Another financial problem of the schools in large cities arises from the fact that cost of sites in large cities is many times that of sites in other school districts. As shown in table 5 for 1958-63, the average cost of all school sites purchased was $68,156 per acre for the great cities, in contrast to the $3,074 per acre average for the sample of other school districts in the States represented. (Metropolitan, suburban, and rural school districts were included in the sample.)

TABLE 5.-School site costs per acre for the last 5 years 1958–631

Average for sampling of other school districts in these States--
Average for 14 great cities..

New York..

Chicago__.

Buffalo____.

St. Louis_.

Cleveland_.

San Francisco_.

Boston___

Pittsburgh_

Los Angeles_.
Philadelphia 2.

Detroit__

Baltimore

Average cost per acre

$3,074

68, 156

197, 841

136, 927

125, 741

112, 081

108, 009

96, 754

74, 620

71, 975

68, 000

67, 344

64, 909

39, 300

29, 181

5,692

Milwaukee.

Houston---

1 Average is for most recent 5-year period for which data is available. 24-year average.

These substantial differences between school site costs in the large cities and in other school districts constitute an increased financial burden in the provision of adequate facilities for the school districts with higher costs in contrast to the districts with lower site values.

Construction costs and restrictive municipal building codes are additional factors which contribute to the high costs of school plants in large cities and should be recognized in provisions for financial support.

The public schools in the great cities have shown a tremendous growth in enrollments since World War II. As indicated in table 6, the enrollments of 14 cities have grown from 2,765,337 in 1950 to 3,890,466 in 1963; for 1965, a conservative projection suggests a growth to 4,109,632, an increase of 48.6 percent between 1950 and 1965. The problem of financing the public schools in the great cities becomes even more critical as the enrollments rise.

TABLE 6.-Public school membership on or about Oct. 1

1 Projected by the Research Council. The average annual increase for 1963 to 1965 was assumed to be the same as the average annual increase for 1960-63.

The greater loss of taxable assessed valuation in large cities, relative to the loss in the rest of the State when coupled with the exploding school population in the cities, dramatizes the fact that the large city school systems are in the midst of a financial crisis.

Table 7 indicates that the large cities have either suffered greater loss in taxable assessed valuation than the rest of its State or has gained less than the rest of the State.

Without access to additional revenue these cities cannot keep pace with the rest of the country in meeting the increasingly complex educational needs facing them.

Baltimore.
Boston

Buffalo..

Chicago.

Cleveland.

Detroit..

Houston..

TABLE 7.-5-year change in taxable assessed valuation

1 Change is for the most recent 5-year period for which data is available. 2 Not available.

Moreover, the taxable assessed valuation is not keeping pace with the growth in pupil population and school costs in many communities. The fact is that over the past 5 years, the tax base per pupil has decreased in 10 of the 14 cities listed in table 8, while during the same period the tax base per pupil has increased in 8 of the 10 States reporting.

TABLE 8.-5-year change in per pupil taxable assessed valuation

1 Change is for the most recent 5-year period for which data is available. ? Not available.

Table 9 illustrates the fact that in these cities from 51 to 77 cents of every property tax dollar goes for nonschool services. In 9 of the 14 cities the nonschool share is 60 percent or more, while in other parts of the State the average local nonschool government is taking less than 50 percent of the property tax dollar and some are taking as little as 22 percent.

This problem is well illustrated by the situation of Pittsburgh, Pa. Of each dollar paid by a resident of Pittsburgh for property taxes, 61 cents goes to nonschool governmental units. In the average Pennsylvania community only 22 cents of the property tax dollar goes to nonschool services, only about one-third that in Pittsburgh. The difference of between 61 and 22 cents, or 39 percent of the total tax revenue, used by the nonschool governmental units in Pittsburgh, represents, in part, an extra burden that must be borne by its residents to support services not provided in other communities. This "municipal overburden" is provided

at the expense of education, and constitutes a serious limitation on the local ability to support public schools.

