"10. Public transportation of passengers for hire is an essential governmental function and a public purpose for which the power of taxation of the State may be exercised and its public funds expended. Provided, however, that the State of Georgia shall not provide more than 10 percent of the total cost either directly or indirectly, and to amend the Title accordingly. The General Assembly is authorized to provide for the implementation of this provision including the granting of public funds to any public corporation or authority established by the General Assembly for the performance of the aforesaid function and purpose, or contracting, through appropriate departments or instrumentalities of State government, with any such public corporation or authority established by the General Assembly for performance of the aforesaid function and purpose." SEC. 2. When the above proposed amendment to the Constitution shall have been agreed to by two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two branches of the General Assembly, and the same has been entered on their journals with the "Ayes" and "Nays" taken thereon, such proposed amendment shall be published and submitted as provided in Article XIII, Section I, Paragraph I of the Constitution of Georgia of 1945, as amended. The ballot submitting the above proposed amendment shall have written or printed thereon the following: "Yes () Shall the Constitution be amended so as to declare public transportation of passengers for hire to be an essential governmental function and a public purpose for which "No ( ) the power of taxation of this State may be exercised and its public funds expended? All persons desiring to vote in favor of ratifying the proposed amendment shall vote "Yes". All persons desiring to vote against ratifying the proposed amendment shall vote "No". If such amendment shall be ratified as provided in said Paragraph of the Constitution, it shall become a part of the Constitution of this State. The returns of the election shall be made in like manner as returns for elections for members of the General Assembly, and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to ascertain the result and certify the result to the Governor, who shall issue his proclamation thereon. Senator WILLIAMS. We welcome you, Mr. DeMent. You lost our good friend, didn't you, the executive director, Mr. Gunlock? He has been here many times to help us out. As a matter of fact, we used Chicago as one of the good examples of the balance in transportation, your expressway, and the whole story. STATEMENT OF GEORGE DeMENT, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR RAPID TRANSIT, CHICAGO, ILL. Mr. DEMENT. And an excellent commuter railroad system. Senator WILLIAMS. Yes. We are pleased to have you, and we are grateful for your appearance here. Mr. DEMENT. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, first let me introduce myself, and give you a little background. I am George L. DeMent, chairman of the board of the Chicago Transit Authority, an autonomous, nontaxing public agency, operator of the mass transportation system in Chicago and 29 suburbs. Previously, I was public works commissioner of the city of Chicago, and have spent my entire professional career in public as an engineer and administrator. As commissioner of public works, I was responsible for completion of such projects as Chicago's initial system of subways, O'Hare International Airport and the new expressway system, of which one major route is the famous Eisenhower Expressway, west of the city, which incorporates the first rapid transit route in the median strip of an expressway. Presently, I am also serving as a member of the newly created Illinois State Commission on High-Speed Rail Transit and as a member of a special committee appointed by Mayor Richard J. Daley, of Chicago, for supervising preliminary planning of a new downtown Chicago subway system. I mention these things to indicate I have been closely involved in expressway work and I am very proud of the expressways we have in Chicago. However, I am appearing before you today primarily as president of the Institute for Rapid Transit. The Institute for Rapid Transit is a not-for-profit corporation whose objectives are to promote, improve, and expand rapid transit, particularly rail rapid transit in the Nation's heavily populated metropolitan areas. The membership of the institute embraces all facets of the industry-operating and planning organizations, manufacturers and suppliers, and consulting engineering firms. However, the institue's board of directors, as the policymaking body, consists entirely of representatives of the following operating and planning organizations: Bi-State Transit System (St. Louis). Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (Boston). New York City Transit Authority. Port Authority of Allegheny County (Pittsburgh). First, as a representative of the rapid transit industry, I would like to express our appreciation for the recognition that Congress has given to the need for financial assistance to mass transit improvements through the enactment of Mass Transportation Acts of 1962 and 1964. The position of our industry long has been that metropolitan areas must have a balanced approach to their transportation problems. Obviously, the automobile is here to stay. Senator WILLIAMS. Using exactly those words here, quoting an oil company president from Boston, he said: "The automobile will take care of itself." The automobile obviously is here to stay. Mr. DEMENT. I feel that the automobile is performing and will continue to perform an important function in fulfilling the overall transportation needs of the community. At the same time, however, I am sure we will realize that in our congested and growing urban areas the automobile alone cannot possibly perform the total transportation job. This is particularly true with regard to moving large numbers of people to and from the central business district in the peak hours of travel. The truth of the matter is that unless modern transit facilities, particularly rapid transit facilities in large areas, are provided along with similar urban highway improvements, there is little or no hope of maintaining prosperous and growing central business districts. Our problem in the post-World War II years was that, for the most part, this importance or need for public transportation was not recognized. To further complicate matters, funds were readily available for highway construction while little, if any, such assistance was available for transit. The inequity of this situation at the Federal level was first recognized by Congress with the passage of the Mass Transportation Act of 1962, which provided demonstration grants and loans but no capital grant funds for transit. Further recognition came with the enactment of the Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which greatly enlarged the Federal assistance program by including capital grants which were so badly needed by the rapid transit industry. Now that Congress is being asked to continue this assistance, you might very well inquire about what has been accomplished with the assistance previously authorized. Many cities throughout the country, grateful for this action on the part of the Federal Government, have taken immediate steps to avail themselves of this much-needed assistance. Time would not permit a complete review of the benefits derived by the various rapid transit systems. We would like, however, to cite a few examples which are typical. CLEVELAND Federal assistance now is making possible the construction, for the first time in the United States, of a rail rapid transit facility connecting a major airport with the downtown business district. Some local funds had been available for this extension for a number of years. However, these local funds were grossly