sewer improvements have resulted in Federal commitments totaling $1,462,000; and the commission has recently been assisting nine other communities with regard to planning and financing these facilities. The commission has been involved in three successful airport improvement applications, two approved grants for outdoor recreation areas, successful funding of a regional jail and other public improvements. Distinct advances have been made in the proficiency of law enforcement agencies throughout the area. A housing implementation program, backed by extensive research by our staff, has been underway for somewhat over 2 months and promises to be quite successful. Housing quality throughout the area has improved substantially during the 1960-70 decade. The Slash Pine APDC has used Federal programs extensively to provide funding for its staff and has assisted local governments to obtain many grants for the improvement of public facilities and services. Thus, I suppose that it is natural that I should be both shocked and apprehensive at the wholesale termination and suspension of Federal programs that has occurred in the last 30 days or so. Evidently, this action is based upon philosophical theories which are not related to the realities of community decisionmaking and governmental funding. For a locality to be progressive requires many years of background work on the part of professionals and lay leaders. It takes time to train citizens so that they can assess needs, can place priorities, and can start mapping strategy which will deal with the problems and distinguish between causes and effects. Meeting public facility and service requirements has relied heavily upon Federal aid programs, as have other incentives to economic development; and it was with much effort that rural communities were taught to effectively utilize the many diverse aid programs. To suddenly turn off so many sources of Federal aid will surely be extremely demoralizing, especially to the progressive communities which have known the joy of accomplishment and have carefully planned their future activities. Even if all the programs being halted should, under the Federal reorganization, find their way into different administrative channels, which, I understand, is not likely, it would take several months for the Federal bureaucracy to gear up to administer the new programs—at least, it always has. In the meantime, the localities have no alternative funding sources, except revenue sharing; and the local share looks pretty small when contrasted with existing categorical grants. Even if communities had sufficient funds from new revenue sharing or other sources- -assuming, for example, a greatly expanded aid-handling role for the States-it would be many months before States and local governments could successfully plan, set up, and utilize a structure for fund distribution based upon new and complicated Federal concepts. Multicounty agencies are almost a necessity now in order for localities to cope with economic and environmental needs. They have been actively involved in the grantsmanship capacity, but they have done much more. They are familiar with the complicated mechanism of government, dealing frequently with many State and Federal agencies. The interaction between these is complex and will remain so, even though Federal reorganization may clarify relationships to a degree. Should State and local governments attempt to provide funding and administrative structures for some of the programs for which Federal aid has been withdrawn, there will definitely be a need for much technical assistance to enable local units to perform in service areas to which they are not accustomed. If States try to administer housing and other programs in such a way that they have an effective local outreach, there must be those on the local scene who can relate to the State and yet who are ultimately responsible to local units. Our area planning and development commissions in Georgia are ideally suited to this task; and, of course, the same would be true of similar organizations throughout the country. The proposed termination of the Economic Development Administration (EDA) particularly concerns our commission. It will have a serious effect upon our program in economic development, which has been quite successful. We have two full-time professionals and a secretary who work in that program, which receives 75-percent EDA grant by virtue of the commission's designation as an economic development district. There is presently no other program known to me that would be available to a multicounty rural area for continuing functionally oriented services in the field of economic development. The termination of the Coastal Plains Regional Commission is also a matter of concern to us. Some supplementary grants from this organization have been received by Slash Pine localities, and others are committed. These include a vocational high school and a sewer system. An agricultural project (blueberry culture) has also been funded, as well as several technical assistance projects which serve the entire coastal plains area in Georgia. One study of special value deals with third level aviation potential. Due to fund limitations, the Coastal Plains Regional Commission has not been active in financially assisting multicounty districts. However, Slash Pine and three other APDC's are receiving some assistance in funding a housing implementation program which relies on private initiative to construct homes in the $8,000-$18,000 range. This will be quite a feat to accomplish, even in consideration of the fact that building costs in South Georgia rural areas may be substantially lower than in other areas, but we are optimistic. Several low-cost proto-type designs have been carefully researched; demonstration units are being constructed; and we will have an on-going educational effort with potential contractors, with the objective of creating a more extensive construction industry. The regional commission is certainly worthy of continued existence in our view. We offer the suggestion, however, that the commission would be more effective if funding were provided by it to multicounty districts to assist in developing and carrying out economic development strategy. We have in our jurisdiction the city of Alma and Bacon County. The entire county was designated as eligible for model cities aid, and the program is now into its third year. Some of you on the Senate committee visited our model city-county several months ago. We think this is a good example of the effective use of a number of Federal programs, nearly all of which are now threatened with extinction or suspension. A beautiful new human resources center is now in operation featuring physical consolidation of the social services, with an "umbrella" staff which aids clients in finding the right agency to solve their problems. The staff, for which funding was to expire January 91-868 - 73 - 20 31, has received an 11th hour reprieve in the form of a 60-day extension.2 Our Commission is extremely enthusiastic about the potential for rural revitalization contained in the Rural Development Act of 1972. We feel that the act will, if properly funded, do much to help the Nation achieve a balanced growth. The aids which it would provide are well conceived; and of course, we view its encouragment of