Mr. BRADEMAS. Let's say what would the pay be of the head librarian at the main public library in Seattle, and then what would be the salary of a beginning librarian?

The reason I raise the question is, in your statement in support of title IV for the library training institutes, you speak of the shortage of trained librarians in the United States, and I am wondering to what extent pay may have something to do with this shortage.

Mrs. COOMBS. Yes. I understand the librarians coming out of the graduate school of librarianship at the university average around $5,000 as a beginning salary.

You understand, many of our local library boards do not have the budget to pay this much salary. So often they cannot hire these librarians, who will go to a State where they can get bigger salaries.

The Seattle public librarian-I am not sure of his salary. I would say it would probably be in the neighborhood of $12,000 to $15,000. Perhaps someone here does know that salary.

Our State librarian-we have just raised her salary to $12,000 from $8,000. This is under a State personnel setup.

Our local librarian in Yakima, Wash., from where I come, makes $8,000. The starting salary there, though, is around $3,000, so you see we are not able to take the ones right out of the graduate school. This is because of the budget on the local level. The city government on which I serve does not have the tax support from which to give the money to the library, so that they can up these librarian salaries.

Mr. BRADEMAS. You get no State contribution for the salaries of librarians?

Mrs. COOMBS. Not for the local level. The only State contribution we have is for extension of services.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I would like to express my appreciation, and I am sure the other members of the subcommittee do, for Mrs. Coombs coming so far to testify.

On page 3 of your testimony, Mrs. Coombs, you say: "We feel very strongly that excluding any public library from the program of library development weakens the total fabric of the library serv ice." I am not sure what you mean by "excluding." Surely you do not mean if something is made available, a pie is developed that has some Federal money in it, that every single library in the State must receive some aid under that program?

Mrs. COOMBS. No, I do not mean that by that statement.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Including it for the sake of excluding it from an appropriation does not seem to be particularly meaningful. Mrs. COOMBS. I think I mean by that, referring to the Washington plan which I mentioned, we have this plan of coordination of all our library services in the State of Washington, and if we are just able to use the money to work in the rural areas, then we cannot work in coordination with the urban areas so as to carry out our coordinated plan.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I understand your point now.

Mrs. COOMBS. The plan would have to meet many requirements. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. My other question deals with your statement that Washington does not instigate any plan.

If my recollection does not fail me, you seem to think there is an inhibition in your constitution which would prevent the State from taking an aggresive role.

Do you not realize that this program would necessitate the State administrative agency making the determinations with respect to adequacy of services, or whether there are no services at all? Mrs. COOMBS. Yes.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. It would not be a local determination.

Mrs. COOMBS. I think, under the present Library Services Act, we make, at the State level, a determination of whether this would be the right type of a service to comply with the act. There also would not be any reason we could not say to the local people, "You have to demonstrate that you can take care of this before we can allot funds to you."

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Are you saying the State can establish priorities and submit a plan to the Federal Government in order to receive the Federal funds because that is what is required?

Mrs. COOMBS. They could do that.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. There would perhaps be an increased amount of State participation in what otherwise would be local determinations of need and advisability of which way to expand and so on.

Mrs. COOMBS. We have to set up a policy by which we will allot the funds to them, but we do not go out and force them into it. We let the initiative come from them. We tell them what is available, but they have to tell us they can take care of it locally before we do it. That is what I mean, we do not instigate their plans for them. In the final analysis, the local library boards rule the local libraries. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I do not know how you can say that a State would not instigate a plan for a rural service that had not been provided at all. It would be a State responsibility, would it not?

Mrs. COOMBS. Yes. We could set the policy and tell them this was available. They have to come to us with the desire to be included in the plan.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. They must be willing to accept it. Do you make the determination that if an area is not served you are going to suggest that money is available to set up such service?

Mrs. COOMBS. No. We do not make the determination of the area to be served. That is what I have been trying to tell you. We tell the State as a whole that this money is available and certain things under our policy which they will have to do to get it. If they are interested then they have to come to us themselves; we do not go to them with it.

First of all, the request has to come from them themselves. That is the way we have run the present plan.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you very much.

