Box 4, Folder 14, Document 102

Dublin Core

Text Item Type Metadata



The Executive Committee Meeting of the CACUR was called to order
promptly at 2:45 P.M. by the Chairman, Dr. Noah N. Langdale, Jr.
Those attending were: Mr. Pob Biveus; Mrs. Leonard Haas; Mrs. Grace
- Hamilton; Mr. George Kennedy; Mr. Charles C. Mathias; Mr. A. B.
Padgett; Mr. Richard H. Rich; Mr. Edgar E. Schukraft; Mr. Clayton
R. Yates. Committee member in attendance was: Mrs. Adah Toombs;
for the Planning Department of the City of Atlanta: Mr. W. F.
Kennedy; and for the Atianta Constitution: Mr. Alex Coffin.

Invitational Notice, Agenda and other related Documents for the
meeting are attached to the file copy of these minutes,

Chairman Langdale opened the meeting by welcoming those present.

The Chairman went to the second item on the agenda because Mr.
Bob Bivens was late to the meeting. Second on the program agenda was
a presentation by Mr. Frank Sheetz of Sheetz and Bradfield, Architects,
on "What is Public Housing?"

The presentation dealt mainly with small towns rather than large
cities, about the requirements that are set up that make a town or
city elligible for public housing. The presentation also gave the
number of Housing Authorities that are located in the southern part
of the United States, which are:

Georgia 192
Florida 63
South Carolina 19
North Carolina 72
Kentucky 99
Tennessee 78
Alabama 137
Mississippi 40

The Chairman thanked Mr. Sheetz for his presentation to the Committee
and asked him about an example of Public Housing he used in his

Mr. Sheetz stated that that particular project was the Bankhead
Project. This project has 500 units, including 4, 5 and 6 bedrooms
and cost from $16,800 to $18,000 per unit.

Mr. Edgar Schukraft congratulated Mr. Sheetz on his presentation and
stated that was the best presentation on Public Housing he had ever
seen and the best understood.

The Chairman then asked Mr. Sheetz if Atlanta is behind in Public


Mr. Sheetz commented that this is really a policy matter, but
Atlanta is behind in Public Housing because of the many slum areas
that have not been cleared away.

The Chairman then called on Mr, Bob Bivens to make his report
to the Committee.

Mr. Bivens reported that he, Doris Lockerman and Mr. W. L.
Calloway had made a list of suggested candidates for membership
of the Citizens Advisory Committee for Urban Renewal. He further
stated that this list is not to be interpreted as final or complete,
but rather as a work list to include both additions and deletions.
Mr. Bivens made a recommendation that the Chairman review the entire
list of Committee appointees in light of newly defined Committee
purposes and functions and appoint an 8-12 member Executive Committee
for assisting him in carrying out the mission of the Committee.

Mr. Bivens then stated that CACUR needs a re-definition of purpose.
This Sub-Committee consists of Mr. Bivens, Dean Alex Lacy and Mr.
A. B. Padgett. Mr. Bivens stated that much of the success of
Atlanta's urban renewal activity is directly attributable to the
fine, active participation of a representative cross-section of
citizens who have helped guide the program, ask questions and provide
liaison with various sectors of the entire community.

He continued that over the past several years, the approach of
urban renewal has changed in many ways, both nationally and locally:

1. Greater emphasis is now being placed on citizen
participation in the planning process,

2. Rehabilitation and upgrading are superseding
bulldozing and clearance,

3. The new "Model Cities" program introduces a
bold new approach,

4. The Neighborhood Development Program (NDP)
represents a new, fast-moving approach capable
of accelerating the planning and execution of.
renewal activity to accomplish community goals.

That because of these changes, this is a good time to re-define
the mission of the citizens' organization, determine the membership
composition necessary to accomplish such mission, and organize the
committee to move forward in facing the new challenges ahead.

Mr. Bivens also stated that the Committee is not being approached
for advice, but rather is beng informed after plans have already been
Geveloped and vital decisions and commitments made, and that in fact
the Citizens Advisory Committee has become largely a “rubber stamp"
organization, in which the intent of Federal requirements is not only
aborted, but also in which the valuable resource of talent and mature
advice is not brought to bear on vital renewal programs.


