Government activities, and (d) involving citizen participation in the development of the programs. Field studies in seven metropolitan areas showed that the programs were too limited to prevent further spread of blight, that there was still a critical shortage of housing for low- and middle-income persons, that relocation was a problem because of lack of coordination of renewal and other Federal construction, and more seriously because the majority of displaced persons were nonwhites who were closed out of white neighborhoods and suburbs. There was little evidence of grassroots citizen participation, beyond the blue ribbon panels appointed by mayors.

We are in general agreement with the criteria to be used by the secretary in determining the cities eligible for assistance. But we wish two of the subsections under section 4(b) could be more specifically described. In subsection (3) more specific language is needed to assure "widespread citizen participation and maximum opportunities for employing residents of the area in all phases of the program, etc." The poor and the less advantaged residents will not be included unless specifically mentioned. Our observation is that city agencies give lipservice to citizen participation and award building contracts to the large contractor-developers who do not employ area residents. In a truly imaginative demonstration program we hope most earnestly that cities will be encouraged to find ways and means to use the skills and services of the small contractors, the small jobbers and artisans who have received such meager rewards in an affluent and great society.

In subsection (7) the language we believe should be more specific, referring directly to the vigorous enforcement of the Executive order banning housing discrimination in federally assisted housing and of title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Without open occupancy housing and the free movement of nonwhite persons into previously restricted white neighborhoods, including the suburbs, we fear that the demonstration cities program could become the means for perpetuating and extending the present ghettos. True the ghettos may be more attractive, more cleanly and safe, but they still will be ghettos.

We strongly support section 9 with requirements for relocation plans and payments for the relocation of displaced families, business concerns, and nonprofit organizations, and the requirement that relocation be coordinated with efforts to increase the supply of safe, decent housing for low- and moderateincome residents. We would hope that such relocation plans would provide for the dispersion of families from depressed areas into areas which provide greater motivation and opportunities, particularly for the young.

In May 1964 the general assembly called upon presbyteries and responsible citizens' groups to give continuing attention to the influences of environment on human life, and the overlooked and unmet needs of urban areas, the limited powers and resources of some local and State governments and the urgency of creating new coordinating and planning groups and governmental structures to deal with the expanding problems of our metropolitan society.

In May 1965 the 177th general assembly called for "coordinated policies at the Federal level dealing with land resources, metropolitan population distribution, housing supply related to job opportunities and transportation, strengthening of central cities and incentives aimed at the logical and timely expansion of existing urban areas, and improved intergovernmental relations and procedures for metropolitan action on metropolitan problems." The assembly "supports Federal legislation which would

"(1) Recognize and coordinate the many interrelated Federal aid programs, such as highways, housing, and welfare;

"(2) Distribute such Federal aid equitably among these programs."

In the light of such action we commend the committee for the inclusion of the Office of the Federal Coordinator in S. 2842 to achieve much needed coordination among the several Federal programs.

We strongly favor the Urban Development Act (S. 2977) to assist in planned metropolitan development. Our general assembly last May voted support for "legislation that would establish the coordination of metropolitan development through metropolitan planning and goal-setting." We need to confront complex urban problems with better, bolder concepts of metropolitan development, and fresh new approaches to deal with explosive urban growth.

The proposed supplementary grants which would be authorized for metropolitan areas would give some fresh incentive for comprehensive coordinated metropolitan planning.

We further support, on the grounds of the action of the general assembly in May 1965 title II of this bill for land development and new communities. "New towns or planned communities offer," the general assembly statement affirmed, “a bold approach to a higher order of comprehensive metropolitan land use** * and the optimum in livability through carefully planned open space, and community facility development." They can provide a dramatic new method of achieving "balanced communities, and controlling the planless wasteful sprawl of suburbs.

"The concept of 'new towns' offers a broadening range of free choice in housing, community activities, employment opportunities, and cultural pursuits. But in order to accomplish the objectives of 'new towns,' it is essential that the general public be encouraged to think in metropolitan terms and to visualize new towns as one essential element of many that compose the total metropolitan environment.