Mr. BAILEY. Mrs. Coombs, we appreciate your coming here to testify, coming from the great Northwest. It is the best evidence that we have that we have nationwide support for this legislation.

Mrs. COOMBS. Thank you, Mr. Bailey. We certainly appreciate the present Library Services Act in the State of Washington. We have one of the best examples of it out there.

Mr. BAILEY. Thank you.

(The following was submitted by Mrs. Coombs :)

For more than 50 years the Washington Library Association has been involved in the planning of the library development program in the State of Washington. The association has a continuing committee which constantly reviews the activities of the State library; recommends to the membership of Washington Library Association revisions in the program; the association discusses, amends, and/or approves; the final recommendations of Washington Library Association are sent to the State library commission for review and discussion before adoption or rejection. To date there has been no major area of disagreement in direction of the program. The Washington Library Association regards the program as theirs, with responsibility for its success; the State library is the agency responsible for carrying on the day-to-day activities.

In cooperation with Washington Library Association the State library commission adopted principles for the programs under the Library Services Act. In brief these principles are:

1. To achieve good library service for all citizens in Washington State. 2. Major emphasis would be implementing the regional library plan adopted by Washington Library Association and the State library commission.

3. Proposals for activities, especially demonstrations, would have to originate at the local level.

4. The State library commission would review proposals and select those it was felt were feasible, practical, and fiscally sound.

5. In judging proposals, one principle would be basic-the areas ability to finance adequate library service from its own local resources.

6. State and Federal financing would be to demonstrate what the region could afford in the way of library service.

7. The people would be asked to approve local responsibility for the continuation of the program.

8. State and Federal funds would be withdrawn and attention turned to the next project.

9. During the period State and Federal funds were involved, the State library would be responsible for administration of such funds; administration of service would be reached by cooperative planning and organization with existing libraries.

We have followed these principles faithfully and successfully. In addition the Washington Library Association cooperated with the State library in evaluating the Library Services Act program during the fifth year. From this evaluation the plans for further progress were developed by Washington Library Association and the State library commission.

Our problem has not been to generate requests for projects but to make wise judgments in selection among those received. We had seven proposals in 1961 and funds to finance one.

It should be understood the Washington Library Association is composed of individual membership by librarians, library trustees, and friends of libraries.

Mrs. BRUCE COOMBS,

Member, State Library Commission,
Yakima, Wash.

NORTH CENTRAL REGIONAL LIBRARY,
Wenatchee, Wash., July 2, 1962.

DEAR MRS. COOMBS: In answer to your inquiry we are pleased to provide you with information as to the formation of this regional library which serves 120,000 people in 5 counties covering more than 16,000 square miles.

The original request for a demonstration of full library service came from the trustees of the regional library which was then serving one county and one large city in the area. This request was evaluated, along with others, by the State Library Commission. Our area was selected as the first implementation of the Library Services Act funds in this State.

The Washington State Library administered the program for the following 3 years, having full authority over the expanded services to formerly unserved areas, but in no means usurping the authority of the existing library outlets. The trustees and staff of the old north central regional library cooperated with

the demonstration staff but continued to manage the finances and program of their own library.

At the termination of the demonstration when a successful vote of the people established a new and greatly expanded library district, the State library staff managed the new unit until permanent staff could be recruited to carry on. This was accomplished within 6 months, in June 1961, at which time the State library withdrew.

During the first 18 months of this new library, the trustees had full control and direction of the library. Since the appointment of the new director, a year ago, the State library has turned its energies into other areas of library development, and has concerned itself with this library only when asked by the staff or trustees to advise and counsel us.

We hope that our experience will be of value to others who are concerned with the Federal Library Services Act funds and their role in promoting local library development.

Sincerely,

ROBERTA M. MORICAL, Chairman, North Central Regional Library Board of Trustees. Mr. BAILEY. The Chair now recognizes our colleague from the State of California.

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES ROOSEVELT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I just wanted to appear to deliver in person my statement supporting your bill, and my identical bill, H.R. 11924, and to say that from all the information I have, the Library Services Act and the provisions of this bill are very much needed in my good State of California. To be precise, California estimates that 1,166,000 persons benefited from the improved service provided by the act and while this is all well and good, I would also like to point out that California's total population is more than 10 times that figure.

