Senator MUSKIE. Well, the very least we can say is it is worthwhile preserving the Democratic Party at the moment.

Senator PROX MIRE. The last witness is Mr. Gray.

Mr. RAINS. The next witness is a distinguished American that all of us around the Capitol have known for many years, former president of the University of Carolina, former Secretary of the Army, and now the chairman of the National Historic Trust, Mr. Gordon Gray.

Senator PROXMIRE. You certainly have an impressive group of citizens here.

Mr. Gray.

STATEMENT OF GORDON GRAY, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION

Mr. GRAY. My name is Gordon Gray. I appear in my capacity as chairman of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and speak on behalf of our trustees and more than 10,600 contributing members. America's heritage of landmarks has been ravished not by invaders as in many other lands, but by a war of our own making. "America's unceasing quest and drive for development and progress has unintentionally and, in many instances, unknowingly left a wake of senseless destruction. The new has risen on the ashes of a building, a neighborhood, a vista, and open space which should have been preserved and passed on to new generations. Our freedom, however, makes it possible for us to legislate now to protect, interpret, and use that which remains of the landmarks across this country.

We celebrate the 25th anniversary of the National Gallery; last fall we commemorated an anniversary of the Smithsonian Institution. Celebrations are directed to the success of programs and to the wisdom of those leaders who bring them into being. These just and worthwhile causes protect a national heritage which can be taken inside and stored, displayed, and viewed. On the other hand, the cityscape cannot be treasured from such storehouses and brought out for special exhibition.

These landmarks which enrich the city and the countryside must be preserved on their natural site in relation to their surroundings and their functions, growing more valuable as time and weather age them and until their contribution is felt and made known.

Townscapes of tomorrow must have this character and beauty of manmade resources rooted in nature which accumulate through the years. It is worse than meaningless-indeed, I submit it is wantonto destroy the best that we have, while trying to create new and inspirational environments.

Organized concern for our tangible heritage began in 1859 when ladies from every State purchased and saved Mount Vernon. Through a dedicated number of individuals and organizations linked together through the National Trust for Historic Preservation, this concern of enlightened Americans has spread across the United States. Initially, the focus was on the houses of the great and the places where political and military history were made. Now, landmarks of beauty, good design, and neighborhood character are also being recognized and are assuming their places of importance.

President Johnson in his message on natural beauty in February 1965, and the White House Conference on Natural Beauty in 1965 provided the inspiration and suggested the method. The recently published "With Heritage So Rich," the report of the Special Committee on Historic Preservation recommended the techniques. Public awareness of the problems of a rootless, ugly America has been kindled and must be stimulated into active appreciation and participation. Public and private agencies must assume an obligation to the citizenry for an environment made meaningful and attractive through the preservation of our landmarks. Once the legislative means are available to identify and protect, once what exists is evaluated, the American people with their initiative and imagination must find uses for the worthy structures in their cities.

The national trust is dedicated to this total effort to bring about a distinctive environment, assisting the American people in saving a heritage which is theirs and which they must protect. The national trust has cooperated with the successful Federal program of the Department of Interior in its protection of parks, scenic wonders, wilderness areas, and historic buildings, predominantly in rural areas.

The great problems of our urban society today make it necessary for the Federal Government to broaden substantially its leadership and contributions to preservation. The Urban Renewal Administration under the old Housing and Home Finance Agency has participated to the maximum degree possible under existing laws, having 119 urban renewal projects which include preservation of historic structures.

This proposed legislation will lift many restrictions and make it possible to explore thoroughly all urban renewal projects for preservation values before the point of no return is reached. In a 2-month period the Urban Renewal Administration of the new Department of Housing and Urban Development has announced the awarding of grants for urban planning assistance programs to 300 cities and towns and to 90 counties which must be reviewed and under this legislation can be evaluated for their potential worth.

