Even the most brilliantly conceived grant-in-aid program will fail to meet its objectives unless there are qualified State and local personnel to carry it out. Intergovernmental personnel matters, then, are of paramount significance.

HEARINGS ON S. 11

On January 15, 1969, Senator Muskie introduced S. 11, the proposed Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1969, with the following cosponsors: Mr. Anderson, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Brooke, Mr. Byrd of West Virginia, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Ervin, Mr. Gravel, Mr. Hart, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Hughes, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. McCarthy, Mr. McGee, Mr. McGovern, Mr. Metcalf, Mr. Mondale, Mr. Montoya, Mr. Moss, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Pastore, Mr. Pell, Mr. Randolph, Mr. Ribicoff, Mr. Scott, Mr. Tydings, Mr. Yarborough, and Mr. Young of Ohio.

Hearings were held on March 24, 25, 26 and April 1, 1969, by the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, to consider S. 11. During the hearings 15 witnesses testified, including: U.S. Senators Thomas F. Eagleton (Missouri), Harold E. Hughes (Iowa) and U.S. Representative William J. Randall (Fourth Congressional District, Missouri); Robert E. Hampton, Chairman, U.S. Civil Service Commission, accompanied by Raymond Jacobson, Director of the Bureau of Policies and Standards, and Harold Leich, Chief of Policy Development Division of the Bureau of Policies and Standards; Jean J. Couturier, executive director, National Civil Service League; the Honorable Alex M. Petrovic, judge of the Eastern District County Court, Jackson County, Mo., accompanied by Denton King, assistant county administrator of Jackson County, Mo., and Gerald Laughlin, legislative assistant, National Association of Counties; Dr. John A. Perkins, chairman of the board, Dun & Bradstreet, Inc., and chairman, Committee for Improvement of Management in Government for Economic Development; Allen E. Pritchard, Jr., assistant executive director, National League of Cities; Alan F. Kiepper, city manager, Richmond, Va. (presented by John E. Damerel, personnel director of Richmond); Arthur F. Sampson, secretary of administration and budget secretary, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, accompanied by George Basich, Office of Federal-State Relations, National Governors' Conference; Dr. Donald C. Stone, dean of Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh; Dr. James A. Norton, president, American Society for Public Administration, and president, Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation; John A. McCart, director, Government Employees Council, AFLCIO; John F. Griner, national president, American Federation of Government Employees, accompanied by Cark K. Sadler, legislative director; Robert D. Bollard, director of legislation and community affairs, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO.

In addition, the subcommittee solicited the views of many who had testified or supplied statements on S. 699 regarding the 1967 legislation. Statements and communications from U.S. Senators Mike Gravel (Alaska), and Hugh Scott (Pennsylvania), as well as State officials and organizations were received and made a part of the hearing record. Throughout its consideration of the bills, the subcommittee con

sulted with organizations concerned with public administration and those representing State, county, and local governments, organizations representing public employees and other public interest groups. The views expressed in the testimony of witnesses and in communications to the committee were overwhelmingly in support of the objectives of the legislation. They reflect widespread concern among officials of government at every level and among students of public administration over the shortage of personnel properly qualified to carry the responsibilities of modern-day government. Measures to help State and local governments improve their personnel administration and training programs, to provide for greater mobility of professional, administrative, and technical personnel between levels of government, and to promote intergovernmental cooperation in personnel and training matters, all received strong endorsement.

MAJOR ISSUES AND COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

In its deliberations on the bill, the committee considered a number of major policy questions, posed by differences between the provisions of S. 11 as introduced and points raised in the testimony of witnesses. The decisions reached, as reflected in the provisions of S. 11, as reported, are as follows:"

Statement of principles.-The bill includes, in its declaration of policy, a statement of six basic merit principles, and requires programs or projects submitted by State or local governments for Federal assistance under the bill to be consistent with such of these principles as are applicable to the activity undertaken.

In considering these principles, the committee wished it understood that the emphasis of the bill is on Federal assistance to State and local governments in carrying out programs and projects of their own choosing, to improve their personnel administration and training activities, in accordance with these basic, generally accepted principles.

Cost-sharing ratio.-The bill, as amended, provides for a "sliding ratio" of Federal funds to State and/or local funds, beginning at 75percent Federal and 25-percent State or local matching funds, reduced to 50-50 on an "over the years" basis. The intent is to give the State and local governments the needed breathing spell to produce their own additional revenue sources for the programs undertaken under the bill's provisions.

Certifying responsibility.-The bill, as amended, provides that a proposed grant program must be consistent with the merit principles set forth in the act. Explicit responsibility and authority to certify such consistency is given the office of the Governor. The committee wished it understood that the intergovernmental purposes of the bill assume that extended effort would always be put forth by the State and local governments to assure that the intergovernmental aspects of public personnel programs would be emphasized. The intension is to further encourage the States, and the office of the Governor, to become more actively involved in these areas of policy.

Language was added providing that approval of an application, by the Civil Service Commission, will be based on consistency of the application to the criteria set forth in the bill.

Distribution formula.-S. 11, as introduced, provided that 85 percent of the grant funds would be apportioned among the States according to such factors as size of population, number of employees affected, the urgency of the programs, the need for funds to carry out the purposes of the act, and the potential of the governmental jurisdictions concerned to use the funds most effectively. The bill, as amended, reduces the percentage to 80 percent, and proposes a formula based on the objective factors of population and number of employees affected. The remaining 20 percent would be apportioned under the factors originally set forth in S. 11. The committee wished it understood that the intention of the latter fund source was to provide flexibility in meeting unanticipated emergencies, special needs, regional compact arrangements, and grants to nonprofit organizations to train personnel. Of the funds reserved for each State, no less than 50 percent shall be available for local government programs.

