Box 22, Folder 19, Document 9
I' .,·,i , t; ·" j ' .
'.;;,';.; i --~
Memorandum To: From:
November 2, 1966
Paul Ylvisaker Stuart Chapin
This is to set down a few ideas for the TF agenda. Some of them spell out further the ideas I listed at the end of our meeting in Washington on October 28. The first proposal could be considered in the short-range category, whereas the other two fall mainly in the longer range category. They are in rough form and need "debugging," and I leave it to you to judge whether any of them have utility for the December 1 assignment. 1. A Program for Easing the Situation of Trapped Minority Groups. Let me first state what is quite obvious to most members of the TF, simply to underscore the urgency of finding solutions. Two statistics about Washington, D. C., dramatize the gravity of the situation and provide clear testimony of the necessity of action -- (1) the fact that approximately 65 percent of the population of the District are nonwhite, and (2) the fact that approximately 95 percent of the school children are nonwhite. Only Federal employment opportunities and constant work by concerned community service groups appear to be keeping this tinderbox from bursting into flame. Though the figures for other central cities have probably not yet reached these dramatic proportions, the indications are that similar buildups are in process in most large central cities. Reports from studies of these areas are clear enough that those trapped see no relief in sight and that problems involving education, employment, housing, health and opportunities for upward mobility have reached a critical mass. As brought out in our session on October 28, a total program is urgently needed to bring this segment of the population into the Great Society. Asstnning that very strong recommendations in this respect are presented to the President and become operative, I would urge inclusion in the total Administration package a new HUD program -- call it a "Program for Humanizing Metropolitan Areas'r or a "Program for Urban Development, 11 or some other positivesounding substitute title for "urban renewal. 11 Two features would distinguish it from earlier emphases: first, it would set up renewal and housing programs on a metropolitan-wide basis as the new Tttle II type of emphasis in the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act has achieved for other federal grant and loan programs, and second, it .would expand on the workable program" concept to require certain steps for humanizing metropolitan areas as a basis for qualifying for loan and grant assistance. More particularly, under such a program current statutory provisions for the array of different grants - in-aid, loan, and rent supplement authorizations would be amended so that the eligible LPA 1 s would be new-type Metropolitan
--- ·- .
·r-...,..___._., _...._ ... ·,------
·1 . Area Development Commissions .ll In addition tD the jurisdictional change, the key feature of these new Commissions would be an entire new philosophy in the execution of the traditional renewal, public housing, rehabilita tion housing, cooperative housing and middle income housing programs, and the new rent supple ment program. While the Demonstration Citie s Program woul d · become the rr.ajor central city program, it would be required to meet the / workable-program-type criteria develop.ed by the Metropolita n Area ,Develop- · .ment Connnission. · -
- · _;
Under the new philosophy an empha sis on ttcommunity enclavestt would. he · featured in contrast to .the old massive .area-wide clearance and r e development or rehabilitation emphasis. The esse ntial objective of thi s- new appr oa ch · would be dual -- (1) it would seek to humanize thei city environment by an across-the-boards effort for the impr ovement of facilities and services i n ihese enclaves,l/ each sensitively attuned to the mosaic of living patte r ns in its environs , and (2) it.would deve lop and utilize workable progr ams tha t would progress i ve ly put into effe ct voluntary open hous i ng gua r ant ee s a nd intr oduce va rious services a nd improvemen ts in all e nclaves . Enclave s wou l d be sma l l in sc'a l e , some times one block in extent, s ome t imes two or three, and pe rhaps affecting no more than a dozen structures in a four or five block a rea. They would be identified on the basis of a wide range of criteria , including struc t ura l conditions in the a r ea, hous ing vacancie s, vacant land; t y pe of exis ting l a nd use , t he propos e d t rans por t a t i on and l a nd use s i n city pla ns, the pattern of communit y organiza t ions i n the a rea , s ocia l inte r action characterist'i cs i n the area , a nd a t tit ude s of re s i de n ts aixl u t the i r ne i ghbor hood. The proposa l f or human iz i ng an e nc l ave woul d :yary lvith the cha r a c ter .-- is tics , oppo.rtuni tie s, and needs of eachu Progr am empha se s would proba bly diffe r i~ close -in a reas from t hos e -i n suburban a r ea s . Experiment a tion i n ways of secur ing community par ticipation in e ncla ve are as wo uld be a n i mpor tant pa r t of a ttaining respons ible invo l vement of r es i den t s i n suc h art e ffo rt . The hous ing aspe ct of the program might i nvolve publ i c l a nd a cquisition of sca tte red propert ie s a few a t a t i me and the r e placement of outworn struc t ure s wi t h new one s ; s ome might i nvolve r e habilita tion by priva t e groups