The cost and number of governmental services, other than education, tend to increase with the size of a community and reach very large proportions in the major cities where many services are rendered to nonresidents as well as to residents. Police and fire protection, sanitation services, welfare programs, maintenance of streets and expressways, parks, museums, and zoos are only a few examples of the services to which the large cities must commit a greater portion of their tax dollar than most other communities must commit. The ability of the large city to support education is thus reduced.

The large cities are in a position where they must increase the tax rate just to maintain their present educational programs. This leaves little or nothing in their budgets for improvement. In fact it often results in curtailment of programs because enrollments and costs are increasing while the total dollars available per pupil dwindle.

Table 9 shows the proportion of the property tax revenue that is being expended for nonschool services in the great cities as compared with the balance of the State in which these cities are located. Table 9 also shows that this proportion in the great cities is as much as three times that of the State in which the great cities are located.

TABLE 9.-Percent of property tax levied by nonschool governments

Such are the common problems of the great cities of the United States. Within each city the problems are particularized, and each has made its own study in depth of its situation and has brought what remedies it could to this situation. As I am most familiar with Chicago, I can best illustrate with facts about Chicago.

The 1960 census data for Chicago provided a basis for a report I made to the board of education on July 10, 1963, in which the data were related to our administrative school districts on a series of maps. Data covered median family income; adult leadership as indicated by percentages of males employed at professional, managerial, and comparable levels; and the years of school completed by those 25 years of age or over.

Our analysis of median income revealed not only a difference between our highest and lowest income districts of $4,224, but a geographic concentration of low incomes in the inner portion of the city, a portion to be identified on each succeeding factor. The districts with the lowest median incomes possessed the lowest percentages of males employed in leadership positions, with nearly one-third having less than 10 percent so employed.

The data on educational levels of persons 25 years of age or older, related to the foregoing, indicated an alarming trend for Chicago as a whole. In 1940 the median number of years of schooling completed by Chicagoans of 25 years of age or older was 8.75, higher than the median for Illinois or the United States at large. By 1960, though its median had risen, Chicago had fallen behind both Illinois and the country at large. Analysis of the city by school districts in comparison to States showed that of our 21 districts, 2 had medians in 1960 lower than the median of any State; only 7 districts equaled or exceeded the median for the United States; 9 States surpassed Chicago's best district; only 8 districts equaled the median for Illinois; and no district equaled the highest median among the States.

On July 8, 1964, a report I made to the board of education utilized additional census data compiled on maps by the Chicago Committee on Urban Opportunity whereby the city's inner poverty ring was identified. Those data included percentages of male delinquents, substandard housing units, and recipients of public assistance, in addition to data on income and educational levels. Study of the composite map of all indicators of poverty revealed that the inner poverty ring approximated the area of 9 of our 21 administrative districts. These data were then related to school data, the most striking of which for the purpose of this report was enrollment. Based on September 1963 enrollment figures, the nine school districts approximating the inner poverty ring were sending to school 47 percent of our elementary school enrollment. Thus nearly one-half of all Chicago's public elementary school pupils live in an area equal to one-quarter of the total city area and characterized as the most serious as to delinquency, substandard housing, low income, public assistance, and below average adult educational attainment.

Chicago has not, however, been insensitive to the plight and educational need of its schoolchildren. The reports cited and several others have indicated both the extent and location of services and facilities designed to provide for the normal and compensatory needs of children in these areas.

The nine districts described have had the following selected services: Special summer schools for elementary school pupils 1960-64, 30,000 pupils; and

Of the 1,000 after school reading classes_.

Of the after school reading clinic services.

Of the after school libraries_.

Of the hot lunchroom services__.

Of the attendance officer services_.

Of the bus trips-.

Of the new classrooms_.

Of the elementary school freed assistant principals_

Of the upper grade center programs_.

Of the master teachers___.