multicounty agency involvement as wise. It is my understanding that the administration proposes that much of the current EDA activity be assumed under this act; and yet. I am told that there is now no administration proposal to fund a number of essential portions of the act and that other portions will be greatly underfunded. This will result in a substantial net loss of Federal assistance for facilities and technical assistance to rural areas. The idea of having government "close to the people" is a good ideal or objective. But let us consider the realities of voter expression of preference. The same voter may indicate a quite different attitude toward issues affecting services and facilities when he votes on national candidates than he does when voting for local candidates, and I submit that his national vote may reveal more accurately his preferences and desires. There are too many factors at the lower level which obscure the real issues-friendships and loyalties, lack of choice in the political arena resulting from lack of available leadership, particularly in rural areas, and the relationship between cost and property taxes (very likely the least popular of all forms of taxation). Given the realities of local government tax base and collection systems, attitudes that have developed over many years concerning the proper balance of Federal, State, and local taxes, and the status of State involvement in social, physical, and economic problems, the Federal financial load just must not be rapidly shifted downward. If drastic realinement of Federal-State-local relationships is really desirable, then those changes should be well planned, clearly understood throughout the hierarchy of government, and applied in a systematic way which recognizes the need for lead time in setting up administrative procedures and in phasing out ongoing programs. Included with this testimony is a certified copy of a resolution recently adopted by the Slash Pine Area Planning and Development Commission concerning Presidential "freezes" on appropriated funds. Never in my lifetime has the Nation stood at a more critical crossroad in its domestic policy. I would urge that Congress assume its constitutional role in formulating this policy, and that the administration carry out the legislative mandates of Congress. Thank you, distinguished members of the Senate committee, for hearing my viewpoint and for being interested in the development of our rural areas. (The attachments follow:) 2 Please note statement A, attached to this testimony. 1 Note that while "number of firms" is for this period, "new jobs" and "investments" are for 1969-1972. 1 Note that "number of firms" is for this period; "new jobs" and "investments" are for 1969-72. ALMA, GA., February 1, 1973. Re Community Service Statement for Congressional Record. Mr. GUS YORK, Jr., DEAR GUS: The following paragraph is the summary statement you requested. Since time does not allow for more detail, I hope it is sufficiently clear and understandable. Alma-Bacon County, Georgia, constructed a beautiful Center for Human Resources building in 1972. The purpose and function of this building is to house all of the major community services that are provided for Bacon County residents. Truly, by going through "one door" Bacon Countians can receive the best that State and Federal Social Programs can offer. An additional service providing delivery of this program is in the form of a central control center with outreach, intake, referral, and follow-up functions. This delivery service has identified needy residents, provided advisement related to available services, supplied transportation to the Human Resources Center, doctors' offices, special education centers, etc.; referred the clients to the appropriate social service offices, and then followed through by maintaining contact with the clients. A central file has been kept on the clients using these services. The Social Services Delivery System was funded by Title IV A and XVI contract with HEW and the Georgia Department of Human Resources. The cost for this service amounted to approximately $134,000. The cut-back of Title IV A and XVI funds has reduced that program to less than $15,000. Currently, the Alma-Bacon County Community Services Delivery System is operating on a second contract extension and Model Cities Supplemental Funds. The second contract extension expires on March 31, 1973. After this date, the Model Cities Supplemental Funds shall be capable of operating only a skeleton building management and maintenance program. The future of the Community Services Delivery System appears very bleak. It is felt that the greatest costs in social programs occurs not in the programs, but in the many duplication of efforts to deliver these programs. A central coordinated delivery system shows the potential to provide greater service for less costs. In conclusion the efforts to deliver Social Programs have brought good results to Alma-Bacon County. The service delivery system is desperately needed, therefore, it deserves every possible effort to retain it and to improve upon it. While it helps thousands of needy local people, it could aid millions across the nation. Please help us. Thank you, ALMA-BACON COUNTY MODEL Planning Director. RESOLUTION Whereas, The Slash Pine Area Planning and Development Commission is charged with the responsibility of promoting and otherwise fostering the economic development and improvement of its eight member counties, and Whereas, The President of the United States has recently suspended a number of federal aid programs, particularly in the categories of housing, water and sewer, and rural electrification, and Whereas, These federal programs are critical to the fulfillment of the stated purposes of this agency, and Whereas, These funds were appropriated by the Congress of the United States for use during the current year for those specific purposes set forth in the Act: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Slash Pine Area Planning and Development Commission commends the Congress, and particularly those members who represent the People of this jurisdiction, in recognizing and executing the will of the People in this matter, and be it further Resolved, That this Commission deplores the abruptness with which suspension of programs vital to the economic wellbeing of the citizens of this region was carried out, resulting in circumventing the will of the People as expressed through their duly elected representatives in the passage of appropriations measures, and be it further Resolved, That this Commission pledges the full support of this constituency in the furtherance of action by the Congress designed to restore the availability of these development programs so vital to the welfare of the People of this area. Certified true and correct. MAX W. HARRAL, Executive Director and Secretary. AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. The CHAIRMAN. I know what a fine job the Slash Pine Area Planning and Development Commission had done and I congratulate you and all those associated with you, Mr. Harral. Mr. Greene, do you have a statement? STATEMENT OF MILES GREENE, DOUGLAS, GA. Mr. GREENE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, your statement will be inserted in full in the record and you want to briefly verbalize what is in it? |