1/ The t itle Me tropolita n Area Deve l opme n t Conm1i s s i on" is intended t o convey emphasis on bui l ding and deve lopment function s , a nd might be cons olidate d wit h the me tropol i t a n planning and pr ogramming functions t ha t are empha size d under T"itle II of the 1966 Act. Whethe r it is po litica lly £eas i ble to phase out the pr esent - day mun icipal programs in re newa l and public housing, I would de f e r to othe rs on the TF on t his ques tion, but under any cir cums t a nces, the new metr opoli tan empha sis, afte r allowi ng for a trans i tion per i od, should rece i ve the lion 's sha re of loa n a nd gran t author i za tion . I I This would mean i n troducing some of the same coordinat ive me chanisms provided for under t he Demons tra tion Citie s Program i n to t h i s Program. ·;"··· ·~,
�~:.~·;.~·f.. -=-~.,.;~~ ~
- .,...~·-:~™--16:58, 29 December 2017 (EST) r"= ' ~J184.108.40.206-~;~~l:~==--- -r_.1__ >··
~: '\1 r_;.i_;;~,,..-
--- ------ ---+- - - ~ ___._. , .. -------- - - - -----·-=- - - - - -
or cooperatives and be planre d variably, some with and some without rent . supplements. The key concept in the development of plans for these enclaves would be voluntary open housing guarantees.JI Enclaves in outlying suburban arec!,s would be encouraged to receive small numbers of deprived families .f rom the central city, and those in central areas would be designed t~ receiv~Jamilies of varying socio-economic circumstances seeking close-in locations; For success of such a _Program a great deal depends on develop~ng responsible participation by re.sidents of enclave connnunities and in keeping the scale of adjustment at low key. I
To -achieve the full leverage ;iJa program of this kind, special related efforts ··in local services, educatlon, employment, health, social work, and recreation would be developed, especially in the central city areas. · By and large schools would be found in interstitial areas bebveen enclaves and depended upon to help supply a cementing force to the efforts in surrounding enclaves. In short' the Program f .o r HumaniZ>ing Met'ropolitan Areas is based on a philosophy of responsible involvement of small groups in making their . block or locale a 11 foster home 11 . for . a few new families. A backup effort in s pecial education, employment and other services would be an essential feature of the Program. In effect, in the large me tropolitan a r eas this Program in a _m etropolitan-wide framework would become a complement to the Demonstration Cities Program which centers on the .c entral city problem. 2. A St epped-Up Effort in Re search on Inter-Group Re lations and Liva bility in the City. The severa l rece nt crise s in ce ntral cities of large me tropolitan areas and the groping a ction efforts to alleviate t he se situa tions cle arly indicate a failure in ba ckup r esearch. In ·some r espe cts more serious, there is a lack of an evaluation effort on action taken which would enable conclusions to be drawn on t he relative effectiveness of measures used. In any effort to institute a ction programs in are as· as sensitive as tho se of trappe d popula tions, and ce rtainly in a ny program to e liminate ca u ses of t he se conditi ons , a major r esearch thrust is r e quired, one on · t he order of that which this country has mounted in space research or in medica l research in recent years. _....,, ,
Ce rtainly the s ocial problems of today s hould- be hi gh in priority of attent ion . But .in be late dly re searching t he s e pr oblems , t he big prob l ems of tomorr ow should not be over looke d . One pr oblem r apidly desce nding on ~itie s is that of a dj ustments to changed ]Etterns of liv ing which wi ll come fr om shorter work week. Ther e is a great deal of s~ecula tion on the boredom
J / Obvious l y vigor ous Admini stration l eadersh i p i n amending the Demonstr ation Cities and Metropol itan Development Act of 1966 to e l iminate Sec . 205(f ) would be esse ntial .
�of urbanites and their social psycho l og ical prob l ems of adjustment; the re is speculation abo~t two-house livi ng arrangements becoming much more widespread wit h attendant changes in re c rea tion empha ses and traffic patterns; and there are all sorts of unknowns i nvolve d i n new transportation and communications technologies. With ;1 11 this i n t e rest and speculation, t here is little systerna tic research going on that would en able cities to take account of these changes in the pub l i c work s a nd service programs of a catching-up and remedial sort be i ng l a unche d today, much less ena ble them to embark on programs of a more pos i tive kind de signed for the Great Society. A thir d research emphasis clea ly needed is one which frontally e xamines the new kind of urban envi r onment res presented in the belts of urba n deve l opme nt extending over seve r a l sta t es . These appear to be superce d ing the metropolitan area as a n ur ban environment (just at the time whe n me t ro pol itan-wide approaches are rece iving a t t ention in Federal legisla tion fo r the :first time to a significan t extent)G The qualitative aspects of liv ing conditions in such regions of the k i nd noted above is one facet of th i s envir onment, but also involve d is the whole area of governmental mechanisms for dealing with needs a nd prob lems in these belts. Sec. 1011 on the Urba n Environmen t a l Stud i es of the Demonstration Cities and Me tro politan Development Act of 1966 needs t o be grea tly broa dened in conce pt to recognize these three area s of neede d research. 3. The Wheaton Proposal for Me tropolitan Ar ea Fi s ca l Res pons ib ility and Actio~ . Although W. L. C. Whea ton 2 s pr oposa l is already i n t he pub lic domain, i t has not been widely cir c ulated as-ye t . I n any cas e, the r e a re f ea tures o f his conce pt of 11 Me tr opoli t an Target Pl a nn i ng 11 which ma y ha ve me rit fo r consideration by the TF i n t he s e cond stage of our work. Ve ry br ie f ly he _ proposes using Federal gr a nt progr ams t o ac h ieve a more equitable d is tribu t i on of fiscal r e sponsibil i ty among t he municipalities of a me tropolitan area, particularly in the a rea s of educa tion and housing . I attach a c opy of his pape r.