.NTY4Ng.NTY4Ng

• lf 021126 EVDAA 202724 13013 MSCDV316370 RAAUIJHZ RUEVDF'H0006 1182004-UUCTU:-- RUEVDAA. FM GEORGE CREEL DIR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS DHUD WASH DC/HHE'A/ TO RUEVDDAA/1/ REGL ADMIN DHUD ATLANTA-GA ATTN: SPECIAL ASST · · . -~·PUBLIC AFFAIRS & A._AA' S FOR MODEL CITIES BT FOR THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT WAS ISSUED BY SECRETARY ROMNEY TO NEWS MEDIA AT 4 :00 PM APRIL 28. ASSISTl\..N'I1 SECRETARY HYDE WILL BE TELEPHONING EACH OF THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS TO DISCUSS THE IMPLICATIONS OP THIS STATEi"\IBN'l' vr.tTHIN '!1IIB NEXT FEW DAYS. · "SECRE'1'A..~Y .ROMNI!."'Y'S STATEY.LENT ON MODEL CITIESi' · THE MODEL CITIES PROGRAM IS Af~ AflBITIOUS EFFORT. IT SEEKS TO . COORDINATE A VAST ARRAY OF FEDERAL PROGRAl"\1S , TO CONCENTRATI.' THEIR IMPACT ON SPECIFIC DEPRESSED URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS, AND TO i~~E LOCllJ. GOVERNMENTS STRONGER AND MORE FLEXIBLE. MY COMMITTEE . ON MODEL CITIE!, OF THE COUNCIL FOR URBAN AFFAIRS HAS BEEN INTENSIVELY EXAM]NING THE PROGRAM . ITS STUDY. HAS SHOWN 'l HAT THE PROGRAM' S GOALS ARE SOUND, BUT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN CRITICAL DEFICIENCIES IN ITS ADMINISTRATION WHICH CALL FOR IMMEDIATE CORREC'l,ION. AMONG THEM : 1 -.:.F~OERAL AGEN€IRS _HAVE !110T BEEN :.SUF,FICIENTLY RESPONSIVE · . TO LOCAL PROPOSALS REFLECTING SPECIFIC LOCAL CONDITIONS . =~IN DEVELOPING THEIR PROPOSALS, LOCAL AUTHORITIES HAVE BEEN HINDERED BY UNCERTAINTY AS TO THE AMOUNTS OF FUNDS THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FROM THE FEDERAL DEPARTMEN'l'S . ·--FEW EFFECTIVE ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO SECURE i ' tlE INVOLVEMENT OF STATE GOVERNMENTS. --FEDERAL GUIDELINES HAVE FORCED CITIES TO SET "MODEL NEIGHBORHOOD" BOUNDARIES THAT OFTEN HAVE BEEN ARBITRARY, AND THAT HAVE CREATED UNNECESSARY DIVISIONS AMONG MODEL .CITIES .RESIDENTS. . THE PRESIDENT HAS APPROVED THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE URBAN AFFAIRS COUNCIL THAT THE MODEL CITIES PROGRAM BE REVISED IN THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT RESPECTS: ·l . THE COUNCIL FOR URBAN AFFAIRS WILL ASSUME DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY FOR INTER-DRPARTMENTAL POLICY AFFECTING MODEL CITIES. 2. , SECRETARIES OF THE DEPARTMENTS INVOLVED WILL HAVE PERSONAL , ·· -. SUPERVISION OF THEIR DEPARTMENTS I FUNDING OF MODEL CITr ES . PROPOSALS, AND WILL RESERVE PROGRAM FUNDS SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT PURPOSE. THIS WILL ENSURE THE AVAILABILITY OF DEPART-, MENTAL FUNDS FOR MODEL CITIES, AND WILL GIVE LOCAL AUTHORITIES A BETTER IDEA OF THE . AMOUNT AND KIND OF FUNDS THEY CAN EXPECT FROM THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS FOR TH.EC R MODEL CITIES PLANS. �PAGE TWO RUEVDFH0006 1182004 3. , ADMINISTRA'I'[ON OF THE PROGRAM WILL BE E'ED I1>.7TO THE REORGANIZA""." \ TION OF THE REGIONA.L FEDEP~JH., OFF.I CBS, NOW UNDERWAY. ONE EFFECT \OF THIS WILL BE TO FACILITATE IN'l1 ER-DEPART!vIBNTAL COORDINATION AT THE REGIONAL LEVEL. IN THE PAS.T, VARIATIONS AMO:NG THE I FEDERAL OFFICES IN PROGRll..M PROCEDURES, HEADQUAJ~TERS LOCATIONS, AND STRUCTURES OF AUTHORITY, HAVE HA.i.~DICAPPED WELL.