"The church is concerned with helping to identify practical and attainable alternatives to our present central city-suburban patterns of development. Growth will occur whether it is planned for or not. However, the well-being of our two greatest resources, people and land, are at stake. * * * Harnessing the forces of urbanization can place man in charge of his own urban destiny." We welcome the provision for research and the testing and demonstration of new methods of applying technological advances to housing construction and urban development. Our 1965 general assembly urged "increased urban research in such entrenched persistent urban problems as pollution, transportation, waste disposal, advances to environmental health factors, housing construction, and densities related to human welfare."

We still build houses in the most traditional ways. We still process garbage and refuse in the same way used in the Roman army camps. Our air is more foul, our water is more polluted, our places to play or contemplate are fewer and more crowded. In every civilized and dynamic society there comes a time when a critical appraisal of the suitability and capacity of physical environment to satisfy human needs should be undertaken.

STATEMENT OF JOHN E. FLYNN, MAYOR, CITY OF YONKERS, N.Y., ON S. 2842, DEMONSTRATION CITIES ACT OF 1966

Chairman Sparkman and honorable members of the committee, ladies and gentlemen, we are all here today to determine whether passage of the Demonstration Cities Act is timely or necessary. Our concern can best be expressed in the form of a question. What does a community do when the rug is pulled out from under it?

This is a serious, significant question requiring thoughtful and objective consideration, not only for analysis of the proposed legislation, but because it directly relates to the recent history of the city of Yonkers.

In 1954, just a few short years ago, the Alexander Smith Carpet Co., perhaps not considered at the time of major importance to the overall economy of the city, closed its doors and by that simple act, did literally "pull the rug out from under us."

You might view the area of our city most drastically affected, the AshburtonSaw Mill-Nepperhan Valley region, in terms of its statistics, such as 174 acres, roughly 42 city blocks, current estimated value approximately $13 million. I must, however, because I was born there, grew up there, and was tied to the community for most of my life, view it in the terms of its people. Almost 3,000 families. My concern now as their mayor is far less for mortar and stone than it is for their well-being and an end to the creeping decay that besets their lives.

This too is why I am here before you. To translate the mountain of statistics which you have already received into the human equation. From this vantage point the need for legislation of the type before you will be seen with crystal clarity.

If I may continue to illustrate. These were good neighborhoods. Originally comprised of hearty Scotch, Irish stock. Soon their ranks were joined by Polish, Italian, Ukrainian, and Slovakian immigrants, all representing either the Christian or Hebrew faith, and upon that faith and their jobs built their lives.

In

later years, they were joined by brethren representing almost every race and creed. This mixture from our own "melting pot" warmed the atmosphere and character of the area with an old "Bohemian" charm.

These were good people, strong and skilled. Secure in their jobs and sure of themselves and their futures. But oddly enough, it was not only their security and their sureness, for upon this rested the entire pattern of the economy of surrounding neighborhoods and that of the very city itself. Of course, we see all of this now in hindsight. We did not and perhaps could not see it then. Ours is a city of some 215,000 people, and what is taking place in this blighted area is growing. The problems, mainly economic and social in character, are spreading.

Legislation of the scope you now contemplate can and will prevent the steady and malignant erosion that began taking place after this plant, employing 7,000, abruptly ceased one century of operation and left our city.

It is such legislation that will prevent the frustration of seeing resourcefulness turned into despair, the good habits and objectives of more than one lifetime become thwarted and warped, a way of life that was wholesome and full of promise peak and then gradually diminish in standards.

Here is an area where, prior to deterioration, private home ownership was the result of self-sacrifice and aspiration. Now it is a trap, chaining those who worked so hard to help build our city to a sordid environment not of their own making.

The rental housing in the area, like everything else, is deteriorating rapidly; upgrading, even to present minimum standards, is economically unfeasible. Owners are not even able to get rents at minimum rates established by rent controls; for most of their tenants such "high" rents are not possible.

Originally the housing was typical mill housing such as the type called to mind in classics like "The Corn Is Green."