Of the special service teachers_

Percent

66

80

80

50

50

40

48

50

57

78

59

Other services could be cited, since the list does not approximate the full range of educational services provided in the Chicago public schools. Moreover, during the same period of time 190,000 additional in enrollment had to be absorbed; double shift eliminated, and class size reduced from 39.5 to 32.5.

The educational needs of children in our great cities are unmatched in our history; the problems and challenges equally so. The pressures of population growth, technological change, poverty, mobility, urban growth, and the tension of our time impinge upon the major cities of America. It is in urban centers that people choose to live must live-under our present way of life. It is to urban centers that our most needy are drawn by a dream of betterment. The great cities are truly impacted areas. The problems are mounting; local revenues, receding. No longer does one city, one State, one area of the United States educate only its own for only its own economy. The highways of America have made us all truly one nation.

A massive effort is needed to raise the level of each for the advancement of the level of all. A larger share of the total tax dollar is essential if education is to bring us completely into the sun, and part of that portion of the tax dollar now collected at the Federal level is needed locally for education.

Therefore in conclusion I wish to emphasize the impacted nature of our great cities' educational programs and heartily endorse Senate bill 2528 amending Public Law 874, 81st Congress.

Senator MORSE. We stand adjourned. Dr. Brownell has arrived. Dr. Brownell, I had already announced your plane was late, and you probably would not get here. We are in a situation where I will have to adjourn again in 10 minutes because of the death of Senator Engle.

2 "1953-63 10 Years of Growing," annual report of the general superintendent, Chicago, Ill., 1964. "Programs for Potential Dropouts," Study Rept. No. 3, 1964 series, Chicago public schools, 1964. "Compensatory Education," Study Rept. No. 4, 1964 series, Chicago public schools, 1964 (in publication).

In his memory I would not hold the subcommittee in session beyond the convening time of the Senate which is 11 o'clock. The Senate will meet just long enough to adjourn. I would like to have you do what the other witnesses have done, insert your prepared statement in the record, and then summarize it and accept my apology in advance. I mean no discourtesy, but I have no other course to follow. You have 10 minutes to make whatever statement you wish in the way of a summary to the subcommittee. I am so glad you called my attention to the fact that you had arrived so we could get your testimony.

STATEMENT OF DR. SAMUEL M. BROWNELL, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, DETROIT, MICH.

Dr. BROWNELL. Thank you. I appreciate very much this opportunity.

For the sake of the record I am Samuel Miller Brownell, superintendent of schools for Detroit, and it is nice to be back before this subcommittee again. When I was Commissioner of Education I had an opportunity to appear on several occasions. In connection with this Federal impact bill amendment, my testimony indicates primarily the support of the proposal with the fact that it acknowledges a Federal responsibility where Federal purposes are involved and indicating that the fact that the Federal Government recognizes its responsibility in connection with food, clothing, and shelter of dependent children. is consonant with a proposal to recognize education equally as a Federal responsibility. And in discussing the proposed amendments, I have tried to point out the impact of the Federal activity in the defense field in removing from cities many of the industries that have been moved out to Federal installations outside of the city, thereby taking away a certain amount of the tax base and leaving behind those who are unable to move into the new automated type of activities in these new factories and that this provides a very decided impact on the ability to support schools.

I have also noted in my testimony the education of the dependent children and of the unemployed in many instances calls for more extensive education than the traditional education and that with the present tax laws as they are established in our States and local communities, the impact of this tremendous burden is massive and calls for immediate action which cannot be done in the slow process of changing the State laws and constitutions necessary to provide the added funds.

Finally I have noted in my testimony some suggestions in reference to Public Law 874 and Public Law 815, some of which I was working on when I was in Washington some time ago, particularly the point that this impact in many respects is a continuing impact and therefore probably should call for continuing legislation in order to provide for sound planning ahead on educational programs rather than the 2 to 3 year extension, periodic extension, which makes it very difficult for school districts to plan any regular and continued educational

program.

This, Mr. Chairman, I think is a summary of the highlights in my testimony.