£5 6 /^ 0

o v < H f P ' ' ' ° 1 ’ i

\ v

" " IS T R IC T OF COLU M BIA 

I

lorasc PP ROPR I ATIONS FOR 1959

I

HEARINGS

BEFORE THE

SUBC OMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

EI GHT Y-FIFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

OK

H. R. 12948

MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND OTHER ACTIVIT IES 

CHARGEABLE IN WHOLE OR IN PART AGAINST 

THE REVENUES OF SAID D ISTR ICT FOR THE 

FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1959,

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

-Gf

\
L
D IS T R IC T OF C O L U M B IA 

A PPR O PR IA T IO N S FOR 1959

H E A R IN G S

BEF ORE TH E

SUBC OMM ITTEE OF THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATION S 

UNITE !) STATES SENATE

EIGHT Y- FIFT H CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

H. R. 12948

MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND OTHER ACTIVITIES 

CHARGEABLE IN WHOLE OR IN PART AGAINST 

THE REVENUES OF SAID DISTR ICT FOR THE 

FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1959,

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

27235

UNIT ED ST AT ES

GO VE RN ME NT PR IN TIN G O FFIC E 

WAS HI NG TO N : 195 8
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

JOHN O. PASTORE, Rhode Island, Chairma n

JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 

LYNDON B. JOHNSON, Texas 

CARL HAYDEN, Arizona, Chairma n,

Ea> Officio

EVERETT MCKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois 

IRVING M. IVES, New York 

STYLES BRIDGES, New Hampshire,

Ea> Officio

Ex Officio Members From th e District of Columbia Committee

ALAN BIBLE, Nevada J- GLENN BEALL, Maryland

J. ALLEN FREAR, J r., Delaware

Harold E. Merrick, Clerk to Subcommittee

Mamie Mizen, As sistan t

II
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1959

TUES DAY, JU N E 17, 19 58

U nit ed States Sen at e,

Subc omm itte e of tiie Com mittee on A ppr opr iation s,

Was Kington, D. G. The subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to call, in room F-82, 

the Capitol, Hon. John O. Pastore (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Presen t: Senators Pastore, Bible, and Beall.

DIS TR ICT OF COLUMBIA

Budget P resentation

STATEMENTS OF HON. ROBERT E. McLAUG HLIN, PRESIDEN T, BOARD

OF COMMISSIONERS; DAVID B. KARRICK , COMMISSIONER; AND

COL. A. C. WELLING , EN GINE ER COMMISSIONER

Appeal Letter

Senator P astore. The committee will please come to order.

This morning the committee will hear the Commissioners of the 

District of Columbia on the overall budget estimates for operating 

expenses and capital outlay items in the fiscal year 1959, and the 

amendments requested to the House bill, in the amount of $4,096,950.

Before you gentlemen begin with your presentations, I will place 

in the record the appeal letter of Commissioner McLaughlin, dated 

June 17, 1958, together with the summary table on available revenues, obligations, and surpluses in the five funds as of Ju ne 30, 1959.

(The material referred to follows:)

Hon. J ohn J une 17, 1958. O. 1’astore,

Committee on Appropriations,

United S tates Senate.

Dear Senator Pastore: The Commissioners beg to express to you their sincere thanks for extending to them the courtesy of an opportunity to indicate to your committee certain changes desired by them in the District of Columbia appropriation bill for 1959 as passed by the House.

1
2 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

The changes req ues ted ar e sum ma rized by ap prop ria tio ns and funds, as 

fo llo ws:

App ropriatio n

Amou nt r educed byHo use

Amou nt request ed to be 

res tored

Op era ting expenses:

Ex ecuti ve Office— ..........................- - -............. Dep ar tm en t of Ge ner al Adm inistra tio n------

Office of C orporatio n C ou ns el -........................

Re gulat ory aee ncies..........................- .............. Dep ar tm en t of O ccu pations an d Professions.

Pu blic sch ools ....................................................... Pu blic Lib ra ry ...... ............................................. Recre ation D ep ar tm en t............ .......................

M etro po litan Police........... ...........................--

Fire D epar tm ent- .................. - . .......................

Dep ar tm en t of Ve ter an s’ Af fairs............. .

Office of Ci vil D efen se_________ ... ------------ D ep ar tm en t of Vocation al R eh ab ilitat io n...

$40,000

40,500

43,000

10,000

498,000

13,000

8,000

40,000

+$39,650

+40,500

+23,000

+418,000

D ep ar tm en t of Pu blic H ea lth— ..........

D ep ar tm en t of C orrec tio ns----------------

D ep ar tm en t of Pu blic W elfare .............-

D ep ar tm en t of B uildin gs an d Grounds.

Office of Su rv ey or ........... .......... . ................ D ep ar tm en t of Li censes and Ins pections.

D ep ar tm en t of H igh wa ys.............. ............ D ep ar tm en t of Vehicles a nd Tra ffic------

M otor Vehicle Pa rking Agenc y................

D ep ar tm en t of S an ita ry E ng in ee ring .. ..

W ashing ton a qu ed uc t----- -------------------

Nationa l G ua rd ............................................

Nationa l Cap ita l Park s. .................................... Nationa l Zoological P a rk ...... .......... .................

Tot al, op erati ng expen ses .....................

Cap ita l ou tla y: D is tric t de bt service......... ..............- .........■ Pu blic b uil ding c onst ru cti on.................

D ep ar tm en t of H ig hw ays. .................. .

Dep ar tm en t of San ita ry E ngin ee ring... 

W ashing ton a que du ct ...............................

Tot al, ca pital o ut la y...............................

By funds: Oe ner al fu n d ...............................................

Highw ay fund _______ _______________

W at er fu nd ..................................................

Sa ni ta ry sewage w orks fu nd........ ............

M ot or ve hicle p arking f u n d ..................

To tal.

120,000

45,000 

34,000 

871,000 

100,000 

203,000 

26,000

61,000 

98,000 

30.000 

117,000 

266,000 

60,000 

15,000

2,798,500

3,985,000 

54,400

1,989,500 

3,050,000

9,078,900

7,882,298 

243,400

3,310,134 

324,568 

117,000

11,877,400

+101,000 

+9,800 

+19,000

+775,000

+263,000

+29,000

+423, 000 

-42 3,0 00

+1,7 17,9 50

+2,3 79,0 00

+2,379,000

+4,015,950

+81,000

+4,096,950

Again, I th ank you for this opportunity.

Yours very truly, R obert E. McLau gh li n,

President, Board of Commissioners of the D istrict of Columbia.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRLATIONS, 19 5 9

Summary of 1959 estimated available revenues, obligations, and surpluses, as of

Ju ne SO, 1959

Es tim ated

rev enu es

availabl e

Es tim ated 

fun ds requ ire d, 1959

Es tim ated 

su rplus 

Ju ne 30. 1959

Gen eral fun d:

Fu nd s from su rpl us, Ju ne 30, 1958............................................ $10,831,904 

' 142,025,000 

21,500,000

Revenue c ollection s d urii g the y ea r_____ .

Federal p ay m en t.................................................

Su bto tal , ge ne ral fun d...................................................... 174,356,904 ’$174,130,087 $226,817

Highw ay fu nd:

Fu nd s from surplus , Ju ne 30, 1958........................................ -10 8,0 70 

i 14,123,400 

431,600

5,500,000

Revenue collections du rin g the y ea r...............................

Federal pa ym en t.......... ............ ....................

Tr easu ry loa n....... ..................... ...........................

Su btotal, hig hw ay f un d................................................... 19,946,930 ’ 19,730,613 216.317

W ater fund:

Fu nd s from s urplus , Ju ne 30, 1958 .................... 471,570 

i 5,945,000 

» 1,732,000 

3,100,000

Re venue collections du rin g the ye ar .............

Fe deral p ay m en t....................................................

Tr ea su ry l oa n.......................................................

Su btotal, water fund..................................................... 11,248,570 7,663,518 3,585,052

Sa nitary sewag e works fun d:

Fu nd s from s urplus , Ju ne 30, 1958............ ........................... 769,540 

» 4,416,000

697,000

Re venue colle ctions du rin g the yea r............ .........

Federal p ay m en t................... .............................

Su btotal, sa ni ta ry sewage w orks f un ds ........... .................. 5,882,540 4, 278,163 1,604,377

Mo tor-ve hic le pa rk ing fun d:

Fu nd s from s urplus , Ju ne 30. 1958___ _______ _____ 1,522,048 Re venue collecti ons dur ing the ye ar ................................ i 625,000

Su btotal, mo tor-vehicle pa rking fu nd______ ________ 2,147,048 399,400 1,747,648

Grand total, all fu nd s___ ____ _____ _____ _______ 213, 581,992 206,201,781 7,380,211

1

 Based on revisio n as of M ay 12, 1958.

8

 Inc lud es un bu dg eted item of $200,000.

’ R epres ents the following:

Ge neral

fun d

Hi ghwa y

fund

Allowed bv Hou se ________________ $171,661,137

4,015,950 

1,000,000 

-2,54 7,0 00

$19, 504,613 

81,000 

145,000

Am en dm en ts re qu es te d..................... . . ............

Es tim ated supple m en ta l___________ _________

Ad jus ted d eferred ap pr op ria tio ns ....................

Tota l......... . ................. ..................... . .................. . 174,130,087 19,730,613

General Statement

Senator Pastore. All right, Commissioner McLaughlin, you may 

proceed in your own way.

Mr. McLaughlin. Mr. Chairman, to begin with, I would like to 

say th at the Commissioners appreciate very much the time tha t you 

and the other members of the committee are giving to the affairs of 

the District government.

We appreciate this opportunity to make our presentation today.

BUDGET ESTIM ATES

The budget estimates for the expenditures of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year 1959, as submitted to Congress in Jan uary of 

this year, amounted to $213,887,000. However, House Document No.
4 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

387, con tain ed amendments which increased the to tal requ ests to 

$215,153,500, which was the amo unt considered by tlie House. This 

consisted of $171,700,500 fo r op erati ng expenses and $43,453,000 for 

capit al outlay.

In a dd ition to estima tes from Di str ict fun ds, the estimates included 

Fe deral pay ments to the gen eral fun d, $25 million; wa ter fun d, 

$1,532,000; and the s an ita ry sewage works fun d, $097,000; or a total 

of $27,229,000. House Docum ent 387 added a paym ent of $431,600 

to the hig hw ay fund which increased the amoun t for Federal fun ds 

reviewed by the Ho use to $27,660,600.

Statement showing estimates by operating expenses and capital outlaij for 1958 and

1959

E sti m ate d a ppro pri at io ns: 

O per at in g e xpense s. . . . 

C ap it al o u tl ay ...............

A ppro pri at io n r eq u este d ___

A d ju ste d de ferred ap pro pri ati o n s.............................................

F u n d s r eq uir ed

A ppro pri at io n re que st ed : 

G en er al fu nd :

O per at in g e xp en se s. 

C ap it al o u tl a y .........

T o ta l, ge ne ral fu nd.

H ig liw ay fund:

O per at in g exp en se s. 

C ap it al o u tl ay _____

T o ta l, hig hw ay f u n d .

W ate r fu nd:

O per at in g e xp en ses. 

C ap it al o u tl ay ..........

T o ta l, w at er fu n d .

S an it ary se wa ge:

W or ks f und :

O per at in g exp en se s___

C ap it al o u tl ay ..............

T o ta l, san it ary sewage w or ks f u n d ___

M o to r ve hi cle par kin g fu nd: 

O per at in g exp en se s. _............

T o ta l, all fu nds.

1958 ap pro ­

pri ations

1959 es tim at es

1959 H ou se 

re co m m en ­

dat io ns

R ec om m en ­

d ati o n comp ar ed w ith 

1959

es ti m at es

R es to ra ­

tions for 

1959

re ques te d 

in Se na te

$160,005,675 

38, 617,000

$171,7 00,500 

43,453,000

$168,902,000 

34,3 74,1 00

—$2, 798, 500 

-9 ,0 78,9 00

+$ 1,71 7,9 50 

+2, 37 9,00 0

198, 622, 675

+2 ,8 78 ,2 00

215,1 53,500

-2 ,5 47 ,0 00

203,276,10 0

-2 ,0 47,0 00

-1 1, 87 7, 40 0

+5 00 ,000

+4,09 6,95 0

-5 00 ,0 00

201,500 ,875 212,606, 500 201,229,100 -1 1,3 77,4 00 +3 ,596 ,950

143.673,543 

17.914,000

154,014,435 

25,529,000

151,7 45,637 

19,91 5,500

-2 ,2 68,7 98 

-5 ,6 13,5 00

+1, 71 7,95 0 

+2, 29 8,00 0

161,587, 543 179,543,435 171,6 61,137 -7 ,8 82,2 98 +4 ,015 ,950

8,166,263 

14,901,000

8,55 5,013

11,19 3,000

8,44 7,0 13 

11,057,600

-1 08, 000

-1 35, 400 +8 1,00 0

23,067 ,263 19,74 8,013 19,504,613 -2 43, 400 +8 1,0 00

5,608,401 

3,802,000

5,833,134 

4,98 3,00 0

5,773,000 

1.733,000

-6 0, 134 

-3 ,2 50,0 00

9,410,401 10,816 ,134 7,506,000 -3 ,3 10, 134

1,949,068 

2,000.000

2,781, 518 

1,748,000

2.5 36, 950 

1, 668,000

-2 44, 568 

-8 0,0 00

3,94 9,06 8

608, 400

4,52 9,51 8

516,400

4,204,950

399,400

-3 24, 568

-1 17 ,0 00

198,622,675 215,153, 500 203,276 ,100 -1 1, 87 7, 40 0 +4 ,0 96 ,9 50

H O U SE AC TIO N

Th e House App ro pr iatio n Com mittee allowed $203,276,100 (ope rating expenses, $168,902,000 an d cap ital ou tlay ,$34,374,100), the am ount 

of the bill pe nding before you. The cuts were appli ed to almo st 

eve ry ap prop ria tio n in the bill, in par t with the concurr ence of the 

Com missioners. In addit ion to reducing the estimates o f ap pr op riations fo r the Distri ct of Colu mbia, the Hou se also elm inated $5 million fro m the requested Fe deral pay me nt of $25 m illion fo r the general fun d. Th is has the effect of reduci ng the reve nues of the genera l fund of the D ist ric t of Columb ia.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959 5

Of the House Appropriation Committee reductions of $11,887,400, 

the Commissioners are requesting restoration of $4,096,950. All except $81,000 of these requests are chargeable to the general fund with 

$1,717,950 for operating expenses and $2,379,000 for capital outlay.

PEN DIN O PAY INC REASE S

In addition to these restorations, the Commissioners have approved 

pay increases for wage board employees and there are pending salary 

increases for classified employees of the District, policemen, firemen, 

and school teachers. The classified group are subject to the same action affecting Federal employees, and the Commissioners have made 

and submitted proposals to Congress for the other categories. Based 

on these actions, the annual cost would be $12,860,000. The retroactive payments to Janu ary 1, 1958, will require $5,785,000 or a total 

additional financing for 1958 and 1959 of $18,645,000.

