Mr. PUCINSKI. I wonder if perhaps in order to give us as much time as possible for questions, you would want to briefly summarize your statement at this time.

Miss REYNOLDS. I was going to suggest, Mr. Chairman, that I hit some of the high points, and perhaps relate to some of the questions that were raised a little earlier.

First, I do want to express my thanks to the Congressmen for their past, present, and future help for libraries. And say that we were really disappointed in the administration's request, inasmuch as we are all feeling the pressures of the programs that are developing with the funds that we have had to date.

I brought some charts with me today, in order that you could see, and I noticed that some of the questions that were raised fitted right into this chart, about the State and local funds, and the effect of the Federal appropriations upon them.

When the first act was passed in 1956, this was the picture in our State. After 1956, the Federal funds rose gradually to the full $72 million, and our State funds rose accordingly, as did the local funds. Then State and local leveled off, while the Federal funds stayed at the $72 million. In 1964, you will recall the big spurt came in the Federal funds, and again, our State funds took a spurt, and our local funds went up. It does show, therefore, that the encouragement of the Federal funds has really increased State and local support.

Part of this is because of the way in which we administer the program, but basically, it is because there is nothing like money to encourage the local communities to make a bigger effort.

You would also like to know what this buys in the way of services. We have a chart here showing some of the improvements in the State of Washington, in which we have had a 74-percent increase in population, but we have had 192-percent increase in the people served. And whereas we had a very small proportion of our population served by libraries with budgets over a hundred thousand dollars, we have a 554-percent increase in the people who have been served by that size of a library.

We have had 186-percent increase in the use of materials, and a 255-percent increase in the amount of materials available, which shows that the quality of service has improved, as well as the amount of the service.

But on the contrary side of the coin is the fact that as of today, the State of Washington could use between $3 and $5 million a year in order to have the current service being offered meet minimum standards. That is, to be buying the number of books we should be buying on a yearly basis, and to have the number of staff members that we would need in order to give the kind of service considered minimum. It would indicate that what has happened is our libraries have not been able to increase the local support, as rapidly as the demands upon the services have come, and as rapidly as the population has

increased.

Some of this is related to the other programs that are being encouraged and developed with the Federal funds, and while libraries are able to qualify for assistance under these, the other programs have pressures for funds, and because there is Federal assistance for libraries per se, the tendency is to expect the libraries to get the money

from this LSCA program rather than from the new programs. Of course, some of the new programs don't even provide for libraries.

In terms of the construction program, I am proud to say that the 10 years preceding the Federal involvement in construction, the State of Washington spent around $12 million to provide new public library buildings, but the effect of the construction funds in our State has been to enable those areas that have more difficulty in raising the funds locally, because they are not a formal governmental unit as such, to get out and raise funds, because they have an opportunity to have matching funds. This gives them a selling point with their communities, and in some instances, where the city fathers have been a little reluctant to engage the public funds, the fact that there would be some assistance has overcome this reluctance, and they are moving ahead.

But there is another aspect to it, and that is these libraries that had made their efforts are now facing expansion. They are already out of space, even though they had made a tremendous effort on their own, in the past. The American Association of State Libraries, at their midwinter meeting, considered some of the new programs that are in this legislation, and they enthusiastically endorsed them, particularly the interlibrary cooperation.

The American Library Association made a survey of the States, and of the 46 States that replied, 36 now have some kind of an ongoing, cooperative program, but they indicated that they have in their planning stages and on the books programs that could use $1212 million a year, to implement them and get them going. This bill provides 5. On page 6 of the testimony you have before you, I have outlined some of the specific programs that we, in the State of Washington, have on paper, but we do not have the funds to implement them at the present

time.

The relationship of title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act with the interlibrary cooperation provision of the proposed title III in H.R. 14050 was brought out here. We have before the Washington State Library Commission now a request for a feasibility study, to see whether or not the education title III funds and possibly the funds under the library projected title III could be combined toand I quote from the request-"wipe out institutional lines for the library user." This would be in a two-county area. We also have a request for a survey of crossing State lines along the Oregon and Washington border, which, of course, will involve funds outside of the localities, if this is going to be done.

The Oregon State Library and the Washington State Library are interested in doing this. We realize that it will take more money than we presently are receiving, either from our State or from the Federal Government, to implement the programs. The basis of all of our programs is library cooperation, because we believe in developing strong regional systems that will give good service within the area with these systems, working together to provide additional services, and then all of them depending upon the State and the other major libraries in the region for the really unusual and difficult materials. This is part of our basic program, and we have been working on it. The institutional library service you have already heard from people who are more expert in this field than I am, but as president

of the American Association of State Library Agencies, I might say that we recognize this as an area of gross neglect on the part of the States. There are very few institutions, either correctional or mental, in the United States that don't depend on gifts from grandpa's attic for their libraries, and this is not the kind of library service they need.

The general impression has been that any old thing would do, whereas it is, as Mr. Sharp indicated, a program that is highly specialized. It, if anything, needs better skilled librarians, and better quality materials than any other kind of a library program, if it is going to do the job in the treatment and education programs that are going on in those institutions.

The biggest gaps are in the area of personnel and books. The service to the blind is one that is many years old, but we find this peculiar situation in which the large public libraries are serving regions which cross State lines. The Seattle Public Library serves Montana, and they formerly served Alaska-and Seattle bore the cost of this, the municipality of Seattle. It was not until 1955 that the State of Washington recognized any responsibility. We do now pay the city of Seattle for service to the blind, outside of the city of Seattle, but they still pay for any costs to render the service inside Seattle.