There on the hillside facing the plant, workers originally set their roots. It is an area affectionately referred to as Hog Hill. These people developed a keen interest in their community and actively took part in the vital areas of community life. I know, for as general manager of the plant for many years it was my job to know them. From this section at least two generations gave their working years to the "mill." In the area known as the Hollows, many third-generation residents, including so-called minority groups, were caught in the big "shutdown."

You can recognize that their lives changed materially and those that could moved out, seeking to pick up the thread of their lives elsewhere.

Our fear is that we are losing ground daily and that legislation either will not pass or will not be made available to our community. The bulk of any appropriation will go to the cities of greater size such as our own immediate neighbor to the south, the great city of New York.

Should this be the case, you can believe that our problem will be accelerated to a high intensity and any resultant forced migration from New York would most naturally gravitate toward this substandard area of our city. To be blunt, we no longer own a "rug" to sweep New York City's problems under. Proof of the pudding lies in the immediate past, supported by the statistics accompanying this testimony.

We respectfully urge passage of this legislation—relief from these burdensome and growing problems-not only for the city of Yonkers, but for all of the smaller central cities abutting large and explosive neighbors.

STATEMENT OF FREDERICK J. ADLER, CITY MANAGER, CITY OF YONKERS, N.Y., RE S. 2842, DEMONSTRATION CITIES ACT OF 1966

Chairman Sparkman and honorable members of the committee, ladies and gentlemen, Yonkers is 64th in the Nation in population and is the 5th largest city in the great State of New York. The area in direct need of Federal and State aid is comprised of 2,870 families, and perhaps contains 174 acres of what was once and still could be the finest real estate in the country, maintaining a viable balance both socially and economically. These 42 city blocks currently are valued at approximately $13 million. Reconstruction and rehabilitation would send values to almost three times that figure.

As presently constituted, it contains the former Alexander Smith industrial park, fringed by what were once single-family detached and attached homes and what is now, in the main, most definitely becoming substandard multipleresidence housing. Deterioration is a growing cancer and, like the actual disease, the only cure may lie in enough money to effectuate a cure. This rapidly decaying community strongly relies upon its four churches and the strength of its religious leaders for some measure of hope. Our own county welfare agencies can just about maintain a status quo. The only hope for a complete and creative method of redevelopment is contained in the legislation now contemplated by the Federal Government.

There are certain precedents already established for the passage of such legislation in papers and statements now in existence. For instance, our President's remarks concerning guidelines for such a program:

"The demonstration should be of sufficient magnitude both in its physical and social dimensions to arrest blight and decay in entire neighborhoods. It must make a substantial impact within the coming years on the development of the entire city."

Also, we wish to underscore that in the prelude to the above, Mr. Johnson also stated:

"I propose a demonstration cities program that will offer qualifying cities of all sizes the promise of new life for their people."

Significantly, here are the words of Commissioner S. J. Shulman, the head of our Westchester County Planning Department, in a letter referring to the city of Yonkers:

"It is an old suburban area which has long been experiencing most of the problems of the older central cities and, at the same time, has had to respond to the problems associated with typical postwar suburban growth. Constituting almost one-fourth of the population of Westchester, the city's ability to handle these problems will determine to a considerable extent whether or not in future years the rest of the county will be able to maintain a viable economy." And further, "Yonkers has already achieved the only significant amount of success in Westchester in its completed urban renewal project. *** I am, therefore, strongly in favor of the city's efforts to secure the larger benefits proposed to be made available under the demonstration cities concept, and urge the desig nation of Yonkers for such concentrated treatment."

There is little question that such legislation is necessary, when it is practically the only answer to what we may call superurban renewal. This fact is again supported by existing statements. For example, in the Department of Housing and Urban Development section-by-section summary of the Demonstration Cities Act of 1966, on page 2, item 1 dealing with the Secretary's determination of eligibility.

[That] "The program is of sufficient magnitude in both physical and social dimensions to remove or arrest blight and decay in entire sections or neighborhoods, provide a substantial increase in the supply of standard housing of low and moderate cost, make marked progress in serving the poor and disadvantaged people living in slum and blighted areas with a view to reducing educational disadvantages, disease, and enforced idleness, and make a substantial impact on the sound development of the entire city."