Senator Pastore. Is it fa ir for me to say, insofar as this particular 

budget is concerned, that you have an item of $5,785,000, which is the 

impact of the salary increases affecting this budget?

Mr. McLaughlin. This budget is alfected by the annual cost of 

$12,860,000.

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, these pay raise expenses are not reflected 

in the budget that is before you.

Mr. McLaughlin. Tha t is right, not this specific budget, but for 

the fiscal year it would be $12,860,000.

Mr. L owe. There will be supplemental requests covering this sum 

of $18,645,000 which will be submitted at such time as the Budget 

Bureau and Congress indicate that they wish to consider the supplemental.

Senator Pastore. Now tha t is the point I make, that even the pay 

raises tha t are retroactive as of January 1, 1958, are not going to 

affect this budget?

Mr. McLaughlin. Not the budget before you at this moment; no, 

sir.

FEDERAL PAYM ENT TO GENERAL FUN D

Public Law 451, approved June 6, 1958, increases the authorized 

Federal payment from $23 million to $32 million. The Congress, in 

effecting the increase, took into account the fac t that the Federal Government is the largest “industry” in the District, but pays no taxes 

whereas industries elsewhere employing comparable numbers of people would pay taxes of more than $50 million per year. Hearings on 

Public Law 451 also brought out that it will be impractical to finance 

the District’s needs without additional assistance from the the Federal 

Government, because District residents and businesses are now taxed 

at rates comparable to those of surrounding communities. Public Law 

451 also permits the Commissioners to borrow $75 million for capital 

outlay payable from the general fund. In this connection, the detailed financial plan for the District, submitted to the Congress in 

connection with the hearings on this act, contemplated that borrowing 

for the general fund would take place only after full utilization of 

local revenues and increased Federal payments.
6 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59

RESTORATIONS REQUESTED

To finance the res tor ati ons pending before th is committee, the 

Commissioners request th at the Federal paym ent to the gen eral fund 

be increased from $20 to $21.5 million. I t sho uld be borne in mind, 

however, th at the Com missioners will need to increase this request 

when the sup plementals for pay increases are subm itted in the next 

session of Congress.

REDUCTION IN GENERAL FUN D

In the general fun d, the Hou se App ro pr iatio n Com mittee reviewed 

item s totalin g $179,543,435. Th is amoun t was reduce d by $7,882,298, 

leavin g in the bill pe nding before you $171,661,137. The Commission ers are ask ing a res tor ati on o f $4,015,950 of this dele tion o f w hich 

$1,717,950 is for op erating expenses, and $2,298,000 is fo r capit al 

outlay, or a total request of $175,667,087. Add ing a reserve of $1 

million fo r supplem ent als and inc lud ing th e financ ing of 1958 c apital 

outlay of $6,303,000, an d deducting $8,850,000 of capit al outlay to be 

pa id in 1960, would resu lt in a to tal fund r equ ireme nt of $174,130,087. 

I f the Federal pay ment of $21.5 million is allowed (of which $7 

million must be appli ed to cap ital ou tla y) , the estimated revenue 

av ail ability in the general fund would amount to $174,356,904, a su rplus of $226,717, if the res tor ations are app roved.

HIGH WAY FUND

W ith resp ect to the hig hw ay fun d, it was estimated at the time of 

the Hou se pre sen tation th at the re would be an un ap prop ria ted su rplu s at the e nd of fiscal year 1959, a mo unting to $53,917. Th e House 

deleted items am ounting to $243,400, which increased the surpl us to 

$297,317. The Commissioners are req ues ting a res tor ati on of $81,000 

and the estimated surpl us at the end of 1959 will be $216,317.

WATER FUN D

Und er the wa ter fun d, there was a red uction of $3,310,134 in the 

estim ates. How ever, the Fe de ral pay ment to the wa ter fund was in ­

creased by $200,000 to p rov ide addit ion al Federal sh aring of the cost 

of constru cting fisldad ders at the Little Fa lls Dam . The Commissioners are requesting no change in the H ous e c omm ittee action which 

pro vid ed a surpl us of $3,585,052, which su rplus includes a Fe deral 

loan of $3,100,000. In view of the large surplus, it is recommended 

th at this committee give no fu rth er consider ation to this loan and 

the reb y reduce the su rplus in the wa ter fund to $485,052.

SAN ITARY SEWAGE WORKS FUN D

Al tho ugh the sa nitary sewage works fund and the moto r-vehicle 

pa rk in g fun d were reduced by $324,568 and $117,000, respectively, 

the Commissioners are not req ues ting any amendments to the House

bill.

In conclusion, the Co mmissioners a pprec iat e the op po rtu nity o f ap ­

pe aring befo re your comm ittee. Dur in g the pa st several months 

ma ny inf orma tiv e statem ents have been prep ared and we have selected several which may be helpful to the committee, and with your 

permis sion, we would like to sub mit them fo r the record.

Se nator P astore. Yes. W ith ou t objection, it is so ordered.

(T he material refe rre d to fo llo ws :)
D is tr ic t o f C o lu m bia

Stateme nt showing compariso n of revenue estimate inclu ded in 1959 budget and revisions of Ma y 7, 1958

G en er al f und:

Tax es :

P ro p erty ta xe s:

R e a lt y __________ ________________________ Per so nal ta n g ib le ............................... ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

M o to r ve hi cle re gis tr ati on fee a n d per so nal p ro per ty . 

S u b to ta l, p ro p ert y ta xes ...................................................

Sa les an d gr os s re ce ip ts :

A lcoh ol ic bev er ag es __________________ ' B eer................. . ......... ................... ........... ZZZZZZZZ..........

C ig are tt e ta x ............................ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ..................

In su ra n ce. . ..................................................... ZZZZZZZZZ.........

M oto r- veh ic le t it le s................................ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

P u b li c u ti li ti es, ban ks, etc ................................... Z.......... Sa les an d us e ta xes .................................. --ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

S u b to ta l, sa le s a n d gross re ceip ts ..................................

Li ce ns es a n d p e r m its ...._______ ________ _____ ____ In d iv id u al in com e............... ..................... ....... Z.ZZZZZZZ

U nin co rp ora te d bu si ne ss ta x es_____ ____ __Z_ ZZZZZZZZZZZZ

C o rp ora ti on n et in co m e an d fr an ch is e ta x .. In h eri ta n ce an d esta te ........................................ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

S u b to ta l, m is ce llan eo us______________________________

T o ta l, ta xes........... ................... ........... . ......................... .............

E arn in gs a n d m isce llan eo us :

C ha rg es , c u rr en t se rv ic e........................................ Fin es , es ch ea ts , a n d fo rf ei ts ........................ZZZZZZ.....................

R eim b u rs em en ts .......................................... ZZZZZ

R en ts a n d ro y alt ie s......... ......................... ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

In te re st on in v e s tm e n ts .. ................ .

O th e r....................................................................ZZZZZZZZZZZZ........

T o ta l, ea rn in gs a n d m is cel la neo us...........................

T o ta l, co llec tion s____ __________________

1958 1959

In 1959 

budget

R ev is ed 

M ay 7, 1958 In cr ea se (+ ) o r de cr ea se (—) In 1959 budget R ev ised M ay 7, 1958 In cr ea se (+ ) or de cr ea se (—)

$45,425,00 0 

8,1 75. 000 

3,8 00,00 0

$45, 425,000 

8.2 00,00 0 

3, 725,000

$45, 925,000 

8,225,00 0 

3, 800,000

$46 ,000,000 

8,225, 000 

3, 700,000

+$7 5,00 0 +$2 5,00 0 

-7 5,0 00 -1 00,0 00

57.40 0,0 00 57,350 ,000 -5 0,0 00 57,950 ,000 57,925 ,000 -2 5 . (MM)

5,5 00, 000

675,000

2,1 00,00 0 

2,3 25,00 0 

2,0 00,00 0 

6,8 00, 000 

20,50 0,0 00

5,350.00 0 

700,000

2,1 00, 000 

2, 425, 000 

1, 750,000 

7,2 70, 000 

20,20 0,0 00

-1 50,0 00

+25 ,0 00

5, 700,000 

700,000

2,100, 000 

2,3 25, 000 

2,000,00 0 

7,4 25, 000 

20, 750,0 00

5,400,00 0 

700,000

2,10 0, 000 

2, 425,000

1, 700,000 

7,000,000 

20,300 ,00 0

-3 00,0 00

+ 100,000 

-2 50, 000 

+4 70 ,000 

-3 00 ,0 00

+ 100, (MM)

-3 00,0 00 

-4 25,0 00 

-4 50,0 00

39,90 0,0 00 39, 795,000 -1 05, 000 41,000 ,000 39,625,0 00 -1 ,3 75,0 00

3,8 00,00 0

19,0 00,0 00

1,475, 000

7, 450,000

2,0 00,00 0

3,8 00,00 0 

21,000 ,00 0

1,475,000 

7,800,00 0 

2,6 00,00 0

3,8 00, 000

19, 500,000

1,50 0,00 0

7, 500, 000

2,0 00, 000

3,8 00,00 0 

21,000 ,00 0

1, 425, 000 

6,9 00,00 0 

2,0 00,00 0

+2, 00 0, 00 0 +1, 50 0, 00 0 

-7 5 ,0 0 0 

— 000, (XX) +3 50 ,000 +6 00 ,000

33, 725,000 36,67 5,0 00 +2, 95 0, 00 0 34,300 ,00 0 35,12 5,0 00 +8 25 , 000

131 ,025 ,000 133 ,820 ,000 + 2 , 795,000 133,250,000 132,675,000 -5 75, 000

2,400, 000

2,3 50,00 0

1, 950, 000 

150,000 

1,300,000

1, 550,000

2, 400,000

2,2 50,00 0

1,950, 000 

150,000

1,350,000

1, 250,000

2,4 00,00 0

2,3 50,00 0

2, 050, 000 

150,000

1,300,000 

1,600,0 00

2,4 00,00 0

2,250,00 0

2, 050, 000 

150,000

1, 200, 000 

1,300,000

-1 00 ,0 00 -1 00, 000

+5 0, 00 0

-3 00 ,0 00 -1 00,0 00 -3 00,0 00

9, 700,000 9, 350,000 -3 50,0 00 9,8 50,00 0 9,3 50,00 0 -5 00,0 00

140, 725,000 143, 170, 000 +2 ,4 45 ,0 00 143,1 00,000 142,025,000 - 1 , 075,000

DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

*4
Statement showing comparison of revenue estimate included in 1959 budget and revisions of May 7, 195S Co ntinued 00

G en er al f u n d —C o n ti n u ed

U nex pen ded ba la nc es r el ea se d to s u rp lu s.

T o ta l, ex cl udi ng F ed era l p a y m e n t..........

F ed er al p a y m e n t... ....................................

G ra n d to ta l, ge ne ra l fu n d --------------------

H ig hw ay f und: G as oline................. . .............................................

A uto m obil e re g is tr ati o n an d w ei gh t ta x .. M oto r- veh ic le fees , e tc ........... ................. ....... In te re st on i n v e stm en ts ...................... ............

P av in g a s s e s s m e n ts .. .................. - .................

S u b to ta l, hig hw ay f u n d . . . ........................ U nex pen ded ba la nc es , re le as ed t o s urp lu s

G ra n d t o ta l, hig hw ay f u n d ........................

W ate r fu nd:

W ate r r a t e s ........................................................

W ate r m a in a ss es sm en ts ................................

P a y m e n t from A rl in gto n C o u n ty .............. M is ce ll an eo us.......................................... ...........

S u b to ta l, w ate r f u n d ................ ............... .. U nexpended bal an ce s re le as ed to su rp lu s.

T o ta l, ex cl ud in g F ed era l p a y m e n t.......... F ed era l p a y m en t fo r w a te r............................

G ra n d t o ta l, w ate r fu n d ..............................

S an it ary sewag e w ork s fu nd: Sew er ch arg es_____________ ________ ____

P a y m e n t from M ary la n d : C a p it a l o u tl a y ............................................. Ser vic e.......... ............. - ........... - - - ...............

In te re st on in v e stm en ts --------------------------

A ss es sm en ts , e tc ________________________

1958 1959

I n 1959 

budget

R ev is ed 

M a y 7, 1958

In cr ea se (+ ) or 

de cr ea se (—)

In 1959 

b u d g et

R ev is ed

M ay 7, 1958

In cr ea se ( + ) or 

de cr ea se (—)

$1,050 ,00 0 $1,150 ,000 +$ 10 0,0 00 $1,200 ,000 $1,050 ,000 -$ 15 0, 00 0

141,775,000 

20,000 ,00 0

144,320,000 

20,000 .000

+2, 54 5, 00 0 144,3 00,000 

25.0 00,0 00

143,0 75,000 

25,000 ,000

-1 ,2 25,0 00

161,775,000 164,320,00 0 + 2 , 545,000 169,300,000 168,075,000 -1 ,2 25,0 00

11,500 ,000

1,900,00 0

828,000

150,000

200,000

11,1 00,0 00

1,900,00 0

828,000

382,000

200,000

-4 00,0 00 11,5 00,0 00

1,90 0,00 0 

823,000 

50,000 

200,000

11,100,000

1,900,000

1823,40 0

100,000

200,000

-4 00, 000

+4 32 ,0 00

+50,0 00 +23 2,66 6

14, 578,000 

411,000

14, 410,000 

411,000

-1 68,0 00 14, 473,000 

200,000

14, 555,000 

450,000

+82 ,0 00

+2 50 ,0 00

14,9 89,0 00 14,821 ,000 -1 68 ,0 00 14,6 73,0 00 15,005 ,000 +3 32 ,000

4,9 10, 000 

85,000 

690,000 

210,000

5,0 25, 000 

60,0 00 

690,000 

185,000

+11 5,00 0

-2 5 ,0 0 0

4,8 80, 000 

80,000 

700,000 

200,000

5,0 00,00 0 

60,0 00 

700,000 

185,000

+1 20 ,000

-2 0,0 00

—25,000 -1 5 ,0 0 0

5,8 95. 000 

200,000

5,9 60, 000 

200,000

+6 5, 00 0 5, 860,000 100,000 5,9 45,00 0 100,000 +8 5, 00 0

6,0 95, 000 

1,751, 450

6,1 60,00 0 

1,751,450

+6 5, 00 0 5,9 60, 000 

1,5 31, 533

6,0 45,00 0 

1,532,00 0

+8 5, 00 0

+4 67

7, 846, 450 7,9 11, 450 +65 ,0 00 7, 491,533 7,5 77,00 0 +85 ,4 67

2,430, 000

1,1 22, 000

490,000

50,000

164,000

2,480,00 0

756,000

490,000

50,000

164,000

+50 ,0 00

-3 66 ,0 00

2,425, 000

225,000

370,000

1,000

210,000

2,440,00 0

621,000

370,00

1,000

210,000

+1 5, 00 0

+3 96 ,00 0

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59
F ed era l g ra n ts .........................................