This money does not improve the service. This help does not do a thing for the person who is hard of seeing, but not legally blind. The title we are discussing here will enable us to work with the Seattle Public Library and develop improved service. Seattle Public is now engaged in preparing a proposal for improved service which will come before us before the first of July. We are working with the Washington Library Association on plans as to how we would administer the library service to the handicapped, generally. This, of course, would go beyond the one library in the State now serving the blind.

This is taking a very quick and hasty over view, hitting some of the high points, but I would be glad to answer any questions.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Very good. Mrs. Beamguard, would you like to add to this discussion as to how you view this legislation, in regard to your own community?

Mrs. BEAMGUARD. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for giving me this opportunity.

Every Alabama reader is particularly grateful for the Library Services Act, as amended and extended. We thank you for your concern. It should be a real testimonial to the value of what has been done and the very great need of what yet must be done to speak of what has happened in the last 10 years in the State of Alabama.

For your convenience, I have placed a map in front of you to show you the status of library services within the State. First, we have come a long way in the 10 years, and in carrying out our basic philosophy, that assistance is to supplement local effort and not to subsidize. We have carried out our obligation to try to make available free public library service to all citizens. And you know, when a businessman takes a dollar out of his pocket and spends it, it is usually on something that he believes in, and is concerned with. Ten years ago, approximately 10 years ago, what public libraries were receiving in local sup

port was $973,000. Ten years later, today, in actual funds spent on public libraries, the figure is $2,900,000, almost $3 million local funds. Even so, we do not yet have one book per capita. For our 32 million people, we have only 2,400,000 books, but it does tell you something that last year, this year, according to actual reports, these 2,400,000 books were read 1311⁄2 million times. And, today, we have been able to take our roll of counties, with their low tax base, and give assistance to 8 regions encompassing the 25 counties, and 11 county systems. We have a long way to go. There are 66,000 people in 3 counties that still have no public library service, but we have been able to support and to create a regional system for the blind.

According to the needs for construction, maybe it is best to say it this way: you know, a new building for the public library program has performed for Alabama what a new dress does for a woman. And you know that the prettier a lady is, the better groomed she tries to continue to be, and this is what has happened to us. Ten years ago, we had really no new public libraries, nothing to point to with pride, except our old and honorable libraries at Birmingham and Mobile. Today, the change in the complexion of the library program is tremendous. I think nothing can be said more succinctly than what Lura Currier said yesterday. With our new buildings, we have opened doors that have cast off old prejudices, and, of course, there is nothing that creates an appetite for more books like books, and you can't put worn, ragged, moth-eaten books on a new shelf, and this, I think, has made a great contribution to local effort. And one particular side effect in construction is something that we hadn't thought about until we met with the League of Municipalities, a very powerful organization in Alabama. The mayor of the small town, as well as the mayors of our larger towns, realized, as they came together to talk about a building, that you just don't have a library building like the city jail or the city hall, and this is where they faced up to standards. If they could not meet State standards, and they began to understand national standards, then they saw how their library had to be a part of a system, that a small county with 35,000 population just could not support a truly sound library service.

One thing I would like to speak of as far as tomorrow is concerned, and then show you why Alabama is almost at the point that we need this program more than we did in 1955. We have come now to know what library service is, because the State, in the receipt of these funds, has been able to demonstrate to the rural areas what a library is. You know, if you just don't know what a library can be, the public and the city council will not make the appropration. But now, the whole State, through a State association, is working on a plan, a master plan, for all library services for Alabama, not just public libraries or school libraries. They have already begun to determine, before we knew how the new title also would be expressed, where cooperation could occur. There would be resource centers, and if you will see on your map, we have one large area where only small public libraries exist, and there will be some type of overall system or cooperative plan which will include a resource center.

Now you know on paper, Alabama has become an urban State. In reality, if you traverse the State, we still have mountaintops and sandy bottoms, and people who are rural, but we recognize that good library

resources have now whet the appetities and that we must extend ourselves to provide them. We have the ever-increasing upgrading of our educational levels, and they are demanding increased library materials. We are moving toward industrialization and urbanization, and this is requiring more sophisticated skills. You remember that Margaret Mead said every person finishing high school today will find himself being retrained for at least three jobs before retirement. Alabama's citizens are facing being retrained with new skills for new jobs. And I think that our tangible progress and growth is reflected not only in improved civic facilities and educational institutions, but in greatly increased personal and tax budgets, a reflection of Alabama's change is the expanding industry with wide diversification.

Two-thirds of capital investment has been made by industry already operating in the State. And I would like to submit letters written from such people as Rohm & Haas, Chemstrand, and Ford Motor, who are now in Alabama, telling what they feel they need in the way of public library services in their community in order to attract and keep skilled workmen.

We have this great movement from cotton and agriculture to a pattern of textiles, primary metals, government, and timber, and this means that the new people coming into the State are less and less unskilled, and it is up to the public libraries to supplement other educational resources. And then, of course, there is the migration of older citizens to Alabama, and it is expected to continue through the 1970's and the 1980's, and I have mentioned our increased educational facilities. We have a new system of junior colleges, and all of this is a part of our plan of cooperation.

We are particularly interested in and concerned for cooperation, and for assistance to the handicapped. Perhaps this is the reason that I am a part of the President's Committee on the Handicapped, but our State agency is concerned that this assistance is continued.

Thank you very much.