As you no doubt know, we own and operate parks generally in the valleys of the Huron and Clinton Rivers within the five counties in the Detroit metropolitan area. We could utilize additional labor in such projects as― 1. Erosion control in lakes and streams involving placing of riprap and planting of willows or other appropriate growth; 2. River and stream cleanout of fallen trees and other obstructions; 3. Reforestation of presently open fields by use of native grown stock removed from local woodlots; 4. Removal of mature and overage trees including dead or diseased elms; 5. Cleanup of thickets; 6. Creation of meadowlike environment from existing woodlands; 7. Development of miles of hiking trails; and 8. Fence construction totaling many miles along park or project limits. Admittedly, the above projects range from the highest or most urgent priority downward, but we hasten to add none are down to the point where they could even remotely be classed as “leaf raking" or a WPA project. The writer, having represented a sponsoring agency during the so-called depression years in the midthirties, recalls some problems which bear relating even though you may be fully aware of them. 1. Our operations are entirely rural but are contiguous to urban areas. Getting these people from home to the project and return remains a problem. 2. Many projects warrant the use of heavy equipment-dragline, trucks, bulldozers, transit mix concrete, etc. We should not consider wheelbarrow dirt moving or mortar-box concrete just to make men appear to be busy. 3. The furnishing by someone of small tools, supervision, personal injury insurance, recordkeeping, etc., could constitute a considerable expenditure of money. We haven't taken the time to accurately estimate the time necessary to accomplish the above work but without exaggeration believe there would be well over 150 man-years. Lastly, it is hoped that if and when projects are established, they be devised with the matter of the self-respect and morale of these people in mind. A definite point of beginning and point of ending of a given project is one method of being able to observe progress. Sincerely, HURON-CLINTON METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY, CITY OF MUSKEGON, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, Muskegon, Mich., June 24, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: Thank you for your letter requesting information on the possibility of using manpower in our park program. Although we are only a small city of 50,000 our need for extra manpower over and above our regular work force is considerable. There is no doubt the kind of help you suggest could be well utilized in further improving, maintaining, and developing our park system. It would certainly seem that there would be many places to use extra labor in brushing, trimming, painting, valley cleanup, and water control, and in many ways to beautify and make a much neater community. There are many young men in our community needing employment and I have often thought how desirable it would be if we had sufficient funds to employ some of these young fellows and give them some training and experience in mechanics and other phases of park operation. I feel sure they could profit in being with our regular men and learn some of the skills necessary for good park operation, as well as being in a position to help improve their own community. Such help could be used to great advantage in county and State parks also, for they are badly in need of help for improvement and operation to meet the greatly expanding demands for park and recreation services. Sincerely yours, CHASE H. HAMMOND, Director. CITY OF WARREN, DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, Warren, Mich., July 7, 1964. Senator GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 15 in which you mentioned you are in the process of drafting legislation to provide funds for park development. I assure this news was warmly received, as there is a definite need to help local parks and recreation departments develop their parks and recreational areas. In 1960 and in 1962 the city of Warren proposed a $51⁄2 million and a $31⁄2 million bond issue for park development and acquisition, and unfortunately both issues were defeated. Of course, our most urgent need is to acquire land now, since it is disappearing at an alarming rate. For instance in 1960 we earmarked 32 sites for parks and recreational purposes and today only 9 of the original 32 are available. Secondly, the need for developing those areas already acquired is a major problem. If Federal funds were available to supply labor, a great deal of development could be done. Such things as underground drainage systems, waterlines, development of ball diamonds, the erection of backstops, the planting of trees and scrubs, and the building of toilet facilities just to name a few. If the labor could be supplemented by funds to let contracts for the major grading etc., there is no limit as to the important work that could be done. In the past, such legislation as the open space bill did not allow for development, and consequently these areas are left undeveloped. It would be very difficult for me to estimate the number of man-years of work, without first being aware of the scope in which these men could be used. When you say project to be done without extensive new preparation, this limits us considerably. Most areas that are developed already are completely developed. If you have a first draft of the proposed legislation, I would appreciate same, since I would then be in a better position to offer suggestions, based on your proposed bill. I have recently accepted the position of national executive director of American Youth Hostels, and will assume my new position as of September 8. After that date, you may contact me at the AYH office, 14 West Eighth Street, New York City. It's encouraging to see someone interested in park development legislation, it is badly needed, and I wish to congratulate you on your efforts. Very truly yours, FRANK D. COSGROVE, Director, Parks and Recreation Department. CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, MICH., July 9, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Your letter to Mayor Davis requesting information concerning utilization of unemployed workers on conservation and recreation projects, has been referred to me for reply. In my judgment the city, without question, could use a minimum of 100 more employees in the kind of work which you outlined in your letter on a year-round basis in productive work if the money were available to do this. This city has many land development and recreational projects which could take place on an orderly basis immediately if such labor were made available or if money were provided to hire the labor. We just recently laid off in the neighborhood of 60 park and conservation workers because of lack of financing. I hope this information is of value. Yours very truly, GEORGE E. BEAN, City Manager. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MICH., July 15, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, DEAR SENATOR NELSON: The city of St. Joseph, Mich., would be able to utilize unemployed workers on the park development program that has been in the planning stage for several years and which was not completed for lack of funds. This project will take an estimated minimum of 10,000 man-hours. There are various other park projects which we feel should be accomplished in the future which would undoubtedly quadruple this figure. If it is necessary, we can furnish you with actual project estimates. Trusting this meets with your satisfaction, I am, L. L. HILL, City Manager. CITY OF ANN ARBOR, MICH., July 14, 1964. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: This is in response to your inquiry concerning use of unemployed workers in park and conservation projects. Ann Arbor would be able to make use of such labor, due to rapid growth of the city and considerable land acquisition for park purposes. Projects could include clearing and preparation of picnic sites, building causeways to small islands in ponds, establishing paths and drives, building guardrails and footbridges, building retaining walls, preparing parking sites. We estimate that 20 men could be applied to this type of work steadily for the next 5 years. Sincerely yours, S. S. SPROULL, Superintendent of Parks and Recreation. CITY OF ROYAL OAK, MICH., July 24, 1964. Senator GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Thank you very much for your letter of inquiry regarding funds for improvement of recreation lands. First, I think that we in parks and recreation, feel this has been a long time in coming, and my hat is off to you for initiating this project. Being a University of Wisconsin alumnus, this work you have undertaken gives me a fine feeling, and makes me feel proud that I was closely associated with your wonderful State. Here in our community of Royal Oak, we have a population of 85,000 people, with a total park acreage of approximately 400 acres. In addition to this, we utilize approximately 200 acres of school acreage. These 400 acres are divided into 53 park sites. In attempting to use a rule-of-thumb, I would say that we could devote approximately 500 man-hours of work on these various sites, and I am using a minimum figure. The specific kinds of projects would be: 1. Land clearance; 2. Ball diamond construction; 3. Nature trail development; 4. Walk development; 5. Bicycle trails; 6. Parking lot development; 7. Tree planting; 8. Fencing development; 9. Landscaping and seeding; 10. Natural ice rink area development; 37-181-64--13 11. Shelter development; 12. Miscellaneous facilities: Development of shuffleboard courts, horseshoe pits, tot lot equipment, fire circle, fireplaces, and picnic area development; 13. Street boulevard planting and seeding. In your proposed legislation, I feel that in joint city-school use of school properties, some consideration should be given to further development of these areas in accordance to a plan approved by both the school board and the municipality. Secondly, in the future, if funds would be allocated, it is my firm belief that communities receiving such aid should have some legal entity such as a parks board, a recreation board, or a combination parks and recreation board. In addition, these communities should have a full-time recreational professional with a minimum number of years experience in order to qualify to receive such aid. I feel quite strongly on this matter of assistance, and if there are any other specific tasks where help will be needed please do not hesitate to call upon me, as I will be ready and willing to volunteer my services. Thank you very much for this opportunity to express myself. Sincerely, JOHN LINDELL, Recreation Director. CITY OF DETROIT, July 9, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: A study was prepared a year ago which includes much of the information you requested in your letter of July 1, 1964. I am enclosing a copy of that study which has costs but does not include any estimates of the number of man-years of work. You will note that in preparing this statement emphasis was placed on the utilization of a conservation and public works program to provide institutional and on-the-job training. It seems to me that a leaf-raking or urban beautification program should try to include a component for training those who could use this training. Obviously, this would require additional funds over and above the cost of the project itself. As I view it, the existing Manpower Development and Training Act programs do not have the kind of flexibility needed to give this sort of training except possibly in the limited experimental and demonstration program. I am also enclosing a copy of the status report of the accelerated public works program describing Detroit's preparation in this significant program. Please note that our participation in a program which is in excess of $30 million resulted with only 3 months' preparation for the initial submissions. I attribute our success to a high degree of coordination through a committee established for this purpose reporting directly to me and the existence of a considerable amount. of advance planning which was on the shelf and ready to go. Sincerely, JEROME P. CAVANAGH, Mayor. FERNDALE, MICH., July 3, 1964. Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: In answer to your letter of June 15, 1964, regarding legislation for funds to municipal agencies for unemployed workers, I'm afraid we are not in a position to utilize any workers in our city programs. Our city is 30,000, highly urban area with a very minimum space for development of park area or other types of conservation projects. Thank you for your interest and as a parting suggestion may I say that we not only need this type of conservation work but a return of a similar organization as the CCC or equivalent. I believe this would provide work and training for youth as well as provide future adequate recreational areas for our expanding population. Respectfully, V. BARTLETT, Superintendent, Forests and Parks. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF FERNDALE, Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR: Thank you very, very much for your letter of June 15, regarding the possibility of drafting legislation to provide funds to Federal, State, county, and municipal agencies to utilize unemployed workers on conservation projects, such as; park development, etc. We, in the recreation field, had hoped that something like this would be available. I am sure that many cities would take advantage of this offer, and many cities would benefit by it. I am sure Ferndale could use at least four men in the summertime, working as maintenance men on our ball diamonds and parks. We could use possibly six men in the wintertime, supervising our ice rinks and assisting in the snow removal and maintenance of our ice rinks. This would entail each man to work approximately 40 hours per week. If I can be of any further assistance, do not hesitate to call on me. DAVID C. BROWN. MINNESOTA RESPONSES STATE OF MINNESOTA, Hon. GAYLORD NELSON, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: Thank you very much for your inquiry concerning suggestions and comments about your plans to draft legislation for conservation projects. I would like very much to be of assistance, however as I read your letter, it appears that your plan does not concern programs related to mental hospitals. This is the area of my interest and responsibility and therefore, could not be of any substantial help you. I personally think that your plan has a great deal of merit and want to wish you success in it. If my interpretation of your letter is wrong and you actually do want suggestions as to programs in mental hospitals or how unemployed workers may be used in mental hospital work perhaps then I might have something to contribute. Thank you very much for your inquiry. DEAR SENATOR NELSON: I regret the delay in answering your letter of June 3, 1964. At the time I received this letter, I was negotiating with Federal conservation officials, seeking funds for a cooperative program in conservation for northeast Minnesota, similar to what you suggested in the first paragraph of your letter. I was hoping that I could submit a report to you following this negotiating which would answer most of your questions. We were unable to get any Federal funds, however, and, therefore, are operating a program in cooperation with the counties in the area. Naturally, this is on a limited basis because of lack of funds. |