T o ta l, ex cl udin g F ed era l p a y m e n t............

U nex pen ded ba la nc es r el ea se d to s u rp lu s .. F ed era l p a y m e n t__________ __________ ____

G ra n d to ta l, san it ary s ew ag e w or ks f und

M oto r- veh ic le p ark in g f und:

P ark in g m ete r re ceip ts ............ .........................

U nex pen ded ba la nce r el ea se d to s u rp lu s .. ..

In te re st o n in v e stm e n ts .........................

G ra n d to ta l, m ot or -v eh ic le park in g f u n d . 

G ra n d to ta l, al l fu n d s......................................

338,000

4,2 78, 000 

5,000 

753,000

5,036,00 0

-3 2 ,0 0 0 440,000 774,000

-3 48, 000

-3 48 ,0 00

600,000 ..............................

15.000 ..............................

25,0 00 ..............................

+2 ,0 94 ,0 00

* In clu des $431,600 co n ta in ed in H . D oc . 387.

3,6 71,00 0 

5,000 

696,970

4,372,97 0

600,000

15,000

25,000

640,000 

196, 477,5 03

4,4 16,00 0

5,000

697,000

5,1 18,00 0

+3 34 ,000 

+7 45 ,000 

+ 30 

+74 5,03 0

600,000

15,000

25,000

-6 2,5 03

DIS TRI CT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959 o
10 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

G o v e r n m en t of th e D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia , D epa r t m e n t o f G e n er a l

A d m in is tr a tio n, F in a n c e O f fic e

Summ ary of revenue effect of Public Law 460, District of Columbia Revenue Act of

1956, approved Mar . 31, 1956

Ac tual inc reased yield

Fiscal ye ar 

1956

Fiscal y ea r 

1957

Fiscal yea r 

1958 es tima ted

Indivi du al inco me tax —Prin cipa l provisions: Red uc tio n of 

personal ex em ption of taxp ayer from $4,000 to $1,000; increase 

personal exem ption of spouse from $500 to $1,000; increase 

personal exem ption of 1st de pe nd en t of he ad of household 

from $500 to $1,000; $500 personal exemp tion of oth er de pe nd ­

en ts unchang ed; rates 2J^ percen t on 1st $5,000 of tax able 

income, 3 perc ent on next $5,000, 3^6 percent on next $5,000,

4 perce nt on next $5,000, 4J4 percent on next $5,000 (new 

rate), 5 perce nt on am ounts in excess of $25,000 (new r a te - 

old law p rovid ed 4 p erc ent on a mou nts in excess of $15,000); 

tax with ho lding on salaries, etc., paid by em plo yers beginning Oct. 1, 1956; V2

 of tax l iability for th e c ale ndar year 1956 

to be “dis charg ed” (forgiven). Ne w person al exemption s, 

rates effective J an. 1,1956 (cale nda r ye ar 1956)--------------— -

Lice nse tax of $25 per an nu m establishe d to b e pa id by those 

profession al an d oth er perso ns engaged in un inc orp ora ted 

bus iness b ut exem pte d by definition from the un inc orpo rated 

bus ines s franchise tax . Effective ca len dar y ear 1957..............

Re ntal of tang ible personal prop erty. Effective J un e 1, 1956.

2 perc ent tax on all re nta ls ex cept films, rec ords, etc., used by 

th ea ter s, rad io sta tio ns, an d televi sion sta tio ns, an d except 

ren tals of linens, uniforms, coveralls, et c. _.....................-.........

El im ination of exem ption from 2 perce nt sa les ta x of rest au ra nt 

meals costing 50 cents or less. Effective Ju ne 1, 1956...............

Wines and sp irits. Effe ctiv e M ay 1,1956. New t ax of 15 cents 

per gallon on wines c ontainin g 14 perce nt or less of alcohol; 

increase from 30 cen ts to 45 cents per gallon on cham pag ne, 

spark ling wine an d wine artificially carbonated ; a nd increase 

from 20 cen ts t o 33 cents pe r gallon o n other wines con tainin g 

more th an 14 perc ent of alcohol. Increa se tax on spirits from 

$1 to $1.25 p er gallon......... . ..................- ............ ..................

Beer. Effect ive M ay 1, 1956. Increa se tax from $1.25 to $1.50 

per b ar re l-...................... ................................................................

Real pr op erty tax ra te incre ase from $2.20 to $2.30, effective 

fiscal ye ar 1957 (not in ac t) ...........................................................

Tot ali $9,955, 800

192,500

116,900 

696,000

1 $13,793,500

’ 136,000

116,900

696,000

$100,000 

20,000

656,000 

91,200 

1,948,500

636,000

40,300

1,961,500

120,000 13,656,900 17,380,200

i W ith ou t ad justmen ts for changes in th e level of income.

1

 L aw chang ed effective calen dar year 1958 reducing nu mbe r of perso ns liable for lic ense.

Statem ent of real estate assessments {taxable, United States, District of Columbia and

privately owned exempt)

Y EA R E N D E D JU N E 30, 1935

To ta l acres Lan d value Im provem ents To ta l val ue Tax

Pe rcent 

of area

Ta xa bl e.........................

United .States. -............

17.988. 5807 

10,978.8047 

1,043.5488 

1,678.3285

$487,742,551

337,304, 256 

18,893,324 

31,493,401

$645,085,098

218,844,350 

17,979,317 

64,644,550

$1,132,827,649 

556,148,606 

36,872,641 

96,137,951

$16,992,414 

8,342,251 

553,091 

1,442,076

56.9

34.8

3.3

5.0 Distri ct of C olum bla-. 

Ex em pt ____________

T ota l................... 31,589. 2627 875,433,532 946,553,315 1,821,986,847 27,329,832

Y EA R E N D E D JU N E 30, 1936

Tax ab le .......... . ............ 17,926. 9122 $483,016,100 $648,782,284 $1,131,798,384 $16,976,975 56.7

United Sta te s_______ 11,081. 5283 337,153, 595 235,592,350 572,745,945 8,591,197 35.0

Distri ct of Colum bia.. 1,031.4590 18,910,671 20,457,717 39,368,388 590,528 3.3

Exe m pt ......................... 1,594.0449 31,745,595 66,392,050 98,137,645 1,472,077 5.0

T ota l. — ........... 31,633.9444 870,825,961 971, 224,401 1,842,050.362 27,630,777
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 11

Statement of real estate assessments {taxable, United States, District of Columbia and

privately owned exempt)— Continued 

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1937

T o ta l acre s L a n d v a lu e Im p ro v e m e n ts T o ta l v a lu e T a x

P e rc e n t 

o fa re a

T a x a b le ..............................

U n ite d S ta te s ..................

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia - 

E x e m p t..............................

T o ta l.......................

17,79 9. 5452 

11 ,2 12 .859 9 

1,03 8. 7717 

1, 60 0.30 89

$4 79 ,495 ,264

34 2,26 1, 11 7 

19 ,2 80 ,092 

31, 95 5, 81 2

$6 64 ,961 ,889

30 7, 73 5, 35 0 

41 ,516 ,717 

67 ,4 59 ,7 33

$1 ,1 44 ,4 57 ,1 53 

64 9,99 6,46 7 

60 ,7 96 ,8 09 

99 ,4 15 ,5 45

$1 7, 16 7,31 4 

9,7 49 ,9 56 

91 1,95 3 

1,4 91 ,2 38

56.2 

35.4 

3 .3 

5.1

31 ,6 51 .485 7 87 2,99 2, 285 1, 081 ,6 73 ,6 89 1,9 54, 66 5, 97 5 29 ,320 ,461

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1938

T a x a b le ..............................

U n it e d S ta te s ..................

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t..............................

T o ta l.......................

17, 5 56 .017 2 

11 ,309 .262 5 

1,07 4.37 67 

1, 59 7.22 68

$4 80 ,4 20 ,638

34 2,64 2, 04 3 

19 ,3 98 ,268 

31 ,8 05 ,9 24

$690 ,910 , 283

30 7, 01 7,55 0 

42 ,9 58 ,817 

68 ,3 01 ,1 33

$1 ,1 71 ,3 30 ,9 21 

64 9,65 9,59 3 

62 ,3 57 ,085 

10 0, 10 7,05 7

$2 0, 49 8, 55 2

11 ,3 69 ,048

1, 09 1. 25 0

1, 75 1, 87 7

55.7

35.9

3 .4

5 .0

31 ,536 . 8832 87 4, 26 6,87 3 1,10 9, 18 7, 783 1, 98 3,4 54,6 56 34 ,7 10 ,7 27

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1939

T a x a b le ...........................

U n ite d S t a t e s .. . .........

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia

E x e m p t...........................

T o t a l ...................

17.357. 7572 

11 ,44 1.74 61

1, 09 0,63 64

1, 61 4.33 67

$480, 473, 718

34 4,35 8, .563 

19 ,6 37 ,752 

32 ,1 45 ,1 56

$7 13 ,025 ,368

31 8, 63 6,95 0 

44 ,3 71 ,317 

72 ,3 61 ,866

$1 ,193 , 499,08 6 

66 2,99 5, 513 

64 ,0 09 ,069 

104, 50 7,02 2

$2 0, 88 6,49 1

11 ,6 02 ,435

1, 12 0,16 0

1,82 8, 87 5

31, 504. 4764 87 6,61 5. 18 9 1,14 8, 39 5, 501 2, 025,0 10,6 90 35 ,4 37 ,961

55 .1 

36.3 

3 .5 

5.1

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1940

T a x a b le ...........................

U n ite d S ta te s ...........

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia

E x e m p t...........................

T o t a l ...................

17 ,0 57 .175 4 

11, 669. 7645 

1,02 4.55 24 

1, 60 6.40 82

$482, 466,00 1

34 6, 19 1, 48 6 

20 ,2 81 ,4 04 

32, 97 2, 20 2

$728, 7 42 ,483

32 3, 38 2,15 0 

45. 966, 517 

75 ,887 ,941

$1,2 11 ,2 08 ,4 84 

669, 57 3,63 6 

66 ,2 47 ,921 

10 8, 86 0,14 3

$2 1, 19 6,39 8

11 ,717 ,556

1, 15 9, 34 5

1, 90 5, 05 4

31, 35 7.90 05 88 1, 91 1, 09 3 1, 17 3, 97 9, 09 1 2, 05 5,8 90,1 84 35 ,9 78 ,3 53

54 .4 

37.2 

3 .3 

5. 1

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1941

T o ta l.

T a x a b le ............................

U n ite d S ta te s ______

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia . 

E x e m p t............................

16, 757.173 1 

11 ,90 6.08 41

1, 01 6.17 00

1, 595 .46 46

$4 83 ,017 ,497

34 6, 85 7, 25 7 

20, 09 4, 34 6 

33, 28 1, 26 3

$7 54 ,91 9, 588

32 1, 21 4,20 0 

53 ,637 , 717 

78, 512,91 0

$1 ,2 37,9 37,0 85 

66 8, 07 1,45 7 

73 ,7 32 ,063 

11 1, 79 4,17 9

$2 1, 66 4,13 7

11 ,6 91 ,257

1, 29 0,31 2

1,9 56 , 401

31 ,2 74 .891 8 88 3, 25 0, 36 3 1,20 8, 28 4, 42 1 2,09 1, 534, 784 36, 60 2, 10 7

53.6 

38 .1 

3 .2 

6. 1

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30 , 1942

T a x a b le ..........................

U n ite d S ta te s ______

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia

E x e m p t..........................

T o ta l..................

16 ,331 . 5125 

12 ,217 .683 6

1,0 26 . 7378

1. 59 9.7 23 9

$4 81 ,965 ,99 1

35 0, 81 1,69 0 

20, 578. 79-1 

33 ,0 55 ,711

$7 85 ,322 ,438

32 6, 94 3,35 0 

56 ,8 98 ,417 

79 ,0 18 ,3 66

$1,2 67 ,2 88 ,4 29 

67 7, 75 5,04 0 

77 ,477 ,211 

11 2, 07 4,07 7

$2 2,17 7, 789

11 ,8 60 ,713

1,35 5,85 1

1,96 1, 29 6

31 ,1 75 .657 8 88 6,41 2, 18 6 1,24 8, 18 2, 571 2, 134, 594, 757 37 ,3 55 ,6 49

52 .4

39.2

3 .3

5. 1

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30 , 1943

T a x a b le .........................

U n ite d S ta te s -----------

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia

E x e m p t........................

T o ta l..................

16,07 4. 4536 

12 ,4 75 .736 3 

1, 00 9.89 83

1, 48 9.05 60

$4 93 ,00 4, 734

35 7,92 4,78 1 

22, 744,93 9 

31 ,495 , 727

$8 33 ,988 ,081

33 2, 37 1, 25 0 

61, 43 3, 26 7 

77, 49 8, 93 3

$1, 32 6, 99 2, 81 5 

69 0,29 6,03 1 

84 ,1 78 ,2 06 

10 8, 99 4,66 0

$2 3. 22 2,61 2

12 ,0 80 ,180 

1,47 3. 11 9

1,9 07 ,4 07

31 ,0 49 .144 2 90 5,17 0,18 1 1,30 5, 29 1, 53 1 2,21 0, 46 1, 712 38 ,6 83 ,3 18

51 .8

40 .2

3 .2

4 .8
12 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Statem ent of real estate assessments {taxable, United States, Distr ict of Columbia and

privately owned exempt)— Continue d

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1944

T o ta l acre s L a n d v a lu e Im p ro v e m e n ts T o ta l v a lu e T a x

P e rc e n t 

o fa re a

T a x a b le . . . _________ 15 ,897 .548 1 

12 ,689 .71 46 

1,01 7.63 88 

1,45 5.45 83

$4 95 ,378 ,491

35 9, 80 3,47 2 

23 ,0 23 ,481 

32, 757,97 0

$8 58 ,970 ,229

33 6,72 3,35 0 

67 ,442 , 767 

81 ,3 52 ,5 35

$1, 35 4, 34 8, 72 0 

696, 5 26 ,822 

90,4 66 ,2 48 

11 4, 11 0,50 5

$2 3, 70 1,33 6

12 ,1 89 ,219 

1, 583 ,15 9 

1,99 6,93 3

51 .2

40.8

3.3

4 .7

U n ite d S ta te s .. . .

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t__________

T o ta l____ _____ 31 ,0 60 .359 8 91 0, 96 3,41 4 1,34 4, 48 8, 88 1 2,2 55,4 52,2 95 39,4 70 ,6 47

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1945

T a x a b le ____ _________ 15 ,60 7.79 44 

12,83 6. 7810 

1, 02 0.82 75 

1,5 68 . 5388

$4 98 ,355 ,660

363, 71 5,16 6 

23, 46 8,8 31 

34, 25 7, 34 6

$8 71 ,806 ,939

33 8,19 8,95 0 

67 ,8 11 ,367 

83, 506,5 51

$1 ,3 70 ,1 62 ,5 99 

70 1, 91 4,11 6 

91, 28 0,19 8 

117, 763,89 7

$2 3, 97 8,07 9

12 ,283 .497 

1, 59 7,40 3

2,0410,868

U n it e d S ta te s ___ _____

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t________ . . .