If the Committee is to serve in the more constructive role,
then the following suggestions are recommended, and membership
constituted accordingly:

1. That all plans by the Housing Authority, Model Cities
Group, Planning Department and others related to rehabilitation and
renewal be presented to the Citizens Advisory Committee or its
Executive Committee during the development and before approval so
that the Committee may perform its functions of review and be in
position to advise, and so that the Committee can help sell the
programs through a real understanding of the plans and their importance
to the City. .

2. That the buSiness community continue its active
financial participation in the staff costs of this program, perhaps
to the extent of 1/3 of staff costs, with the City paying 2/3 of
such cost.

3. That the staff offices be housed in City Hall as close
to the Mayor and Assistant Mayor as possible.

4. For retirement purposes and other City benefits, that
the Executive Director be an employee of the City of Atlanta,

5. That duties of the Executive Director include the

a. Primarily serving the Chairman of the Citizens
Advisory Committee on Urban Renewal,

b. Provide liaison between the Mayor's Office and
CACUR through continuous communication with the

c. Keep well-informed on various activities related
to urban renewal by continuous communication with
the City Planning Department, Atlanta Housing
Authority, Model Cities Staff and others working
on renewal related activities,

d. Through newsletters and other communications,
keep Executive Committee and full Committee
well-informed on renewal matters,

e. Suggest pertinent agenda items and review with
the Chairman for Executive and full Committee
meetings; make all arrangements,

£. Preparation of the necessary reports and documentation
for certification of the Workable Program
insofar as applicable to citizens participation,


That he constantly seek ways to strengthen
renewal activity and citizens understanding
of and participation therein,

Preparation of frequent news releases aimed
at building public understanding and support,

Maintain good lines of communications with
other organizations such as the Community
Relations Commission, Atlanta Youth Council,
and others.

6. That a carefully picked cross-section of established
and rising community leaders be developed, reviewed by the Chairman,
and appointed by the Mayor. (A sub-committee exists on inactive
status at the pleasure of the Chairman, ready to propose a list
of nominees as soon as the mission of the Committee is agreed upon.
This sub-committee consists of R. W. Bivens, Doris Lockerman and
W. L. Calloway.)

7. ‘That an Executive Committee be appointed, such Executive
Committee to consist of 8 to 12 persons.

8. The Executive Committee shall meet monthly; and the
full Committee shall meet quarterly.

9. That special sub-committees shall be appointed as
necessary by the Chairman to accomplish specific purposes.

10. In summary, that the Citizen Advisory Committee for
Urban Renewal aspire toward achieving a higher standard of excellence
in the building and renewal:of our great City to serve better our
- present and future generations.

Because of the time element involved Mr. Bivens stated that the
Executive Committee should study the revised list of members (the
names that were passed out to each member of the Executive Committee),
so that names could be taken off or others added.

The Chairman agreed to discuss this at the next Executive Committee
Meeting next month.

The Chairman stated that by 1972 all the money will be used up
out of the City funds to build housing (matching funds for NDP areas)
that the plan now used is that you must pay as you go.

Mr. Richard Rich stated that therefore money is needed before any
action can be taken, Discussion ensued between the Chairman and ane
Rich on clarification of the matter.

Mr. Edgar Schukraft stated that he has been working on the West
End project for about 18 months with the Park Street Methodist Church
about building a shopping center. He stated that he wrote the Housing
Authority but as yet has not heard from them.


The Chairman then asked if there any objections to having an
analysis of the West End Project first on the agenda for the next
meeting. There were no objections.

The Chairman then stated that the agenda for the next meeting
would be:

Analysis of the West End Project
Bivens Report
New Budget

New Members
Staggered Terms
Financial Situation of U.R. Program (status of

matching funds)

Nour WN H

Mr. Padgett stated that it should be recommended to the Mayor
that all members have staggered terms.

Dr. Langdale then asked if 2:00 P.M. was a better time for having
the meetings? Everyone agreed.

Col. Jones then presented Dr. Langdale with the Financial Report
and a draft of the CACUR's Proposed Budget.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:35 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,


> i
P29 ok cote bw-2

Malcolm D. Jones
Executive Director


Encls: As stated

public items show