=.INTENTIONED FEDERAL OF'FICIALS AND CONFUSED L0<2AL OFFICIP-J.iS, THUS SERIOUSLY COMPROMISING THE MODEL CITIES PROGRAM AT THE CITY LEVEL. -1. GREATER EFFORTS WILL BE MADE TO INVOLVE THE STATE GOVERNfv!EUT S IN THE MODEL CITIES PROGRAM. LACKCOF STATE INVOLVEMENT HAS PROVEN A CRITICAL DEFICIENCY BECAUSE M.l\NY OF THE FEDERAL FUNDS NEEDED FOR MODEL CITIES ARE ADMINISTERED THROUGH STATE .. AGENC!EG OUR AIM WILL NOT BE TO ADD .Al-:rOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE" LAYER. BETWEEN THE CITIES AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, BUT TO PAT<E B.E~TER USE OF THE STATES I RESOURCES, EXPERifil.TCE AND PE.RSPEC_:: TIVE~ . !,!ODEL CITIES IS INTENDED TO BE AND WILL REMAIN A LOCAL GOVERNMEN'l' PROGRAM CENTERED UPON THE MAYOR ' S OFFICE WITH A . CONTINUED REQUIREME~"'T FOR ADEQUATE CI TI.ZEN INVOLVEMENT. o THE 10%' POPUL.i\'I'ION RESTRICTION ON THE SIZE OF THE TARGET NEIGHBORHOODS "WILL BE DROPPED. THIS GUIDELINE HAS BEEN ~:,;,'-.~:ADMINISTERED HAPHA.Z.ARDLY IN THE PAST AND HAS _HINDERED PROGRESS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. ELIMINATING THIS GUIDELINE DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE PROGRAM WILL BE EXPANDED CITYWIDE WITHIN EACH CITY. 5. ITS PURPOSE WILL REMAIN THAT OF FOCUSING RESOURCES ON PARTICULARLY POOR AND BLIGHTED NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT LOCAL OFFICIALS WILL BE GIVEN GREATER LA'I'ITUDE IN DRAWING PROGRAM BOUl\TDARIES THAT CONFORM TO LOCAL CONDITIONS. \ I 6. PRIORITY CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO THOSE CITIES THAT SUCCESSFULLY ENLIST THE PARTICIPATION OF PRIVATE AND VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS IN THEIR MODEL CITIES PLANS. THE INCREASED FLEXIBILITY IN ESTABLISHING PROGRAM BOUNDARIES WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THESE ORGANIZATIONS TO C©NTRIBUTE. 7. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WILL BE ASKED TO ESTABLISH CLEAR PRIORITIES IN DEVELOPING THEIR MODEL CITIES PROPOSALS, AND TO STRIVE FOR "COMPREHENSIVENESS" ONLY IN THE PROGRAMS' FIVE-YEAR PLANNING CYCLE. MANY CITIES HAVE INTERPRE'rED MODEL CITIES LEGISLATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES REQUIRING A. LOCAL "COMPREHENSIVE" PLAN OF ATTACK ON BLIGHT AND POVERTY IN THEIR TARGET NEIGHBOR~ HOOD AS REQUIRING PROPOSALS TO I.MM.EDV.TELY ATTACK EVERY CONCEIVABLE PROBLEM WITE-1IN THESE NEIGfillORI-IOODS. ·'I'!-I:tS OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE UNWORKABLE: WHAT IS IMPORTA1fl IS THAT CITY GOVERNMENTS SET CLEP-..R PRIORITIES FOR ATTACKING THEIR PROBLEMS SO-THAT THEY CAN MAKE RAPID AND SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS TOWARD SOLVING THEIR MOST URG~'NT RATHER THAN DISSIPATING THEIR RESOURCES IN A VAIN EFFORT TO SOLVE ALL. THIS ADMINSTRATION WILL COMPLETELY SCRUTINIZE APPLI CA'I'IONS TO ELIMINATE UNWISE OR UNNECESSARY PROPOSALSo J 1 �PAGE THREE RUEVDFR0006 118200 WITH THESE REVISIONS, I FEEL THAT THE MODEL CI TIES PROGR&~ CAN HELP US ·To ACHIEVE TWO IM.PORT.l-\NT GO.A.LS--A MORE RATIONAL AND CREATIVE FEDERAL-STATE-·LOCAL SYSTEM , AND CITY GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE MORE FDEXIBLE AND RESPONSIVE TO THE NEEDS OF THEIR CI TIZENS • . WE MUST REALI ZE THAT ELIMINI-iTION OF BLIGH'I' AND POVERTY IN OUR CENTRAL CITIES CANNO'I BE ACCOMPLISHED OVERNIGHT. IT WILL BE A HARD AND OFTEN FRUSTRATING STRUGGLE, BUT MODEL 9ITIES DOES OFFER US THE MEANS OF BETTER USI NG OUR PRESENT RESOURCESP AND Th--US TAKING 1 AN IMPORTAN'I' S'1.'EP IN 'J~HAT DIRECTION. " . NNNN 121126 EVDAA. ..

I \ \ \ �