T o t a l. . . . . . 31,03 3. 9417 91 9, 79 7,00 3 1, 36 1, 32 3, 80 7 2,2 81,1 20,8 10 39 ,9 19 ,847

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 194G

T a x a b le ______________ 15 ,385 .04 61 

12 ,925 .289 4 

1, 04 6.52 05

1, 05 9.89 30

$5 04 ,193 ,989

36 5,91 1, 80 0 

23, 65 7, 68 0 

35 ,7 49,6 12

$8 77 ,687 ,063

34 3,07 4,35 0 

67, 7 96 ,367 

86 ,5 00 ,7 40

$1 ,3 81,8 81,0 52 

70 8, 98 6,15 0 

91 ,4 54 ,0 47 

12 2, 25 0,35 2

$2 4, 18 3,14 4 

12 ,407 ,257

1, 60 0, 44 5 

2, 13 9,38 1

49 .6

41 .7

3 .4

5.3

U n ite d S ta te s .. .

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t_______________

T o ta l 31 ,0 16 .749 0 92 9,51 3,08 1 1,3 75 ,0 58 ,5 20 2,3 04,5 71 ,6 01 40 ,3 30 ,227

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1947

T a x a b le ____ __ ______ 15 ,2 19 .902 4 

12 ,989 .653 3

1,04 9.90 50 

1, 73 9.21 37

$5 06 ,4 61 ,468

36 6, 31 8, 79 7 

23, 22 1, 09 3 

35 ,7 63 ,921

$8 89 ,556 ,013

34 5, 59 7,95 0 

68 ,7 33 ,967 

88 ,1 30 ,1 70

$1 ,3 96 ,017 ,4 81 

71 1, 91 6,74 7 

91,9 55 ,0 60 

12 3,89 4,09 1

$2 4, 43 0,53 9 

12 ,458 ,543 

1, 60 9,21 3

2, 168.1 46

U n it e d S ta te s ..................

D is tr ic t o f C o l u m b i a - 

E x e m p t______________

T o t a l ___________ 30 ,9 98 .674 4 93 1,76 5, 279 1,3 92 ,0 18 ,1 00 2, 323,7 83,3 79 40 ,666 .441

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1948

T a x a b le _____________ 15 ,133 .481 9 

13,00 8. 6408 

1, 06 9.93 03 

1,74 8, 60 66

$5 42 ,1 27 ,566

402 , 242,34 7 

27 ,6 89 ,4 72 

38 ,1 18,3 48

$1 ,0 30 ,3 99 ,9 38 

36 7, 16 3,01 0 

82 ,0 11 ,740 

10 2, 40 2,56 2

$1 ,5 72,5 27,5 04 

76 9, 40 5,35 7 

10 9, 70 1,21 2 

14 0, 52 0,91 0

$3 1,45 0,58 5

15 ,388 ,107 

2,1 94 ,0 24 

2,8 10 ,4 18

48.9

42.0

3 .5

5 .6

U n ite d S t a t e s .. . ___

D is tr ic t o f C o l u m b i a - 

E x e m p t. . . ___

T o t a l _______- - 30 ,960 . 6596 1, 010 ,1 77, 733 1,8 51 ,9 77 ,2 50 2,5 92, 154, 98 3 51 ,8 43 ,134

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30 , 1949

T a x a b le _____________ 15 ,046 .603 7 

13 ,031 .874 9 

1, 06 4.47 47 

1,7 66 . 6230

$5 42 ,388 ,907

40 8,98 3, 63 9 

25 ,8 86 ,8 65 

38, 92 5, 55 2

$1, 05 1, 86 3, 15 8 

38 8, 83 7,12 5 

82 ,3 93 ,160 

10 6, 01 4,52 2

$1 ,5 94 ,2 42 ,0 65 

79 7,82 0,76 4 

10 8,28 0,02 5 

14 4,94 0,07 4

$3 1,88 4,87 5

15 ,956 ,415

2,16 5,60 1

2,8 98 ,8 02

48 .7

42.2

3 .4

5 .7

U n ite d S ta te s —.

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t ___ ___ _

T o ta l 30 ,9 09 .576 3 1,0 16 ,1 84 ,9 63 1, 62 9, 09 7, 96 5 2, 64 5,2 82,9 28 52 ,9 05 ,693

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1950

T a x a b le __________ ____ 14 ,986 .036 7 

13 ,043 .030 4 

1, 04 8.58 02 

1,7 83 . 2342

$5 55 ,8 00 ,080

40 9, 89 9, 43 6 

26 ,3 15 ,9 10 

39, 75 8, 57 5

$1 ,0 81 ,070 ,9 41 

41 4, 56 8,34 5 

82 ,9 18 ,740 

10 6,24 9,87 9

$1, 63 6, 87 1, 02 1 

82 4,46 7,78 1 

10 9, 23 4,65 0 

14 6, 00 8,45 4

$3 5, 19 2,80 8

17 ,726 ,057

2,34 8, 54 4 

3, 13 9,18 1

48 .5

42 .3

3 .4

5 .8

U n ite d S ta te s . . . .

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia - 

E x e m p t_____ _______ .

T o ta l 30 ,860 .881 5 1,03 1, 77 4, 00 1 1,6 84 ,8 07 ,9 05 2, 71 6,58 1, 90 6 58 ,4 06 ,5 90
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 13

Statement o f real estate assessments (taxable, United States, District of Columbia and

privately owned exempt)— Co ntinued

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1951

T o ta l acre s L a n d v a lu e I m p ro v e m e n ts T o ta l v a lu e T a x

P e rc e n t 

of a re a

T a x a b le ....................... . 14 ,8 96 .949 4

13 ,060 .608 0

1,0 53 .211 1

1,8 07. 5359

$5 57 ,368 ,804

41 0, 11 7,28 5 

26 ,4 14 ,5 74 

40, .503,067

$1 ,1 10 ,1 10 ,0 93 

41 6, 30 1,46 5 

92,75 7,3 .50 

11 0,79 3,91 9

$1, 667 ,4 78 ,8 97

82 6, 41 8,75 0

11 9, 17 1,92 4

15 1, 29 6,98 6

$3 5, 85 0, 88 4

17 ,7 68 ,003 

2,5 62 ,1 96 

3,2 52 ,8 85

48.3

42.4

3 .4

5 .9

U n ite d S ta te s ________

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia - 

E x e m p t.............................

T o t a l ....... ............... 30 ,818 .3 04 4 1, 034 ,4 03 ,7 30 1,7 29 ,9 62 ,8 27 2, 764, 366, 557 59 ,4 33 ,968

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30 , 1952

T a x a b le ___ _______ . . 14,79 5. 3475 

13,05 8. 7214 

1,06 5.98 90 

1,80 9.69 47

$5 67 ,8 26 ,976

41 1,44 6, 91 9 

26 ,9 38 ,4 98 

41 ,4 72 ,091

$1, 16 1, 08 6, 01 7 

41 5, 94 7,52 5 

93 ,0 65 ,4 50 

11 4,02 8,28 9

$1 ,7 28, 912, 993 

82 7,39 4, 44 4 

12 0,00 3,94 8 

15 5, 50 0,38 0

$3 7, 17 1,71 7

17 ,7 88 ,980 

2,5 80 ,0 84

3,3 43 ,2 58

U n ite d S ta te s ..................

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia - 

E x e m p t_______________

T o ta l.................... 30 ,7 29 .752 6 1,0 47 ,6 84 ,4 84 1,78 4, 12 7, 28 1 2, 831, 811, 765 60 ,8 84 ,0 39

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1953

T a x a b le .............................. 14 ,6 65 .366 9 

13 ,0 95 .308 4 

1, 07 4.89 13 

1, 85 2. 67 05

$.57 7,4 05,64 2

41 2, 17 0, 17 5 

27, 26 7, 01 8 

42 ,7 57 ,5 73

$1, 20 5, 18 2,94 0 

46 3,01 8, 97 0 

96, 43 7, 42 0 

11 9,82 3,67 9

$1,7 82 ,5 88 ,5 82 

87 5, 81 9,14 5 

12 3, 70 4,43 8 

16 2, 58 1,25 2

$3 8,32 5,74 4

18 ,8 16 ,5 67

2,65 9, 645 

3,4 95 ,4 97

U n ite d S ta te s ________

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t_______ _______

T o ta l___________ 30 ,688 .237 1 1,0 59 ,6 00 ,4 08 1,8 84 ,4 63 ,0 09 2, 94 4,0 63,4 17 63 ,2 97 ,4 53

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1954

T a x a b le ________ ______ 14 ,591 .037 2 

13,11 0. 7852 

1,08 8. 33 22 

1, 87 3.35 75

$5 77 ,4 55 ,297

41 2, 92 0, 35 2 

27, 39 7, 20 8 

43 ,9 76 ,0 27

$1, 22 7, 95 4, 24 5 

46 9, 45 8,62 5 

10 1,44 7,96 0 

12 7, 46 9,57 9

$1,8 05 ,4 09 ,5 42 

88 2,37 8,97 7 

12 8,84 5,16 8 

17 1,44 5,60 6

$3 8, 81 6,39 7

18 ,9 71 ,148

2, 77 0,17 1

3,68 6, 08 1

U n ite d S ta te s ..................

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t........ ...................

T o t a l ___________ 30 ,663 .512 1 1,0 61 ,7 48 ,8 84 1, 926 ,3 30, 409 2, 988,0 79,2 93 64 ,2 43 ,7 97

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1955

T a x a b le .............................. 14 ,555 .346 8 

13 ,115 .910 6 

1,10 3.32 41

1, 87 3.85 89

$588, 2 02 ,177

41 3,53 7, 33 0 

27, 67 5, 58 5 

44, 51 1,83 2

$1, 26 4, 12 1,72 8 

497, 569, 698 

10 9, 46 8,81 0 

13 0,40 9,17 9

$1,8 52 ,3 23 ,9 05 

91 1,10 7, 02 8 

13 7,14 4,39 5 

17 4, 92 1,01 1

$4 0,75 1,29 7

20 ,0 44 ,3 55

3,0 17 ,1 77

3,8 48 ,2 62

U n ite d S ta te s ________

D is tr ic t o f C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t_______________

T o ta l...................... 30 ,648 . 4404 1,0 73 ,9 26 ,9 24 2,0 01 ,5 69,4 15 3,0 75,4 96,3 39 67 ,6 61 ,091

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30 , 1956

T a x a b le ............................. 14 ,5 11 .048 7 

13 ,078 .462 8

1, 11 3.41 78

1,88 7. 5631

$600 ,672 , 717

42 4, 01 1,43 4 

28 ,0 13 ,5 75 

48, 52 1, 19 7

$1, 29 6, 03 1, 51 1 

50 1, 52 0,01 8 

11 1, 11 6,63 0 

138, 553, 529

$1 ,896 , 70 4,22 8 

92 5, 53 1, 45 2 

139,1 30, 205 

187,0 74 , 72 6.

$41, 72 7,66 6

20, 36 1, 69 2

3, 06 0,86 5

4, 115,6 44

U n ite d S ta te s ________

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E xem pt

T o ta l....................... 30, 590.4 924 1,1 01 ,2 18 ,9 23 2,0 47 ,2 21 ,6 88 3, 148,4 40,6 11 69 ,2 65 ,8 67

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30 , 1957

T a x a b le .............................. 14 ,430 .172 8 

13 ,1 32 .196 2 

1, 10 4.35 77 

1, 89 7.85 75

$6 15 ,077 ,543

42 8, 43 8, 32 0 

28 ,3 53 ,5 02 

50 ,1 40 ,5 73

$1 ,3 33 ,4 60 ,1 58 

50 1, 49 5, 15 8 

11 5, 05 0,73 0 

14 4, 18 9,22 9

$1 ,9 48 ,5 37 ,7 01 

92 9, 93 3, 47 8 

14 3, 40 4,23 2 

19 4,32 9,80 2

$4 4,81 6,48 9

21 ,3 88 ,470 

3,2 98,2 97 

4,4 69 ,5 85

U n ite d S ta te s ..................

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia .. 

E x e m p t_______________

T o ta l....................... 30 ,564 . 5842 1,1 22 ,0 09 ,9 38 2,0 94,1 95, 27 5 3,2 16,2 05,2 13 73 ,9 72 ,841
14 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Statem ent of real estate assessments (taxable, United States, District of Columbia and

privately owned exempt)— Co ntinued

Y E A R E N D E D J U N E 30, 1958

T o ta l acre s L a n d v a lu e Im p ro v e m e n ts T o ta l v a lu e T a x

P e r ­

c e n t 

o fa re a

T a x a b le ______________ 14 ,380 .440 7 $6 15 ,731 ,425 $1 ,345 , 78 5,6 25 $1, 961 ,5 17 ,0 50 $4 5,11 5,01 5 47 .1

U n ite d S ta te s ................. 13,140 . 2749 45 8,46 5,92 1 50 5, 99 1,45 8 96 4, 45 7,37 9 22 ,1 82 ,519 43 .0

D is tr ic t ol C o lu m b ia .. 1,1 15. 5351 28 ,8 30 ,627 117,7 65, 770 14 6,59 6,39 7 3,3 71 ,7 17 3 .6

E x e m p t.............................. 1,92 5.89 63 50 ,5 59 ,310 15 2, 49 0,96 9 20 3, 05 0,27 9 4, 67 0,1 56 6 .3

T o ta l...................... 30 ,5 62 .147 0 1,1 53 ,5 87 ,2 83 2, 122 ,0 33 ,8 22 3, 27 5, 62 1,10 5 75 ,3 39 ,407
S c h e d u l e o f ta x a b le a n d e x e m p t p r o p e r tie s i n th e D i s t r i c t o f C o lu m b ia , fi s c a l y e a r 1 9 5 8

T A X A B L E P R O P E R T Y

T o ta l ac res L a n d val ue Im p ro v em en ts T o ta l val ue T ax P erc en t of la n d ar ea P erc en t of la n d val ue P erc en t of to ta l val ue N u m b er o f it em s

14,3 80.4407 $615,731, 425 $1,345, 785, 625 $1, 961, 517,05 0 $45,115, 015 47.1 53.4 59.9 152,474

U n it e d S ta te s........................................................................

D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia ..........................................................

O th er ex em pt: R el ig io us (i nclu din g s ch oo ls an d c h u r c h e s ) .. ..

E d u c ati o n al...................................................................

Fore ig n g o v ern m en t— ...........................- ...............

C h a rit a b le ......... ................................................... .........

C em et eri es ......................................................................

H o s p i t a l . . . . ..................................................................