The traditional role of private leadership in preservation in the United States will be intensified and bolstered with the programs made possible by this legislation. The National Trust, as the only private nonprofit organization chartered by the Congress to lead the private preservation program, is prepared to assume the additional responsibilities which the legislation will confer upon it.

This charter was granted in 1947 to a cause backed simply by 35 sponsoring organizations; less than 20 years later this well-established cause, known as the National Trust, reaches out to about 10,600 individual members, and through more than 650 national, regional, and local member organizations, supported by their estimated membership of 720,000 individuals; these groups own more than 2,000 houses, sites, and other properties; a projected figure of more than 16 million persons visit or use these houses and other facilities annually.

From these members and the general public the National Trust receives more than 200 requests monthly for advice, for consultation, and conferences, for funds, for intervention to save and for legislative information. The greatest number of inquiries comes from those areas of the country where this National Trust membership is the

strongest-where there is the greatest awareness of the importance of landmark preservation.

Nevertheless, the success of these efforts, like the number of people involved, has been too limited. There have been too few leaders, too few dollars, and far too many great buildings and places destroyed or ignored.

This legislation, together with other pending legislation, contains provisions which will strengthen the national trust's program of education, service and financing of projects and extends the programs of other group and agencies to include preservation concepts and objectives. This legislation will thus help assure the success of national landmark preservation which, as a tangible record of American history, is the birthright of every American.

It will be possible for the trust through public education to broaden the awareness of the great mass of American people to values of their landmarks and to create the citizen participation required for the success of this endeavor. It will not only permit the trust to meet needs with tangible assistance, but it will enable this public service institution to expand its program intelligently, moving ahead of day-to-day crises, so that in time the preservation movement will be one of planning and orderly action, rather than frantic, last-minute effort, which too often results in failure.

Mr. Chairman, may I add one other comment which I am instructed to put before you by my board of trustees, and that is, in view of the fact that the national trust is chartered by the Congress, and the only such organization chartered by the Congress, my trustees feel that if there is to be a designation of the type of membership on the advisory council which has been discussed here earlier, that perhaps, subject to rulings of the Attorney General, who apparently is sensitive in these matters about telling the President whom he should appoint, at least the thought should be put before you that one of the public members might be the Chairman of the National Trust.

I am aware this sounds somewhat self-serving, and I am speaking only by instruction of my trustees.

Senator PROXMIRE. I appreciate that very much, Mr. Gray. That sounds logical and sensible to me.

I would like to ask you gentlemen one or two questions. You have in title I preservation of historic structures, as part of your urban renewal projects.

Then on page 2, lines 21 to 25, it reads: "of structures located in the urban renewal area, which are to be repaired or rehabilitated for dwelling use or related facilities, or which are determined by the local or public agency to be of historic value."

Does this mean it would apply to historic structures in the urban renewal area only, or would it also apply to historic structures that are in and outside or both?

Mr. RAINS. It would apply to both. As we studied it more, we were concerned that it might be just outside and as such would be completely ignored. So the Senator knows the purpose of that is to try to include even those structures that might be immediately adjacent to the area.

Senator PROXMIRE. Then you would confine it to those within or immediately adjacent?

Mr. RAINS. I don't know I would use the word "immediately" but I would say those within or adjacent to the urban renewal area. Senator PROXMIRE. I see. What is your attitude on the Kennedy amendment?

Mr. RAINS. I listened to the amendment. Of course this is Senator Muskie's bill, and frequently in housing and planning legislation we adopt such amendments as this. I think area planning and area preservation generally is a very good thing indeed. And so far as speaking for myself only, and having given it quite a bit of consideration, it sounded to me like a good amendment.

Senator PROXMIRE. It seemed to me essential and logical. If you are going to, as he said, have a historic building placed between a couple of hotdog stands or a filling station or some other kind of a strictly commercial operation, you destroy the atmosphere, and so forth.

Mr. RAINS. The committee report which I put in the record makes that point very strongly.