insufficient to carry out the construction so the project lay dormant until Federal assistance became available. NEW YORK The availability of Federal grants for capital improvements has enabled the city of New York to double its current purchase program of rapid transit cars for the New York City Transit Authority from 200 to 400 cars. Like other metropolitan areas, New York is planning vast improvements for rapid transit based on future availability of Federal assistance. Mr. O'Connor mentioned this in more detail, and I am sure Mr. Gilhooley, of the transit authority, will make further comments about it to you. CHICAGO On my own property, the Chicago Transit Authority, we have been greatly encouraged by the success of the new Skokie Swift suburban rapid transit service which was made possible by a Federal demonstration grant. In this instance, the Federal demonstration grant has served as the risk money for a transit service which was especially difficult to assess in advance from the standpoint of patronage. The actual average patronage of more than 7,000 rides per day, as compared with our prior estimates of 1,500 rides per day, has more than justified the Federal grant. As a direct result of this Federal assistance, the Chicago Transit Authority is now able to provide this service on its own which would have been difficult to justify without the demonstration. As an in direct result of the success with Skokie Swift, Mayor Daley, and the Chicago City Council have decided to include transit in a major bond issue proposal for the June 14 referendum. In view of the many demands upon Chicago for all types of public improvements, money for transit improvements is limited. However, the money available, matched with Federal grants, would permit us to construct urgently needed rapid transit extensions to the northwest and the south areas of the city, as well as modernization to the existing system, much of which was constructed before the turn of the century. Naturally, I am especially concerned with what happens in Chicago, but I cite this as an example which I believe is indicative of conditions in many cities. SAN FRANCISCO The entire rapid transit industry stands to gain from the technical and research development program now being conducted by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District under a Federal demonstration grant. This project covers automatic train operations, noise control, better riding qualities, improved track construction, and similar experiments. All of these subjects have been important areas of interest in which industry did as much as it could. Until Federal assistance became available, the industry simply did not have the money in sufficient amounts to carry out this important research. As a result of the research in San Francisco, there has been generated $75 to $100 million of research in private industry. I am sure Mr. Stokes will elaborate on that statement tomorrow. EASTERN CITIES A commuter railroad crisis has developed in a number of cities and metropolitan areas along the eastern part of the country. These commuter railroads are supplying important suburban rapid transit service in the areas surrounding Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. The Federal Government through its demonstration grants is helping to find solutions to this problem in the areas involved. While solutions to the New York and Philadelphia problems are still to be determined, experiments have indicated that in the Boston area these services could not be carried on by private operators and that an areawide operator to be responsible for all surface, rapid transit, and commuter services was needed. The formation of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, as the area wide operator for the Boston area, came about in part because of the federally sponsored demonstrations in this area. OTHER CITIES Rapid transit has been discussed in many other cities over the years. Because of the financial problems involved, these plans have remained dormant. However, now that the Federal Government is providing assistance for both public and private transportation, there has been a resurgence of interest in the possibilities of rapid transit in many of these cities. This is exemplified in such cities as Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Baltimore, Atlanta, and most recently Seattle. As you are well aware, rapid transit will be provided in Washington, D.C., under a separate act of Congress. All of these cities and many others throughout the Nation are recognizing the advantages of rapid transit-that is, off-street, grade-separated facilities. Only high capacity, grade-separated rapid transit can successfully perform these most necessary functions. 1. Reduce street traffic congestion in the cores of metropolitan areas; 2. Cope with the mass transportation needs of the growing concentration of population in metropolitan areas; and 3. Provide the speed and attractiveness of service that will induce a great many motorists to leave their cars at home, or at least use rapid transit for part of their daily trips into high population density areas. There exists today a serious lack of adequate high-speed, highcapacity rapid transit in most of our metropolitan areas. Existing rapid transit systems should be extensively expanding and improving their facilities and their services to the public. A number of cities of major size do not have any rail rapid transit at all. Great as is the need now for rail rapid transit, it will be much greater by 1980 when, according to population experts, 85 percent of the Nation's rapidly expanding population will be concentrated in metropolitan areas. The year 1980 may sound far off, but 14 years is a short period to accomplish improvements of this magnitude. Senator WILLIAMS. Could we just pause there on one other point. I agree with what you just said wholeheartedly. But if we don't start now, ultimately we are going to have to do it, and it will be a lot less costly to begin now than to put it off. Mr. DEMENT. Exactly. The reasons why there is a serious lack of rail rapid transit today and why existing rapid transit systems cannot expand to meet even today's needs are obvious. Rapid transit. systems are costly to construct, to maintain, and to operate. Major improvements and extensions cannot possibly be financed out of the fare box alone at reasonable rates of fare. The Mass Transportation Acts of 1962 and 1964 have established a pattern of Federal assistance that was needed by our urban communities. Actually, however, the amount of Federal assistance made available thus far is only a fraction of what will be needed. In the years to come, the capital requirements of rapid transit alone will be evaluated in terms of billions rather than millions of dollars. Consequently, the Institute for Rapid Transit believes that a continuous and expanding program will be required in the years ahead. We would like to point out that many of our cities have been handicapped by the two-thirds, one-third matching fund requirements under the existing Mass Transportation Act. If that is a big "if," I understand-if 90-10 matching funds could be made available, as is provided in the interstate highway program, it would enable much greater participation in this program by cities throughout the country. It is extremely important that our cities be assured that Federal aid to transit will be a continuing program. As I am sure we all realize, the planning of improvements of this scope require considerable time, and cities must be assured that the programs can be carried out if they are to undertake ventures of this magnitude. First, I want to thank you for providing the past acts that have made some of these things possible, and then I would like to respectfully urge that this committee recommend to the Congress the enact |