Sci en tifi c.........................................................................

M is ce ll an eo us................................................................

T o ta l, o th er ex em p t...................... .........................

T o ta l e x e m p t....................... ..................................... T o ta l ex em pt ex cl us iv e of U n it ed S ta te s, D is tr ic t 

of C olu m bia , an d re ligi ou s...........................................

T o ta l ta xab le an d ex em p t....................................

E X E M P T P R O P E R T Y

13,140. 2749 

1,115.5351

$458, 465, 921 $505.991. 458

28,830 ,62 7 ! 117,765,770

$964, 457,379 

146, 596,397

$22,182, 519 

3,37 1, 717

43.0

3. 6

39.7

2.5

29 .4 5,274

4. 5 1 984

517.55 13 

614.1427 

150. 5612 

141. 2642 

386. 8473 

65. 2402 

23.1794 

27.11 00

15,417,111 

11.1 73,5 90 

5,9 26, 867 

2,903,95 9 

2,862,12 6

3, 930,757 

3,945,06 6

4, 399,834

61, 612, 660 

38, 973,676 

12, 742, 680 

8, 760, 293 

385,900 

15,097, 780 

4,009, 700 

10, 908, 280

77,029 ,771 

50,147 ,26 6 

18,669, 547 

11,664, 252 

3,2 48, 026 

19,028, 537

7,954, 766 

15,308,114

1,771, 684

1,153,388 

429,399 

268,278 

74, 705 

437, 656 

182,960 

352,086

1, 925. 8963 50,559 ,31 0 152,490,969 203,050,27 9 4,6 70, 156 6. 3 4.4 6. 2 2,375

16,181. 7063

1, 408 .3450

537, 855, 858

35,142 ,19 9

776,248,197

90. 878,309

1,3 14, 104 ,05 5

126.020, 508

30, 224. 392

2. 898, 472

52.9 46.6 40.1 8,633

30, 562.14 70 1,153, 587,283 2,1 22,03 3,8 22 3, 275,621,1 05 75,339, 407 100.0 100.0 100.0 161,107

C i
0 5

Statement of revenues of the general, highway, water, sanitary sewage works, and motor-vehicle park ing fu nd s of the Dis tric t of Colu mbia showing

actual revenues f or 8 fisca l years and estimates fo r the current year and, budget year

G en er al fu nd:

Tax es :

P ro p e rty ta xe s:

R e a lt y ................... ............. ................. ............... .

P er so nal t an g ib le .............................................. .M oto r- veh ic le , per so nal ......................... .........

A uto m obile re g is tr ati o n a n d per so nal

p ro p erty ............................................................

P en al ti es an d i n te re s t------------------------- -

P er so nal in ta n g ib le ........................................ .

S u b to ta l, p ro p ert y t axes ..............................

Sa les an d gross re ce ip ts :

Alcoh olic be ve ra ges ........ . ......................... .......

B ee r.............. ......... . . . . ............. ...........................B usi ne ss p ri vil eg e........... ............. .....................

C ig are tt e____ __________ ________________

In su ra n ce........... . ............... ............... .................

M ot or- ve hi cl e ti tl e , ex ci se _______________

P u b li c u ti li ti es, ban k s, etc ..............................Sal es ____________________________________

S u b to ta l, s ales a n d gross re ceip ts .............

Li ce ns es an d p erm it s...................... .........................

In d iv id u al in com e......................................................

U nin corp ora te d bus in es s in c o m e.. ......................

C orp ora ti on n et in co m e an d f ra n ch is e_______

In h eri ta n ce a n d e s ta t e . . . . ......................................

T o ta l ta xes................................................................

E arn in gs an d m isce llan eo us :

C ha rg es , cu rr en t se rv ic e..........................................Fin es , es ch ea ts an d fo rf ei ts ......... ................. .........

R eim b u rs em en ts ____________________________

Sp ec ia l as se ss m en ts __________________________R en ts an d ro y alt ie s______________ ______ ____

In te re st on in v e stm en ts ...........................................

O th e r......... ........... ............. ...........................................

T o ta l, ea rn in gs an d m is ce llan eo us ........... .......

1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958

esti m ate 

1

1959

esti m ate 

1

$35 ,205 ,935 $36,286 ,297 

6,5 99, 160

$37,572 ,519 

7, 728,376

$38,571,65 8 

8,1 53, 329

$39,1 81,981 

8,0 67, 046

$40 ,954 ,386 

7,541,02 4

$42 ,195 ,877 

7,708, 164

$44,9 04,451 

8,04 5,431

$45 ,425 ,000 

8,200,00 0

$46,000 ,000 

8,2 25,00 0 6,6 38,94 9 3,0 63,15 7 3,6 61, 568 3,6 03,02 0 3,6 99, 188 3, 204,454

3,9 33, 025 

291,520

4,0 73, 226 

298,341

3,779,94 6 3,7 25,00 0 3,7 00,00 0 259,2 52 271,336 266,033 275,826 286,511

24

45,1 67, 317 46,8 18,3 61 49,169 ,94 8 50,7 00,0 01 50,739 ,992 52,719 ,955 54,275 ,608 56,729 ,828 57,350 ,000 57,925 ,000

2,8 12,71 7 3,6 12,16 0 3,4 08, 004 3,3 63,06 7 3,472,14 9 4,250,91 8 4, 763,929 5,4 19,93 6 5,3 50,00 0 5, 400,000 525,9 46 601,051 601,150 577,216 547,679 662, 129 659,688 750,915 700,000 700^000 131 866 33

1,267, 958 1,273,009 1,281,0 07 1,25 6,61 4 1,11 4,88 2 2,2 18, 868 2,033, 630 2,061,22 7 2,1 00,00 0 2,1 00,00 0 1,691,842 1, 721,568 

1,999,983

1, 840, 229 1,97 7,05 1

1, 788,068

2,1 04, 236 2,180, 463 2,352, 028 2,335,90 4 2, 425,000 2,4 25,00 0 1, 603,200 1,67 1,42 3 1, 738,549 2,170, 579 2, 403. 393 1,97 0,35 8 1,750,000 1,700,000 4,486, 186 4,4 59,72 7 4,9 61, 953 5,4 19, 528 5, 775,986 5,937,011 6,405, 798 6, 536, 991 7,270,00 0 7,000,000 11,3 04,0 48 14,9 91,1 96 15, 450,031 15,413, 786 15,014 ,096 17,8 88,3 96 19,5 30,8 09 20,383,751 20,200,0 00 20,300 ,000

23,692 ,028 28,659 ,56 0 29,213 ,830 29,795 ,33 0 29,767 ,577 35,308 ,36 4 38,149 ,27 5 39,459 ,082 39,795 ,000 39,625 ,000

3,1 51,97 2 3,2 09, 808 3,1 68, 182 3, 219,884 3,204,39 8 3,3 37, 940 3,3 32,87 8 4,1 86, 086 3,8 00,00 0 3,800,00 0 5,0 43, 840 3,8 89,85 7 4,0 54, 070 4,2 89, 468 4,2 41, 656 5, 796,194 7,206, 488 17,162,322 21,000 ,00 0 21,000 ,000 1,20 6,17 1 1,528,53 2 1,696, 550 1,692,02 0 1, 620,444 1, 644,692 1,546,373 1,485,121 1,47 5,000 1,425,000 5,9 45, 052 6,7 50, 592 7,7 83, 827 7,356, 213 6,8 19, 597 6, 658,195 7,497,24 4 7, 541,969 7,800,00 0 6,9 00,00 0 3,0 71,43 2 1,53 5,90 1 1,399,716 1,616,553 2,5 56, 295 1,916,162 2,1 71, 623 2,159,38 4 2,600,00 0 2,000,00 0

87,2 77, 812 92,392,611 96,486 ,123 98,66 9,4 69 98,949 ,95 9 107,3 81,502 114,1 79,489 128,723, 792 133,820,000 132,675,000

1, 731,198 1,684,036 1,872,521 1,882,596 1,773,76 4 2,1 79,38 0 2,1 76, 114 2,411, 695 2,4 00,00 0 2,4 00,00 0 2, 233,493 1,442,263 1,473,428 1, 406,448 1,75 2,85 0 2,036, 468 2,3 02, 689 2,331, 463 2,2 50,00 0 2,2 50,00 0 1,011,800 1,052, 740 1,309,739 1,338,2 25 1,442,0 34 1, 508,313 1,664,016 1,67 9,928 1,950,000 2,0 50,00 0 112,517 123, 799 

134, 469

140,177 92,7 58 86,098

157,376 160,880 208, 771 191,850 196,348 314,479 140,040 150,000 150,000 112,617 236,928 220,312 463,446 320,358 576,368 676,677 983,064 1,350,000 1,20 0,000 572,765 799,187 734,976 760,905 939,178 929,428 988,989 1,009,921 1,250,00 0 1,300,00 0

5,9 31, 766 5,4 73, 422 5,912, 033 6,1 53, 149 6,5 06,13 2 7,426,30 5 8,122, 964 8,556,111 9,3 50,00 0 9.3 50,00 0

DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROPRIATION S, 1959
T o ta l, n o t in clu din g F ed era l p a y m e n t--------

F ed era l p a y m e n t________________________________

93,20 9, 578 

11,0 00,0 00

97, 866,033 

9,8 00, 000

102,398 ,156 

10,400,000

104,822,61 8 

10,000,000

105,456,091 

11,0 00,0 00

114, 807,8 07 

20,000 ,000

122,3 02,453 

18,000,000

137,2 79,903 

20,000 ,00 0

143,170,000 

20,000,0 00

142,025,000 

25,00 0,0 00

G ra n d to ta l, ge ne ra l fu n d ---------------------------------- 104 ,209 ,578 107,6 66,033 112, 798,156 114,822,618 116,456,091 134, 807,807 140,3 02,453 157,2 79,903 163,170,000 167,025,000

H ig h w ay f und: G as ol in e ta x ___________________________________ 7,4 39, 677 1, 711,649 

970,0 48

7,851, 362

1,807,81 6

1,079,63 0

8,177, 703 

1, 759,441 

661,704

9,8 83,14 0

1, 788,287 

667,280 

49,8 80 

263,469

10,002 ,300 

1,831,46 0

700.943

108.943 

197,038

11,754, 736

1,97 6,64 3 

735,241 

78,302 

103,219

3,3 57, 000

12,2 55,6 28

2,0 98, 335 

833, 468 

158,642 

176,828

6,0 00, 000

11,513,964 

1,947,245 

847,864 

262, 566 

256,346 

5,4 00, 000

11,100 ,000

1,900,000 

828,000 

382,000 

200,000

6,4 81,10 0

11,100 ,000 

1,900,000

2 1,255,00 0 

100,000 

200,000 

5, 500,000

A u to r eg is tr ati o n an d w eig ht ta x ------------------------- M oto r- veh ic le fees, e tc ____________________- _____ In te re st on in v est m en ts ______________________

P av in g a ss es sm en ts ______________________________ 157,170 144,413 154, 693 T re asu ry lo a n ----------- ------- ------------------------------—

G ra n d t o ta l, h ig h w ay f u n d ____________________ 10,278, 544 10,88 3,221 10,75 3,541 12. 652,056 12,840,684 18,005,141 21, 522,901 20,227 ,98 5 20, 891,100 20,055,0 00

W a te r fu nd:

W ate r rate s. ______________ - _________________ 4,5 94, 982 140,170 

297,1 73 

48.5 08 

84,2 40 

246, 582

4,5 45,87 8 

150,706 

114, 447 

48,5 07 

73,923 

234,036

1,405,00 0

4, 531, 595 

152, 755 

253,029 

48,4 16 

72,695

4, 504,958 

150,219 

619,672 

48,4 74 

84,6 75

4,476, 651 

128,222 

231,835 

48,382 

69,1 17

4,950,44 5 

128, 151 

669,333 

48,809 

66,433

5,382,0 71 

99,6 60 

264,630 

76,213 

398,176

4,9 46, 052 

75,175 

489,409 

1,817 

169,365

5,0 25,00 0 

60,0 00 

690,000

5,0 00,00 0

60,0 00

700,000 W ate r- m ain as se ss m en ts _______ ________________ P a y m e n ts f ro m A rl in gto n C o u n ty , V a___________ In te re st on in v e stm en ts ______ _______________ . . 185,000 185,000 M is ce llan eo us re ceip ts _________________ _______ Sa ies of se cu ri ties fro m w at er- fu nd in v e stm e n ts .— 

T re asu ry l o a n ___________________________________ 5,1 25, 000 6,9 00, 000 4,0 00,00 0 2,550,00 0 3,0 00, 000 5,3 00, 000 1,600,000 3,100, (XXI

T o ta l, n o t in clu din g F ed era l p a y m e n t................... F ed era l p a y m en t for w ate r co nsu m ed...................... . 5,4 11,65 5 1,000, 000 6,5 72, 497 1,000,00 0 10,183, 490 1,000,000 12,307, 998 1,000,000 8,9 54, 207 1,000,00 0 8,413,171 1,298,0 00 9,22 0, 750 1,302,000 10,9 81,818 1,813,950 7, 560,000 1, 751,450 9.0 15.00 0 1,532,000

G ra n d to ta l, w ate r fu n d -------------------- --------------- 6,4 11,65 5 7, 572, 497 11,183, 490 13,3 07,9 98 9,9 54,20 7 9,711,1 71 10,522, 750 12, 795, 768 9,3 11,45 0 10,577,000

S an it ary s ew ag e w ork s fu n d : 1,531,343 

60,898 

131, 516

2,6 26, 840 2,44 4, 619 

3,000,00 0 

140,141

2, 480.000

1,246,000 

164,000 

338,000 

50,000 

753,000

1,550,000

2,4 40,00 0 

991,000 

210,000 

774,000 

1,000 

697,000

145,845

29,0 03

590,700

700,000

80,045 

744, 700 592, 000 

2, 050, 000

G ra n d to ta l, san it ary s ew ag e w ork s fu n d ............. 4,36 5, 757 4,0 92, 388 6,40 9, 505 6,5 81,00 0 5,1 13,00 0

M o to r ve hi cl e p ark in g f u n d : P a r k in g m e te r re c e ip ts ______________________ 406,580 425,150 422,130 10, 718 426, 774 10,387 390,739 23,6 46 604,551 34,095 600,000 15,000 600,000 15,000 In te re st on in v e stm en ts _________________________

G ra n d t o ta l, m o to r ve hi cl e p ark in g f u n d .............. 406,580 425,150 432,848 437,161 414,385 638,646 615,000 615,000

G ra n d to ta l, al l fu n d s_________________________ 120, 899, 777 126,121, 751 135,141. 767 141,207,822 139,683,830 167,327,037 176,854,877 197,351,807 200, 568,550 203 ,385,0 00

» R ev is ed M a y 7 ,19 58.

2 In clu des $431,600 co nta in ed i n H . D oc .
18 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

PROGR ESS REP ORT, DISTR IC T OF CO LU MB IA REA SSE SSM EN T PROG RAM

J une 16, 1958.