In addition to that, the Kennedy amendment could be of assistance to the second type of historic preservations needed.

I can see not only any disadvantage, but I think it could be helpful indeed to the legislation.

Senator PROXMIRE. Do you see any reason why it goes outside of the urban renewal approach? I asked him that, and he indicated he thought more incentive might be needed, but I still am a little confused as to why he would have to depart from the urban renewal formula.

Mr. RAINS. We are not departing from the basic urban renewal formula. We are just expanding the area of its applicability.

Of course as far as I am personally concerned, I would like to see the expansion of the bill with the Kennedy amendment if the committee in its wisdom thinks that type of legislation would go through. Senator PROXMIRE. I wonder if you could tell me how in your judgment, Mr. Gray, this advisory council would fit in? Would it replace the organization you represent here this morning?

Mr. GRAY. No sir. I don't visualize it as such. I would hope, as I suggested, that we would be in one way or another represented on it. The advisory council, as I see it, would coordinate the activities of the various Federal agencies concerned in physical development. There is no mechanism today which provides such a coordination. It would seek to give leadership, it would advise, I think, the President and the Congress where appropriate and primarily would be concerned in its own activities with the functions of those agencies of the Federal Government.

It would have realtionships with the States and local units through, as proposed, through membership, and indeed would be a source of information as to governmental programs for private agencies.

As you probably know, our history has been that the burden of the preservation movement has been borne by private interests. We estimate about 68 percent. My own feeling is that not only will this continue, but it should continue. I don't think the Federal Government should take over, as in some European countries, the whole burden.

So there is still a need for a strong private organization to stimulate the private economy and to deal with the nongovernmental organizations.

Senator PROXMIRE. That is very, very helpful.

Mr. GRAY. But may I comment on the historic district question for a moment?

I would see a reason for not putting this entirely under the urban renewal approach, when you consider the nature of some historic districts.

We have one right in the District of Columbia, and that is historic Georgetown. It is very important that that continues to be considered a historic district, but it has never involved urban renewal and those of us who live there hope it would never have to involve urban renewal.

So this is not always a question of renewing an area; it is a question sometimes of protecting an area as it is.

Senator PROXMIRE. Then are you suggesting that we ought to consider broadening the language in the bill? Because there seems to be some difference between you and Mr. Rains and I think ordinary reading of the bill would confine it to either urban renewal areas or immediately adjacent.

Mr. GRAY. I am expressing an individual opinion, if I may.

Mr. RAINS. I say, Mr. Chairman, there was no intention, in the report of the committee to confine it to urban renewal. Not at all. The only addition that the Kennedy amendment would add would be to develop it on an area basis, which we envision in the report, such as fishing villages, whole villages, as well as individual structures. So I think it was the intent of the bill-I am sure the Senator would agree that it should encompass such places as Georgetown outside of the urban renewal area.

There is no intention to confine it to urban renewal in itself.

If I might say a word about the advisory committee, one of the things that caused so much confusion, and why we have lost so many buildings has been the simple fact that there has not been adequate clearance between the Federal agencies in Washington. And this advisory committee, certainly one or more members of it would come from the national historic trust.

For instance, I remember Rex Whitton, head of the Bureau of Public Roads, said, "Well, a lot of times I don't even known there is a historic structure on a right-of-way until it is too late."

So the advisory committee, and everybody seems to approve of the idea, is so broad it encompasses all of the levels of government, as well as the private sector. The idea would be it would be a clearinghouse for information as well as advisory.

You will observe that the Advisory Council can employ staff of architects, historians, people who would really know the worth and value of any particular historic building, and could advise as to whether or not it ought to be preserved as a historic site.

There is some other legislation, Mr. Chairman, that because of jurisdiction, comes before the Interior Committees. It complements this particular legislation, adds to it in the way of establishing the landmark programs throughout the country. It comes under the National Park Service.