Basis for the support of such legislation lies in these few key statement> by divergent yet responsible people of government. In our case, support for such funds would not only create a favorable impact upon our city, but also upon the entire county consisting of total of almost 1 million people. A county, may I remind you, that for many years was and still is considered to be one of the finest suburban areas in the New York metropolitan region.

Let us also submit for your reflection the fact that many of our problems are not only of our own making, nor are they solely a result of our changing times. Many of their roots may be found in what may be called the transgressions of our immediate neighbor, the great city of New York.

Many have already appeared before like committees suggesting that the entire proposed appropriation, would if it were theirs, be used up in trying to solve one small neighborhood problem within their great borders.

We state that a small percentage, added to the work that is already underway in our community, would be enough to begin to effectuate cures for our Ashburton-Saw Mill-Nepperhan Valley region and the entire county of Westchester and once against restore to Yonkers the pride and security that was once ours.

Our demands would be small-enough to get a start-a "Headstart" if you will.

Something dramatic and far reaching is needed if we are to stem the tide of increasing vice and crime in the area. Retraining centers and programs for the now disadvantaged must be provided.

The industrial area, with its obsolete facilities and the effect of its low evalua. tion upon many levels of our economy, must be razed. The availability of modern plant sites on flat and level terrain abutting mainline rail sidings, with proximity to two of the State's major highway routes, coupled with present and existing zoning and environment, would of itself help to rehabilitate the entire region.

These are not speculative pronouncements.

We, of the city of Yonkers, have already begun preliminary planning for redevelopment. Appropriations have been made and “action" groups, consultants, and first proposals are already in hand.

But, if we are to accomplish all of this and the environmental changes necessary to the residential and commercial areas with as little disruption of our citizens as possible funds such as you now propose to make available will be needed. We pledge ourselves to continue planning, development, community action, and participation to make it possible to help free the area, change the statistics and arrest the decay. Decay that is sure to continue as rapidly as we could afford to redevelop under present programs and appropriations.

Here, in the balance of the material provided with our testimony, are the facts and the preliminary plans that have resulted from an all-out, crash program to help our people.

We openly solicit and urgently require your consideration and help. Give the people of Yonkers and other smaller central cities their chance now.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. CONNORS, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER, CITY OF YONKERS, N.Y., RE S. 2842, DEMONSTRATION CITIES ACT OF 1966

Chairman Sparkman and honorable members of the committee, as assistant to the city manager of the city of Yonkers in the State of New York I have been empowered with the privilege of presenting to your honorable Subcommittee on Housing of the Senate Banking and Currency Committee, this interim report of the Yonkers Urban Renewal Agency in support of Federal legislation authorizing a demonstration cities program-and documenting this need for a comprehensive attack upon the many problems of our urban blight with this analysis and report together with the statements of the Honorable Frederick J. Adler, city manager of the city of Yonkers, and the Honorable John E. Flynn, mayor of the city of Yonkers, in support of such legislation.

This presentation before you today is in recognition of the action of the President of the United States in requesting of Congress the enactment of a demonstration cities program in order to provide financial and technical assistance to enable cities to plan, develop, and carry out programs of rebuilding and revitalization of large slums and blighted areas, to expand and improve public programs and services available to people who live in such areas, and to enable cities to participate more effectively in existing Federal assistance programs.

This coordination of activities aided under such Federal programs, with other public and private actions will provide the most effective and economical concentration of Federal, State, local, and private efforts and improve the quality and environment of urban life.

The Yonkers Urban Renewal Agency, after thorough consideration of the needs and problems of the entire city of Yonkers, has determined and designated the Ashburton-Nepperhan-Saw Mill Valley area as appropriate for the undertaking of such a demonstration cities program.

Because of the many adverse and deteriorating influences and circumstances present in this area, the Ashburton-Nepperham-Saw Mill Valley in the city of Yonkers has become a classic example of a large area within a city afflicted with serious problems-economic, social and physical blight, deterioration and decay. We believe that a demonstration cities program in this area will be of sufficient magnitude in both physical and social dimensions to remove and/or arrest blight and decay in the entire area, and will contribute a substantial impact on the sound future development of the entire city of Yonkers; further, after careful