The reassessment program for the Distric t of Columbia, authorized by the 

Congress in 1955, is proceeding essentially according to schedule. This is the 

thi rd progress report to this subcommittee on th e sta tus of the program. Fiscal 

year 1958, covered by this report, represents one of the most crucial years of 

the program. Thus far it has been a year of accomplishment as to actu al production. Further, the program lias been under continuous review and analysis 

to assure timely completion. Within the limits of available personnel, the remaining work to be done has been time-phased and scheduled, so that the program will be substantially completed by Jun e 30, 1958, with certain of the operations extending to the end of August. To insure that all phases of the program 

are complete, to review the assessments for accuracy, and to allow sufficient 

time the rea fter to notify property owners, we have scheduled informal hearings 

to begin September 1 and to run through December 31,1958.

At the beginning of fiscal year 1958, the s tatus of th e program was as follows: 

of an estim ated total of 158,000 parcels of taxable prop erty to be reassessed, 

the fieldwork had been completed on 100,000. the pricing on 80,000 and the final 

field review on 40,000. As of Jun e 13, 1958, fieldwork had been completed on 

157,853 parcels, pricing on 150,847 parcels and final field review on 137,708. 

The extent to which these three phases are completed is shown on a month-tomonth basis from the beginning of the program through May 31, 1958, in cha rt 

1 attache d hereto. The geographic area not yet completed is shown in chart 2. 

It will be observed that the cen tral business district is essentially the only remaining area for which final field review has not yet been completed. Weekly 

standard s have been established for each of the detailed operation s of the program and actual production compared to these standard s is reported weekly. 

Table 1 attached is a copy of the weekly repo rt ending Jun e 13, 1958. This tabie 

also shows numerically and as a percentage of the total the production remaining 

to be completed for each of the detailed operations. The fieldwork, it will be 

noted, is prac tically completed with the other operations ranging downward in 

various stages of completion. The final field review on improved properties, 

which is the last step in the process, is approximately 86 perce nt completed.

The final field review is the most imp ortant step in the reassessing process and 

involves the establishm ent of the assessed value based upon a physical inspection of the property and the information which has been gathered and computed in the other processes which have gone on before. This phase of the operation is performed by the experienced assista nt assessor staff and in recent months 

has been accelerated as preceding phases of the operation have moved toward 

completion. Since the permanen t assessing staff must also maintain current 

assessm ents, it has been necessary for them to divide the ir time between these 

operation s and the reassessment program. Thus, in orde r to remain substantially on schedule, we have resorted to a 6-day workweek for this staff.

When the program was initially authorized, it was deemed advisable to have 

outside consulta nts prepare the assessing stan dards, review the program periodically and provide professional assistance as needed. Thus far, consultants 

have been used to prepare the assessing standards, to review all phases of the 

program and to offer professional advice and assistance in establishing land 

values in the central business district. Based upon consultant findings, an extensive analysis was made of the program during the month of Jan uary 1958 

and the remaining work was rescheduled and time-phased for timely completion. 

In Feb rua ry 1958. a land value appraisal committee was created to provide professional advice and assistanc e in estab lishing land values in the central business 

district. The members of this committee are experienced Washington realtors 

and were selected on the basis of the ir knowledge of downtown prop erty values. 

They are contributing greatly to the effectiveness of the reassessment program. 

Our success with a committee of local realtors parallels that of other large cities 

most of which have used the services of a similar committee in the conduct of 

reassessment programs. Experience in other places has shown that the need 

for consulting services is equally as great during the final stages of the program, 

including both the informal and formal appeal periods. Thus, it is contemplated 

th at the services of a consultant and the land value app rais al committee will be 

utiliz ed to a considerable extent during fiscal y ear 1959.

The program is expected to be completed during fiscal yea r 1959 with the new 

assessed values being placed on the tax roll as of July 1, 1959. Upon completion 

of the reassessment of all taxable properties, pertinent information taken from
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 19

the appraisal card will be placed in punchcards which will he used for notifying 

property owners of the new assessments and in preparing tax rolls and tax bills. 

Informal hearings will he conducted from September 1 through December 31, 

1958, and formal appeals will be heard from the first Monday in Janu ary to the 

first Monday in April as required by law. The entire assessing staff, both permanent and temporary, will be utilized for the informal hearings and to do 

necessary followup work resulting from both informal hearings and formal appeals. Based upon experience with similar programs in other cities, a considerable number of reinvestigations will be necessary in order to satisfy all taxpayers.

While fiscal year 1958 was a year of accomplishment, the final and perhaps the 

most important part of the reassessment program remains to be completed during fiscal year 1959. In addition to discussing assessments with taxpayers at 

informal and formal hearings and making the necessary investigations and 

adjustments, it is planned to complete as much as possible of the field and office 

work in connection with the reassessment of Federal and other exempt properties. 

While it is not considered possible to complete this project during fiscal 1959, we 

hope to do most of the fieldwork with the temporary staff and complete the revaluation phase with the permanent assessing staff in fiscal year 19G0.

In the original justification for the reassessment program the total cost 

was estimated at $730,000. Adjusting this amount for mandatory pay increases 

and civil service retirement costs brings the total estimated cost to $797,287. 

Appropriations to date total $007,030. broken down by year as follow s : fiscal 

year 1956 (part year), $190,000; fiscal year 1957, $202,565; fiscal year 1958, 

$215,065. The amount requested to complete the program in fiscal year 1959 is 

$179,179, which will bring the overall cost of the program to $786,809—$10,478 

less than the original cost estimate as adjusted for mandatory increases. The 

amount requested for fiscal year 1959 will permit us to retain all of the temporary staff for the first half of the fiscal year, approximately one-half of this staff 

for the entire fiscal year and, in addition, to engage consultants to the sajne extent as provided in previous fiscal years. To insure timely completion of this 

important program, and to avoid any possibility of jeopardizing it during this 

last vital year, the amount requested for fiscal 1959 is considered absolutely 

essential. Public acceptance of the results of the reassessment program is vitally 

important and this in large part hinges on having proper staff facilities to conduct informal and formal hearings and to make the necessary investigations 

and adjustments.

The assessing standards adopted for the reassessment program were designed 

so as to provide assessed values at substantially the same level a present assessed 

values. The goal is equalization rather than an overall increase in assessments. 

However, the process of equalizing assessments at a particular level, as is being 

done in the District’s program, generally results in some increase in the overall 

assessment. In other jurisdictions, similar programs have demonstrated that 

the number and amount of assessment increases on properties below the equalization level are generally more numerous than assessment decreases on properties above this level. At this time, it appears that the previously estimated 

5 percent increase in the overall assessed value is still a realistic figure.

Notwithstanding the fact that the real-estate tax is the largest single source 

of tax revenue for the District of Columbia, this is the first time that a citywide 

study of assessed values has ever been undertaken. The reassessment program, 

when completed, will provide an equalized and up-to-date assessment based on 

generally recognized standards. Many other jurisdictions throughout the United 

States are following a similar course. The program provides a sound basis and 

a workable system for property tax administration which will benefit property 

owners and the District government both for the present and the future.
20 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 19 59

T a b le 1.—Progress report— District of Columbia reassessment survey, Ju ne 13, 1958

Fie ld enum er at io n:

Im p ro v ed _____________________________

V acan t................... ............. ..............................

C o m p u te a n d ch ec k area s:

Im p ro v e d _____________________________

V acan t__________________ ____ ________

Cla ss ific at io n: Im p ro v ed ............. .....................

D ra ftin g:

Im p ro v e d ................. .............................. .........

V acan t...............................................................

P ri ci ng i m pro vem ents : Im p ro v ed ...................

E x te n d an d che ck im pro vem en ts : Im p ro v ed . 

P ri ce a n d ex te nd l an d:

Im p ro v ed _______ ______ ______________

V acan t_____________________ ________

F in al revi ew :

Im p ro v ed _____________________________

V acan t...............................................................

C u m u la ­

ti ve pr oduct io n 

to J u n e 

6, 1958

Sc he duled pr odu ct io n 

pe r wee k

W ee k 

en ded 

Ju n e 13, 

1958

C u m u la ­

ti ve pro ­

duct io n 

to J u n e 

13, 1958

R em ain ­

in g pro ­

duct io n

P er ce nt 

of tota l

121,863 808 68 121,931 69 0.1 35,922 465 35,9 22 78 .3

121,388 

36,000

767

381

30 121,418

36,000

582 .5

119,813 726 691 120,504 1,496 1.2

121,288 718 127 121,415 585 .5 35,9 52 321 25 35,9 76 24

117,288 910 937 118,225 3, 775 3.1 114,712 885 932 115,644 6,356 5.2

112,972 1,754 3,40 6 116,378 5,622 4. 6 33, 798 425 671 34,4 69 1,531 4. 3

102,888 1,892 2,074 104,962 17,038 14.0 32,319 432 427 32,7 46 3,254 9. 0
District of Columbia— Statement of proposed pay increases

[I n t ho u san d s o f d ollars]

T y p e

E sti m ate d

av er ag e

per ce nta ge

in crea se

E sti m ate d c os t (i ncl ud in g 

re ti re m en t)

F u n d d is tr ib u ti o n

Fis ca l

yea r

1959

R etr o ­

ac tive 

Jan . 1,19 58

T o ta l G en er al H ig hw ay W ate r

S an it ary

sewag e

w ork s

M o to r

ve hi cle

p ark in g

Classifi ed - - ____ _______________________________________ 10.0 $4,639 $2,141 $6, 780 $6,271 $234 $181 $82 $12

T ea ch er s:

13.7

32.0

63.0

13.2

6.4

3,700

9,000

16,800

3,150

1,371

2,190

5,33 0

9,900

1,454

(')

5,89 0

14,330 

26,700 

4,604 

1,371

5,890

14,330 

26,700 S 3734 4,225

992

379 C om m is si oner s’ pr opo sa l for pol ic em en a n d fi re m en -------------------

W ag e B o a r d .. .................................................................. - ................. ........... 148 158 73

T o ta l, usi ng C om m is si one rs ’ pr op osa ls for sc hoo ltea ch er increa se s, S. 3 957..-------------- -------------- -------------------------------------- 12,860 5,78 5 18,645 17,378 761 339 155 12

T o ta l, us in g B oar d of E d u cati o n pr opo sa l for sc hoo ltea ch er incr ea se s.................- .......................................................................................... 18,160 8,925 27,085 25,818 761 339 155 12

T o ta l us in g S 3734 p ro po sa l for s ch oo ltea ch er i ncr ea se s________ 25,960 13,495 39,455 38,1 88 761 339 155 12

Eff ec tive be gi nnin g of 1st p ay pe ri od follo wing d ate of a p p ro v al b y C om m is si on er s, M ay 8, 1958. F in anced from re se rv e for su pple m en ta ls . S u p p le m en ta l now pen din g.
22 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

SCH EDU LES OF TAX COMPARISON’S OF MAJO R TAXE S IN TH E WA SHING TON 

METROPOLITAN AREA, MARCH 18 , 19 58

In considering this tax comparison of the Washington metropolitan are a several factors should be borne in mind. Schedule A is a digest of various majo r 

taxes administered and collected at the State, county, and city level. The Distri ct of Columbia is unique in that taxw ise it is comparable to a combination 

of a State, county, and city. While the Dis trict receives certain Federal funds 

in the form of a Federal payment, the counties and cities referred to in this 

comparison receive shares of Sta te tax collections, Federal and State payments 

or reimbursements in varying amounts. The amounts of such revenues or payments quite n aturally influence the v arious tax ra te struc ture s.

Schedule B is a comparison showing the amount of certain major taxes individual taxpayers would pay under the situations as indicated. The stateme nt 

of assumptions should be read before reading this comparison schedule.

We would like to express our appreciation for the courtesy and cooperation 

extended by officials in the finance, tax, and assessing departm ents of Montgomery, Prince Georges, Fairfa x, and Arlington Counties, the cities of Falls 

Church and Alexandria and the Washington Board of Trade.

Schedule A

SALES AND USE TAXES District o f Columbia

R at es :

2 percent on sale, lease, or rental of tangible personal prop erty and certain 

services.

1 perc ent on sales of food for consumption off the premises.

3 percent on rental of accommodations to tran sien ts.

Reimburseme nt: Sales of food for consumption off the premises, 28 cents and

ov er; other sales, 14 cents and over.

M aryland

R at es : 2 percent on sale, lease, or rental of tangible personal property and 

certain services, including charges for rental of accommodations to transients 

but not including food or meals sold for human consumption. (Note.—Rate in­ creased to 3 percent, effective Jan. 1, 1959.)

Reimburseme nt: All sales, 51 cents and over.

Virginia

R at es : No S tate sales tax. Alexandria imposes a 3 percent tax on rooms and 

lodgings furnished transients and a 10 percent tax on monthly utility bills. 

Falls Church also imposes a 10 percent tax on monthly utility bills. In both 

cities the amount of the utility bill in excess of $50 monthly or $150 q uarterl y 

is exempt from tax. Gas bills in excess of $5 per dwelling unit per month are 

also exempt from tax in both cities.

CIGARETTE TAXES District of Columbia

Rat es : 2 cents per package of 20 cigarettes.

Maryland

R at es : 3 cents per package of 20 cigarettes, effective Jul y 1, 1958. Montgomery County, 2 cents per package of 20 cigarettes.

Virginia

Rat es : None.

IN HE RITA NC E AND ESTA TE TAXES

District of Columbia

R at es :

1 to 15 percent depending on the class of beneficiary and the value of the share 

received after exemption.

An esta te tax is imposed on the es tate of each decedent to absorb the 80 percent 

credit allowed under the Federal Estate Tax Act.

No gift tax.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 23

Maryland

Rat es :

1 to 7% percen t depending on class of beneficiary.

An estate tax is imposed on the estate of each resident to absorb the 80 percent 

credit allowed under the Federal Estat e T ax Act.

No gift tax.

Virginia

R at es :

1 to 15 i>ercent depending upon the class of beneficiary and the value of th e sh are 

received a fte r exemption.

An estate tax is imposed on the estate of each residen t to absorb the 80 percent 

credit allowed under the F ederal Estat e Tax Act.

Gift tax at same rate s as inheritance tax.

INDIVIDUAL INC OM E TAXES

District of Columbia

Rat es : 2% percent first $5,000 of net taxable income, 3 perc ent second $5,000, 

3% percent third $5,000, 4 percent fourth $5,000, 4 ^ percent fifth $5,000, 5 percent 

on amounts in excess of $25,000.

Personal exemp tions: $1,000 for a single person, $2,000 for a married person 

(husband and wife ), $2,000 for head of household (tax pay er and one depend ent), 

$500 for each other dependent, $500 for each blind taxpayer or spouse, and $500 

for each taxpayer or spouse over 65.

Income tax law provides for employer withholding on residents and declaration 

and payment of estim ated income tax liability.