Reallocation of funds among the States.-The bill, as amended, provides funds not obligated by the States for which they are reserved, may be made available for reallocation to States and localities which can use the funds more immediately.

Appropriation. The bill, as amended, proposes standard appropriation language with no set amounts listed, in order to make it possible to request specific amounts consistent with budgetary requirements for the programs.

Guidelines for administration. After considering the view of some that Federal assistance for State and local personnel administration might tend to bring about an undesirable degree of uniformity and rigidity in personnel practices, the committee added language providing that the authority granted to the Civil Service Commission shall be employed in such a manner as to encourage innovation and allow for diversity on the part of States and local governments in the design, execution, and management of their own systems of personnel administration.

Language is included providing that the bill shall not be construed to prevent participation by employees or employee organizations in the formulation of policies and procedures affecting the conditions of their employment, subject to the laws and ordinances of the State or local government concerned. The question of the effect of Federal requirements of merit systems on collective bargaining procedures or on existing agreements does not arise, since no such requirements are authorized in the bill.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

The title sets forth the basic purpose of the bill as a whole and provides that it may be cited as the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1969.

Section 2.-This section sets forth the finding and declaration of Congress that since the effectiveness of State, local, and Federal governments are interdependent, it is in the national interest that the quality of public service at all levels of government be improved. This can be achieved through the development of systems of personnel administration consistent with such merit principles as insuring

openness and equity in recruitment, appointment, advancement, retention, and separation; providing equitable and adequate pay scales and benefits; upgrading of skills through training; and insulating employees from partisan political pressures. To this end, Federal financial and technical assistance is in the national interest.

Section 3.-This section provides that the act shall be administered in such a manner that the rights, powers, and responsibilities of State and local governments are fully recognized, and to encourage innovation and allow for diversity on the part of State and local governments in the design, execution, and management of their own systems of personnel administration.

TITLE I-DEVELOPMENT OF POLICIES AND STANDARDS

Section 101. This section sets forth the purpose of the title, which is to provide for intergovernmental cooperation in the development of policies and standards for the administration of programs authorized by this act.

ADVISORY COUNCIL

Section 102.-This section provides for the appointment by the President of an advisory council on intergovernmental personnel policy within 180 days after enactment. This shall be done without adherence to provisions regarding appointments in the competitive service. The President may terminate the council at any time after the expiration of 3 years following its establishment.

Subsection (b) provides that the council, not exceeding 15 members, shall be composed primarily of officials from all levels of government but shall also include members selected from employee organizations, educational institutions, and the general public. At least half its governmental members shall be officials of State and local govern

ments.

Subsection (c) states that it shall be the duty of the advisory council to study and make recommendations regarding personnel policies and programs for the purpose of improving personnel administration in State and local governments, strengthening these governments in their training efforts, and in their development of personnel administration systems, and facilitating assignments of personnel between the Federal Government and State and local governments.

Subsection (d) provides that members of this council who are not full-time employees of the Federal Government may be compensated at rates not in excess of the daily rates for GS-18 employees, including travel time and per diem.

REPORTS ON THE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Section 103.-This section provides that the council shall report its findings and recommendations to Congress and the President from time to time.

Subsection (b) states that the initial report is to be made not later than 18 months after the council's establishment, and shall include its views and recommendations on: the feasibility and desirability of extending merit requirements to additional grant-in-aid programs;

appropriate standards for merit personnel administration; and the possible use of financial and other incentives to encourage the development of such comprehensive systems of personnel administration based on merit.

Subsection (c) provides that the President shall propose legislation to Congress which he judges desirable to implement the recommendations of the council.

TITLE II-STRENGTHENING STATE AND LOCAL PERSONNEL

ADMINISTRATION

Section 201.-This section states the purpose of the title which is to assist State and local governments in strengthening their staffs by improving personnel administration.

STATE GOVERNMENT AND STATEWIDE PROGRAMS AND GRANTS

Section 202.-This section provides that the Civil Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) is authorized to make grants to States for up to 75 percent, to be reduced to 50 percent after 3 years, of the costs of developing and implementing programs or projects to strengthen personnel administration which the Commission finds upon certification of the Governor of that State that the programs or projects are consistent with the merit principles set forth in section 2 of the act. Inasmuch as these grants are designed to strengthen personnel administration on the part of State and local governments, the authority provided by this section is to be employed in such manner as to encourage innovation and allow for diversity in the design, execution, and management of such programs by the governments concerned.

Subsection (b) states that, to be approved, an application by a State for a personnel administration grant must provide for designation, by the Governor, of the State office that will have responsibility for the program or project; establishment, where appropriate, or improvement of personnel systems based on principles of merit; specific personnel administration improvement needs of the State; assurance that such a grant will not effect a reduction in pertinent State or local spending; and clear and practical actions for improving such aspects of personnel administration as

the establishment of statewide personnel systems to meet the needs of jurisdictions not able to provide such systems for themselves;

the effecting of State grants to local governments for improved personnel systems;

the conduct of manpower requirements studies, and remedial action where appropriate;

The strengthening of one or more of the major areas of personnel administration;

the conduct of research and demonstration projects by the State and by appropriate nonprofit institutions;

the strengthening of programs for the disadvantaged and underutilized, as well as shortage category personnel;

the augmentation of intergovernmental cooperation in all area of personnel administration wherever feasible.