was recommended that S. 1431 be amended to inclusive 6 additional members appointed by the President of the United States, of which 2 should be made from county legislative bodies, 2 from county administration and 2 from the legislative bodies of cities. It was contended that this would overcome the fact that the bill, as drafted, does not adequate utilize the perience and training of many local government officials in studying the problems of their particular field of operations.
A somewhat similar recommendation was made by Mr. Robert L. Brown, coordinator, municipal metropolitan program, of the Graduate School of the University of Pittsburgh. Mr. Brown recommended that the committee consider the appointment of at least 1 or 2 city managers to the Commission for the study of metropolitan problems. He stated that the city managers represent an enormous storehouse of professional competence and knowledge when it comes to municipal and metropolitan matters.
GLENN K. SHRIVER,
Professional Staff Member. Approved :
WALTER L. REYNOLDS,
Staff Director. EXHIBIT A METROPOLITAN PROBLEMS As REPORTED BY THE NATIONAL MUNICIPAL POLICY
STATEMENT OF 1959 Approximately three-fifths of our expanding population is concentrated in 173 metropolitan areas. These include territory in 42 States and the District of Columbia. In these areas people constantly are migrating across the core-city boundaries into the suburbs. At the same time, newcomers are establishing homes, businesses, and factories just beyond the boundaries of the central cities. Both types of movement have brought with them a demand for a high level of municipal-type services. The overall result is commonly referred to as the metropolitan problem. Actually, this is a series and combination of major problems. These include (1) jurisdictional limitations or other inadequacies of existing governmental organizations, (2) areawide service and control deficiencies, (3) financial inequities, inequalities, and weaknesses, and (4) difficulties in or lack of popular control of governments in the area.
Local government in many such areas has responded to the challenge with bold new experiments. Special districts, cooperative metropolitan planning, intergovernmental contracting for services, consolidated city-county government, and other devices are being tried. Currently under study are several proposals to create general metropolitan units or federations of existing local governments.
As the national organization representing more than 12,530 municipal governments, the American Municipal Association encourages these experiments in the belief that the solution to metropolitan problems requires new concepts in local government organization, functions and finances. At the same time it believes that, intelligent and timely use of the annexation device, State laws permitting, coupled with some realinement of functions between cities and counties and with proper safeguards against unsound incorporation of new cities, may yet prove the best solution in many, perhaps most, metropolitan areas. event, such an approach can be developed into an effective preventative.
As is now becoming widely recognized, metropolitan area problems are also the concern of State and Federal Government. State government, with its constitutional and statutory responsibility for distribution of functions and powers to various units, has a vital stake. The Federal Government must be concerned with metropolitan areas which cross State borders and with the problems of coordinating civil defense. * * *
Senator HUMPHREY. I understand that Mr. F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., has a short statement and, inasmuch as Senator Clark will arrive in a few minutes, we will proceed with you.
We will take you out of order, Mr. Chapin.
STATEMENT OF F. STUART CHAPIN, JR., AMERICAN INSTITUTE
Mr. CHAPIN. Mr. Chairman, my name is F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., I am a city planner; professor of planning in the Department of City and Regional Planning at the University of North Carolina; director of urban studies program of the Institute for Research in Social Science; and a member of the board of governors of the American Institute of Planners.
I am representing the American Institute of Planners at this hearing.
The instituto is a nonprofit organization whose membership is limited to thoso in the profession of city, metropolitan, State, and regional planning.
On behalf of the institute I would like to put this statement that is now in your hands into the records of this hearing.
Very briefly, the institute has repeatedly taken a position, through statements of its officers, endorsing a concerted attack upon growth and development problems besetting urban areas everywhere.
In the interest of maximizing the benefit of national programs that deal with these problems of urban growth and development, we recommend that consideration be given to all possible means for achieving coordination among national programs related to urban development.