Maryland

Rat es : 3 percent on taxable earned income and the first $500 of unearned income, 5 p ercent on unearned income in excess of $500; effective with calendar 

year 1958 income.

Personal exemptions: $800 each for taxpayer, spouse, and each dependent; 

$800 additional for each blind taxpay er or spouse; $800 for each taxpayer, 

spouse, and each dependent over 65.

Income-tax law provides for employer withholding on residents and declaration 

and payment of estim ated income-tax liability.

Virginia

R at es : 2 percent on the first $3,000 of net taxable income, 3 percent on the 

next $2,000, and 5 percent on amounts in excess of $5,000.

Personal exemptions: $1,000 for a single person and $1,000 for a spouse. 

Taxpayer or spouse, blind or over 65, an additional $600 for each. Each dependent $200.

CORPORATION INC OM E TAX

District of Columbia

Rat es : 5 percent on net income fairly attrib uta ble to such trade or business 

conducted in the Distric t and on income from Distric t sources. In determ ining 

net income a ttributab le to the District of corporations operating both within and 

without the District, sales facto r formula used in most cases.

Maryland

Rat es : 5 percent on net income o f corporations engaged in tra de or business 

in the State. Income from ground rents, rents, and royalties and other income 

from real estate allocated wholly to the State. In determining other net income 

attr ibu table to Maryland of corporations operating both within and without 

Maryland, three-factor formula made up of property, payroll, and sales used. 

Virginia

R at es : 5 percent on net income of corporations doing business in the State. 

Income of corporations operating both with in and without Virginia allocated 

in the proportion that real estate and other physical assets in the State and 

the gross receipts in the State bear to the tota l market value of all real estate 

and other physical assets and the to tal gross receipts.
24 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROPRIATION S, 1959

UNINCORPORATED BU SIN ES S TAXES

Distr ict of Columbia

Ra tes : 5 percent on net taxable income fai rly attri buta ble to such trade or 

business conducted in the Dis tric t and on income from Dis trict sources afte r a 

$5,000 exemption. (Taxabl e unincorporated business income is not again taxed 

in the hands of a D istr ict resident.)

Mar ylan d

Ra tes : None as such, 

within the State.) 

Virg inia

Rat es : None as such, 

within the State .) 

Di str ict of Columbia

(Ind ivid ual income tax applies to business income

(Ind ivid ual income tax applies to business income

ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE TAXES

Rat es : 15 cents per gallon on wines containing 14 percent or less by volume 

of alcohol.

Forty-live cents per gallon on champagne, sparkling wines, and wines art ificially carb onated; 33 cents per gallon on other wines containing more than 14 

percent alcohol. $1.25 per gallon on spirits and alcohol.

Marylan d

R at es : 20 cents per gallon on all wines ; $1.50 per gallon on sp iri ts; $2.50 per 

gallon on alcohol.

Virg inia

R at es : Wine sold by the Alcoholic Beverage Contro l Board to retailers or 

wholesalers is taxed at the rate of 35 cents per gallon . The sale of spirits and 

alcohol is controlled by the Alcoholic Beverage Contro l Board and the tax 

equivalent is reported to be approximat ely $1.35 per ga llon.

BEER TAXES

Di stric t o f Columb ia

R at es : $1.50 per barrel of 31 gallons.

Maryla nd

R ate s: 93 cents per barrel of 31 gallons. 

Vir gin ia

Rate s : $3.10 per barrel of 31 gallons.

INS URAN CE TAXES

Di str ict of C olumb ia

R at es : 2 percent on net premium receipts.

Ma ryla nd

R ate s: 2 percent on a ll new and renewable gross premiums allocable to Mar yland with deductions allowed for returned premiums, dividends paid to policyholders, and refunds made to policyholders, except 1 percent rate on consideration paid for annuiti es. Domestic insurance companies are allowed a credit for 

franchise ta xes paid. Li fe insurance companies having a home office in Mary land 

are allowed a credit for fees paid the insurance commissioners not exceeding 15 

percent of the t ax, in addition to credit for franc hise taxes paid.

Vir gin ia

R at es : 1 percent to 2% percent on gross premiums derived from business In 

Vir gin ia without deduction for dividends or any other deduction except premiums 

returned on canceled or reduced policies depending upon type of insurance. Lif e 

insurance companies 214 percent (2% percent on premiums paid for special 

benefits) , domestic mutual companies 1 percent, indu stria l sick benefit companies 1 percent, workmen's compensation 21A percent, and all other companies 

2% percent.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 25

GROSS EARNING S TAXES 

(Banks, financial companies)

District of Columbia

Rates: 4 percent on gross earnings of banks. Intere st paid to depositors is 

deducted in determining earnings subject to tax.

Two percent on gross earnings of building and loan associations. Dividends 

paid to depositors a re not deducted in determining earnings subje ct to tax. 

Maryland

Rates: None as such. Share tax on shares of stock in State and national 

banks, trus t companies, and financial institutions competing with banks taxable 

in the county and/o r city where the shareholders reside or where t he in stitution 

is located. The rate is the aggregate of all lawful levies fo r State purposes plus 

$1 per $100 of the value of the shares for county an d/or city taxa tion.

Virginia

Rat es : None as such. Shareholders taxed on stock in any incorporated bank, 

banking association or tru st company organized under the laws of Virginia or 

the United State s, doing business in Virginia. The rate is 10 mills per $1 of 

valuation of the stock. Any city or town may impose a tax not in excess of 

80 percent of the State rate. This tax may be credited against the State tax.

GROSS REC EIPTS TAXES

(Electric, gas, and telephone companies)

District of Columbia

R at es : 4 percent on gross receipts of electric, gas, and telephone companies. 

Ma ry land

Rates : 2 percent franchise tax measured by gross receipts on electric, gas, 

and telephone companies.

Virginia

Rates : 1% percent up to $100,000 of gross receipts and 3 ’/2 percent on the excess 

over $100,000 of gross receipts of gas, light, and power companies. Telephone 

companies pay a grad uate d tax based on gross business and miles of line in 

the State. Additional %o of 1 percent on gross receipts of light, gas, and phone 

companies. In addition, local business privilege taxes based on gross receipts 

are levied on utilities.

MOTOR VEH ICL E FU EL TAXES

District of Colum bia

Rates : 6 cents per gallon.

Maryland

Rat es : 6 cents per gallon. Trucks with thre e or more axles and buses must 

purchase fuel or pay an equivalent tax amount for mileage operated in the State. 

District registered vehicles are exempt from this provision by reciprocal agreement.

Virginiu

Rates: G cents per gallon (plus 2 cents sur tax for property ca rri ers). Trucks 

with three or more axles and buses must purchase fuel or pay an equivalent tax 

amount for mileage operated in the State.

MOTOR VEH ICL E AND TRAILER REGISTRATION FEES

District of Columbia

Rat es : $22 per year per automobile for weights of 3,499 pounds or less. $32 

per year for weights of 3,500 pounds or more. Trucks and tra ile rs are taxed by 

weight classes.
26 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROPRIAT ION’S, 19 5 9

Virginia

R at es : $10 per year for priv ate automobiles. Personal property tax also applies to all motor vehicles. (See Personal property taxes.) Trucks, tractors, 

and trailers are taxed by weight classes.

Local tags must be obtained as follows:

Alexandria—$7 for passenger veh icles; $10 to $40 for commercial vehicles

based on weight classes

Arlington—$5 Hat fee; $9 to $45 for commercial vehicles based on weight 

classes

Fairfax—$5 flat fee 

Falls Church—$1 flat fee

MOTOR VEH ICLE AND TRAIL ER EXC ISE TAXES

District o f Columbia

R ate : 2 percent of the f air market value.

Maryland

R ate : 2 percent of the fair m arket value.

Vir^tma

R ate : None.

REAL PROPERTY TAXES

District of Columbia

Ra tes : Average effective tax rate of $1.26 per $100 of curre nt market value. 

The actual tax rat e is $2.30 per $100 of assessed valuation. The assessment 

level is on the average 55 percent of market value.

Maryland

Rat es :

Montgomery County: Average effective tax rate of $1,323 per $100 of current 

ma rke t value on residential property. Actual tax rates vary from $2.2925 to 

$3.0675 per $100 of assessed valuation. The assessment level is reported to be 

50 percent of market value. Effective tax rates accordingly vary from $1.15 

to $1.51 per $100 of market value. The actual tax rates used do n ot include a 

special park ing lot rat e varying from 20 cents to 54 cents per $100 of assessed 

valu ation which applies only to business properties where free parking facilities 

are provided. Town rates applicable in specific areas are excluded.

Prince Georges County: Average effective tax rate of $1,234 per $100 of current market value. Actual tax rates vary from $2.2425 to $2.6525 per $100 of 

assessed valuation. The assessment level is reported to be 50 percent of market value. Effective tax rates accordingly vary from $1.12 to $1.33 per $100 of 

ma rke t value. Town rates applicable in specific areas are excluded.

Assessors or other officials were contacted for information as to rates and an 

estimate of the ratio of assessments to current market value. Certain services 

vary among jurisdictio ns and are not included in the rat es where a separate 

charge is made.

Virginia

Ra tes : Arlington County: Average effective tax rate of $1.10 per $100 of current market value. The actual tax rate is $3.24 per $100 of assessed valuation. 

Tho assessment level is reported to be 34 percent of market value.

Alexandri a: Average effective tax rat e of $0114 per $100 of current market 

value. The actual tax rate is $2.75 per $100 of assessed valuation. The assessment level is reported to be 34 percent of market value.

Fa irfax County: Average effective tax rate of $1.05 per $100 of current market value. Actual tax rates vary from a minimum of $3.25 to $3.32 per $100 

of assessed valuation. The assessment level is reported to be 32 percent of 

market value. Effective tax rates accordingly vary from $1.04 to $1.06 per 

$100 of market value.

Falls Church: Average effective tax rat e of $1.28 per $100 of current market 

value. The actual tax rat e is $2.84 per $100 of assessed valua tion. The assessment level is reported to be 45 percent of market value.

Assessors or other officials were contacted in each jurisdiction for an estimate 

of the rati o of assessments to current market value. A study entitled “Tax 

Comparison Jurisdictions in the Washington Metropolitan Area'* and published
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 27

in August 1957 by Arlington County was also used to assure consistency of information supplied by assessors or other officials. Certain services vary among 

jurisdictions and are not included in the rates where a sep arate charge is made.

PERSO NAL PROPERTY TAX

District of Columbia

Rat es : Effective rat e of $2 per $100 of current market value only on tangible 

personal prop erty used in business. Actual rate is also $2 per $100 of market 

value. Assessment level is at market value. Household property and motor 

vehicles not stock-in-trade of dealers are exempted.

Maryland,

Rates: Montgomery County: Average effective rate of $1.08 per $100 of curren t market value of tangible personal prop erty used in business. Effective 

rates vary from $1.38 to $1.97 depending upon the location of the property. 

Actual rates vary from $2.2925 to $3.2875 per $100 of assessed valuation including the special levy for parking lots which applies only to business property 

and which was not used in comparing the real-estate tax rates. Town rates 

applicable in specific a reas are excluded. Maryland law requires th at business 

inventories be assessed at 60 percent of acquisition cost for county tax purposes. 

Assessed values for other than county tax purposes are not subject to this limitation.

Prince Georges County: Average effective rate of $1.47 per $100 of current 

market value of tangible personal prop erty used in business. Effective rates 

vary from $1.35 to $1.59 depending upon the location of the property. Actual 

rates vary from $2.2425 to $2.6525 per $100 of assessed valua tion. Town rates 

applicable in specific area s are excluded. Maryland law requires th at business 

inventories be assessed at 60 percent of acquisition cost for county tax purposes. 

Assessed values for other than county tax purposes are not subject to this 

limitation.

Virginia

Rates : Arlington County: Actual rate of $4.29 per $100 of assessed valuation 

of all tangible personal property including automobiles and household furnishings. The effective rate cannot be determined from the available information 

but is less tha n the actu al rate . Motor vehicles must be listed separately and 

the fair market value according to the tra de association handbook is used as 

the assessed valuation . However, household furnishings and personal possessions 

must be enum erated or valued for repo rting purposes at 10 percent of the residential real estate assessed value in the case of homeowners or at 50 percent 

of the tena nts’ an nual rental.

Al exandria: Actual rate of $3.50 per $100 of assessed valu ation of all tangible 

personal prop erty including automobiles and household furnishings. The effective rate cann ot be determined from the available information but is less than 

the actual rate . Motor vehicles must be listed sepa rately and the fa ir market 

value according to the trade association handbook is used as the assessed valuation. However, household furn ishings and personal possessions must be enumerated or valued for repo rting purposes at 10 percent of the residen tial realestate assessed value in the case of homeowners or at 50 percent of the ten ants’ 

annual rental.

Fa irf ax County: Actual rate of $3.25 per $100 of assessed valuation of all 

tangib le personal property including automobiles and household furnishin gs. The 

effective rat e cannot be determ ined from the available information but is less 

than the actu al rate. Motor vehicles must be listed sepa rately and the fair 

market value according to the trade association handbook is used as the assessed 

valuation. However, household furnishings and personal possessions are generally accepted at the valuatio n reported by the taxpayer.

Falls Church : Actual rate of $3.09 per $100 of assessed valuation of all tangible personal prop erty including automobiles and household furnishin gs. The 

effective rat e cannot be determined from the available information but is less 

than the actu al rate . Motor vehicles must be liste d sepa rately and the fair 

market value according to the trad e association handbook is used as the assessed 

valuation. However, household furnishings and personal possessions must be 

enumerated or valued for reporting purposes at 10 percent of the value of improvements only in the case of homeowners or at 30 percent of the ten ants’ 

annual renta l.
28 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 195 9

Sche dule B

Basi s fob Comparis on and Ass um pt io ns Made

This comparisou includes only the major taxes shown below and does not take 

into account additional service charges applicable in the various jurisdic tions 

for such items as water, sewer, trash collections, etc. Annual income levels of 

$5,000, $7,500, $10,000, and $15,000 are assumed as is ma rital status and dependents for each income level.

1. Individu al income tax.—Applicable rates in each juris diction a re applied to 

net taxable income after allowing for exemptions and the maximum standa rd 

deduction in each jurisdictio n for income levels of $5,000, $7,500, $10,000 and 

$15,000. Computation of tax liabilities in Maryland jurisdictions reflects the increased individual income-tax rate enacted by the 1058 legislature.