Certainly the expansion of the provisions and the services is badly needed by the people of California.

I would ask, Mr. Chairman, for permission to submit my statement in full.

Mr. BAILEY. It will be accepted for inclusion in the record. (The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES ROOSEVELT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I welcome the opportunity to appear before the subcommittee on behalf of my bill, H.R. 11924, amending the current Library Services Act. This bill is identical to that of the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee.

With your permission, I would like to make a few remarks about the purposes and accomplishments of this act, and about the purposes and future prospects of my proposed amendment.

The library, in the public school, in the university, and in the community, should be the great vault of information, the storehouse of all man's accumulated knowledge and the real foundation of an informed citizenry. When a totalitarian government takes control of a nation, its first and most sweeping assault is always made on the libraries-to remove from the people's grasp the thoughts, wisdom and stirring ideas of the past which have in them a power to inspire men to overthrow the shackles of ignorance and oppression. But a library that is burned is no worse than a library that never existed, or one so failing the needs of the people that it is useless.

The current act recognizes this and has as its purpose the betterment of library services through incentives to the States. The State must make its own

library appropriation pursuant to an approved plan, and then the United States provides up to 66 percent of that amount in additional funds. But this was, at the time, an uncharted course, and the Congress was only performing an experiment. The scope of the act was limited to one most pressing need: the Nation's rural areas, and this was done to provide a narrow field of activity in which the success of the experiment could be readily measured.

There was no presumption that rural areas represented the only real need or that the act, so restricted, supplied the only definitive solution.

Nevertheless, it was greeted with great enthusiasm by State library administrators and its success over the past 6 years has been clear. If I may quote from the annual report of the State of California to the U.S. Office of Education for the period ended June 30, 1961:

“*** over a million people in California (have) improved library service now available because of the Federal projects. Tangible proof of the services provided by the project can be seen in the form of three bookmobiles; many thousands of books * *; several hundred films and phonograph records; added staff members; and expedited loan services. Intangible results are harder to measure, but a greater awareness on the part of the public of the library as a service agency available to all ages and types of people, is shown by the increased use of the libraries in which projects have been conducted."

To be more precise, California estimates that 1,166,000 persons benefit from the improved service provided by the act. This is all well and good, but California's total population is more than 10 times that figure, now approaching 16 million persons. And I use California only as an example of both the act's success and what great potential there is for an expansion of its provisions.

The needs of libraries serving communities larger than the present limitation of 10,000 has become critical, for I think we are all aware of the astonishing growth of urban and suburban areas since the war. The States are more than willing to continue their present programs, but the requirements of all the people can only be met by enlarging substantially the framework of this already tried and proven program.

The new amendment, in brief, provides four kinds of aid:

(1) It continues the same policy of helping regular public libraries, but removes the population restriction. Funds may be used for books, materials, salaries, programs and demonstration projects, but not for buying land and erecting buildings.

(2) It adds a most important provision for the use of funds to improve public elementary and secondary school libraries.

(3) Institutions of higher learning would also benefit, allowing them to use funds to acquire additional books, materials, and documents.

(4) More and better library services, of course, require more and better qualified librarians. To this end, the last title of the bill provides support for academic library training, a sorely neglected field of education in this country. The method of allocating Federal funds is comparable to the methods of the current act. A flat sum is allowed each State, and the remainder is allocated on a ratio basis that is relevant to the use of the funds. For example, the public school libraries will receive funds on a ratio of the State's school-age population to the total U.S. school-age population.

The amendment, of course, preserves the essential safeguards of local control over library policy, supervision and content.

Man's knowledge today is fast outpacing his ability to absorb it. We cannot abandon this opportunity to provide greater means and resources for buttressing this ability and thus helping to keep Americans the most informed and enlightened of the world's people.

I urge a favorable report on this bill.

Mr. BAILEY. Congressman Gonzalez submitted the following state

ment:

STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY B. GONZALEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. Chairman: Other witnesses have appeared here, or are scheduled for appearance, to fully explain the four titles of H.R. 11823, a bill to amend the Library Services Act so as to broaden the effective work and growth of library facilities that have come about since the act was passed in 1956.