2. Real property tax.— Tax rates and the general level of p roperty assessm ent 

in relation to m arket value were obtained from each jurisdiction treated in this 

comparison. Actual tax rates in each jurisdictio n are converted to an average 

effective rat e per $100 of current market value of real prop erty ownership assumed. Real property ownership assumed for each income level is as follows :

Assu med market value of real pro perty

Income le ve l:

$5,000____________________________________________

$7,500____________________________________________________

$10,000___________________________________________________

$15,000___________________________________________________

$13, 500 

15, 000 

20,000 

30, 000

3. Personal property tax.—Actual rates are applied in jurisdiction where applicable. Assessed value of personal property ownership assumed for each income level is as follow s:

Income level Assumed 

assessed 

value of 

autom obile

To tal 

assumed 

assessed 

value of 

personal 

pr op erty

$5,000.............. . ....................................... .......... . ............................ ....................... $500 $ 7 0 0 $7; 500__________________________ ___ ________ ________ _______ ____ 600 1 O0Q $10,000......................................................... ............................................................ 850 1 BOO $15,000___ ___ _____ _________ ____ ___________ _____ _________________ 1,300 2 5 0 0

For single individuals, an automobile was assumed to be the only tangible 

personal property.

4. Sales tax.—Based on formula developed from a study of gross income and 

expenditures of urba n consumers. Allowance is made for 1-percent Dis trict of 

Columbia tax on food for consumption off the premises and exemption of all 

food and meals from sales tax in Maryland. Because the increase in the Maryland sales tax rate does not become effective until Jan uar y 1, 1959, it is not 

reflected in these computations.

5. Auto tags.—All motor-vehicles registration fees are applied to automobile 

ownership assumed for each income level as follows:

Income level: Weight of car

$5,000____________________ Less than 3,500 pounds.

$7,500____________________ Over 3,500 b ut less than 3,700 pounds.

$10,000___________________ Over 3,700 pounds.

$15,000....................... ............... Do.

6. The high, median, and low total tax liability is indicated by the letters H, 

M, or L, respectively.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Incom e, $5,000

29

Cas e I—M arr ie d , 2 ch ildr en :

In co m e_______ __________

R ea l p ro p ert y .....................

Per so nal p ro p ert y ............ .

S a le s .. .......... ............... ........

A uto ta g s............................

T o ta l......... .......................

C as e II—M arr ie d, no ch ildre n:

In com e____ ________ ____ .

R ea l p ro p ert y ........................

Per so nal p ro p ert y .................

Sa les.................... —..................

A uto ta g s................................

T o ta l............... ..................

Cas e I I I —Sing le:

In co m e.............. .......

R ea l p ro p erty ------

Per so nal pro per ty .

S a le s.. ......................

A uto ta g s................

T o ta l.....................

D is tr ic t 

of Co ­

lu m b ia

M ary la n d V irgi ni a

M o n tgo m er yP ri nce

Ge orges

A rlin gto n

A lexa ndri a

Fal ls

C h u rc h

Fa irfa x

$38 $39 $39 $47 $47 $47 $47

170 179 167 149 127 173 142

0 0 0 31 21 19 19

45 28 28 0 0 0 0

22 15 15 15 17 11 15

H 275 261 M 249 242 L 212 250 223

63 87 87 55 55 55 55

170 179 167 149 127 173 142

0 0 0 31 21 19 19

45 28 28 0 0 0 0

22 15 15 15 17 11 15

300 H 309 297 250 L 220 M 258 231

88 111 111 83 83 83 83

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 27 18 16 16

32 18 18 0 0 0 0

22 15 15 15 17 11 15

142 H 144 II 144 M 125 118 L no 114

Income, $7,500

D is tr ic t 

of C olu m b ia

M ary la n d V irgin ia

M o n tgo m er yP ri nce

Ge orges

A rlin gto n

A lexa ndri a

Fal ls

C h u rc h

Fa irf ax

Cas e I—M arr ie d , 2 c hi ld re n: 

In co m e______________ ____ $94 $114 $114 $112 $112 $112 $112

R ea l p ro p ert y . _____ ____ 189 198 185 165 141 192 158

Per so na l p ro p ert y ___ ____ 0 0 0 45 30 27 27

S a le s ........................ ..... ......... - 63 42 42 0 0 0 0

A uto t ag s ............ ............ 32 15 15 15 17 11 15

T o ta l___________________ H 378 369 356 337 L30 0 M 342 312

Ca se I I —M ar ri ed , no c hi ld re n: 

In c o m e ___ ____________ 119 162 162 120 120 120 120

Re al pro pert y __________ 189 198 185 165 141 192 158

Per so na l p ro p ert y — —-- - 0 0 0 45 30 27 27

Sales ___ ___________ 63 42 42 0 0 0 0

A uto ta gs _______________ 32 15 15 15 17 11 15

T o ta l........... ........................... 403 H 417 404 345 I, 308 M 350 320

Ca se III: Single:

In co m e ______ ________ 148 186 186 176 176 176 176

Re al p ro p ert y . __________ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Per so na l p ro p ert y —_______ 0 0 0 31 21 19 19

Sales _______ - _______ 45 25 25 0 0 0 0

A ut o t ag s...................... ........... 32 15 15 15 17 11 15

T o ta l______ ______ - ......... 225 H 226 II 226 M 222 214 L 206 210
30 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Income, $10,000

D is tr ic t 

of C olu m b ia

M ar y la n d V irgi nia

M o n tgo m er y

Princ e

Ge org es

A rlin gto n

A le xa ndri a

Fal ls

C hurc h

Fairfax

Cas e I —M ar ri ed , 2 chi ld re n: 

In co m e....... .. . . . $155

252

0

81

32

$189

265

0

54

23

$189

247

0

54

13

$225

220

72

0

15

$225

188

48

0

17

$225

256

43

0

11

$225

210

43

0

15

Rea l p ro p ert y ________

Per so nal pro p ert y ..........

Sal es ____ . . . . . .

A uto ta g s__________

T o ta l______ ________ M 520 531 513 532 L 478 II 535 493

Ca se I I —M ar ri ed , no c hi ld re n: 

In co m e_____ . . 185

252

0

81

32

237

265

0

54

23

237

247

0

54

23

245

220

72

0

15

245

188

48

0

17

245

256

43

0

11

245

210

43

0

15

R ea l p ro p e rty .. . . . . _

Per so na l p ro p ert y _______

Sa les_______ . . . . .

A uto t a g s ............. ...

T o ta l_______ _____ 550 H 579 561 M 552 L 498 555 513

Ca se I I I —Single:

In co m e___ _______ 215

0

0

43

32

261

0

0

27

23

261

0

0

27

23

295

0

45

0

15

295

0

30

0

17

295

0

27

0

11

295

0

27

0

15

Rea l p ro p ert y _________

Per so na l pro p ert y ..........

Sa les_______

A uto ta g s____ ____

T o ta l......... ................. L 290 311 311 H 355 342 M 333 337

Incom e, $15,000

D . C.

M ar y la n d V ir gin ia

M o n tgo m er y

Princ e

Georges

A rl in gto n

Alexan d ri a

Fal ls

C hurc h

Fai rf ax

Cas e I —M ar ri ed , 2 c hi ld re n: 

In co m e___ $310

378

0

118

32

$339

397

0

84

23

$339

370

0

84

23

$475

330

112

0

15

$475

282

75

0

17

$475

384

68

0

11

$475

312

68

0

15

R ea l pro pert y

Per so na l pro pert y

Sales ______ .

A ut o ta g s.........

T o ta l_________ 838 843 L 816 932 M 849 II 938 870

Cas e II—M arr ie d, no c hi ld re n: 

In co m e .. 345

378

0

118

32

387

397

0

84

23

387

370

0

84

23

495

330

112

0

15

495

282

75

0

17

495

384

68

0

11

495

312

68

0

15

R ea l p ro p ert y .

Per so na l pro per ty

Sa le s____

A uto ta g s___

T o ta l . . . 873 891 L 864 952 869 II 958 M 890

Cas e I I I —Sing le:

In co m e . 380

0

0

90

32

411

0

0

60

23

411

0

0

60

23

520

0

67

0

15

520

0

45

0

17

520

0

41

0

11

520

0

41

0

15

Rea l pro per ty

Per so na l pro per ty

Sal es ____

A uto t a g s.........

T o ta l_____ 502 L 494 L 494 II 602 582 M 572 576
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959 31

P ublic Law 85-451 

85tii Congress, II. It. 12377 

Jun e 6, 1958

AN ACT To autho rize the Commissioners of the District of Columbia to borrow funds for 

capital improvement programs and to amend provisions of law relating to Federal Government particip atio n in meeting costs of m aintaining the Nation’s Capital City

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United

States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) a program of construction 

to meet capital needs of the government of the District of Columbia is hereby 

authorize d. Such program shall include, without limitation, projects relatin g 

to activities to meet the needs of the public in the fields of education, health, 

welfare, public safety, recreation, and other general government activ ities.

(b) To ass ist in financing the cost of constructing facilitie s requ ired for 

activities financed by the general fund of the District, the Commissioners are 

hereby authorized to accept loans for the District from the United States 

Treasury and the Secretary of the Tre asury is hereby authorized to lend to the 

Commissioner’s such sums as may her eafter be appropria ted : Provided, That 

the tota l principal amount of loans advanced pursua nt to this section shall 

not exceed $75,000,000: Provided further, Th at any loan for use in any fiscal 

year must first be specifically requested of the Congress in connection with the 

budgets submitted for the District, with a full statement of the work contemplate d to be done ami the need thereof, and such work must be approved by the 

Congress: And provided further, That such approval shall not be construed to 

alt er or to eliminate the procedures from consultation, advice, and recommendation provided in the National Capital Planning Act of 1952 (66 Stat. 781). Such 

loans shall be in addition to any other loans heretofore or herea fter made to the 

Commissioners for any other purpose, and when advanced shall be deposited 

in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the general fund of the 

District.

(c) The loans authorize d pur suant to this section, or any pa rt or parts 

thereof, shall be advanced to the Commissioners on their requisition therefor, 

shall be available to the Commissioners for carryin g out the said construction 

program, and shall be available until expended.

(d) Loans made under this section during any six-month period (beginning 

with the six-month period ending December 31, 1958) shall be at a rat e of 

inte rest determ ined by the Secretary of the Treasury as of the beginning of 

such period which, in his judgment, would reflect the cost of money to the 

Treasury for borrowings at a maturity approxim ately equal to one-half of the 

period of time the loan is outstanding.

(e) Any loan advanced pursuant to this section shall be repaid to the Secretar y of the Treasury in su bstantially equal payments, including princip al and interest, within a period of thirty years beginning on July 1 of the second fiscal 

year following the date on which each such advance is credited to the general 

fund.

(f) No loans shall be advanced pursuant to this section after Jun e 30, 1968.

Sec. 2. Subsection (a) of section 2 of article VI of the District of Columbia

Revenue Act of 1947 (D. C. Code, sec. 47-2501b) is amended to read as follows:

“Sec. 2. (a) There are hereby authorized to be appropriated, in addition to 

the sums appropriated under section 1 of this article, as annual payments by 

the United States toward defrayin g the expenses of the government of the 

District of Columbia, the sum of $9,000,000 for each of the fiscal ye ars 1955 and 

1956, the sum of $12,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1957 and 1958, and the 

sum of $21,000,000 for the fiscal year 1959 and for each fiscal year th er ea fter : 

Provided, That so much of the aggregate annual payments by the United States 

appropriated under this article to the credit of the general fund as is in excess 

of $13,(XX),000 for each of the fiscal years 1955 and 1956, $16,000,000 for each of 

the fiscal years 1957 and 1958, and $25,000,000 for the fiscal year 1959 and 

subsequent fiscal years shall be available for capital outlay only, and then on 

a cumulative tota l basis only to the extent of not more than 50 per centum of 

the cumulative tota l of capital outlay appropriations payable from such general 

fund which becomes available for expenditure on and after July 1, 1954.”

Sec. 3. As used in this Act the term “District” means the Dis trict of Columbia 

and the term “Commissioners” means the Board of Commissioners of the District 

of Columbia.

Approved Jun e 6, 1958.

27235—58------3
32 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

F IS H LADDERS AT LITTLE FAL LS DAM

Senator Pastore. Now let me ask you a little bit about this item 

of $200,000 for fish ladders at the Little Falls Dam. Tha t is the 

amount to provide additional Federal sharing of the cost of constructing fish ladders ?

Mr. McLaughlin. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Is that $200,000 a budgeted item ?

Mr. McLaughlin. Colonel Welling is our expert on fish ladders, 

I believe.

Senator Pastore. I s that $200,000 a budgeted item ?

Colonel Welling. No, sir.

Senator P astore. That was considered in the House ?

Colonel Welling. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Well, does that mean if it remains in this budget 

that those ladders will be built?

Colonel Welling. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. It does mean tha t ?

Colonel Welling. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. What will be the District’s contribution toward 

that?

Colonel Welling. $150,000 out of the water fund.

Senator Pastore. That will be an item of $350,000 and tha t will 

do the job?

Colonel Welling. No, sir. The total estimate is in the neighborhood of $516,000.

Senator Pastore. $516,000.

Colonel Welling. The water fund contribution toward tha t would 

be only $150,000 and the remainder would be Federal participation.

Senator Pastore. Approximately what would tha t figure be 

around ?

Colonel Welling. At this time, sir, I think there are already 

$200,000 on hand from the Federal Government.

Senator Pastore. I see. So that would do it ?

Colonel Welling. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. I s that all you have ?

Air. McLaughlin. That is all of my prepared statement, Mr. Chairman.

Senator P astore. Do you have any questions ?

F ederal P ay me nt

Appropriatio n, 1958---------------------------------------------------------------- $20, 000, 000

Estim ate , 1959_______________________________________________ 25, 000, 000

House allow ance, 1959 (redu ction of $5,000,000)------------------------ 20, 000, 000

AME NDMENT REQUESTED

Page 2, line 5, strike out “20,000,000” an d in se rt in lieu the reof “$21,500,000,” 

or an inc rease of $1,500,000 in th e appropriation .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 33

HO USE REPORT

The bill recommends a Federal Paymen t to the various funds of the Distric t 

of Columbia as follows:

Estim ate Recomm ended

Ge neral fu nd............................................................................................................ $25,000,000 

431,600

1,532,000 

697,000

$20,000,000 

431,600 

1,732,000 

697,000

High wa y fu nd ........................................... ............................................................

W ater fu n d .. ......................... .............................................. ..................................

Sa nitary sewage w orks f und............. . ................................................ ................

To tal, Federal p aym ent. ............... . ................................ ......................... 27,660,600 22,860,600

JU ST IFIC AT IO N

The restoration s requested that are payable from the general fund amount to 

$4,015,950. However, $500,000 of this will be financed from 1900 revenues, which 

leaves a net additional requirement of $3,515,950.

After adjusting for a $1 million reserve for supplementals, the bill as reported 

by the House Appropriations Committee leaves a surplus of $2,242,707 in the 

general fund. To finance the restorations, it is proposed to reduce this surplus 

to $220,817 and request an increase in the Fed eral payment of $1,500,000, or a 

total of $21,500,000. This increase in Fed eral payment is well within the presently authorized Fe deral payment of $32 million.

FEDERAL PAYM ENT OF $211 MIL LIO N

Senator Bible. One item did catch my eye. Tha t was this Federal 

payment of $211

/2 million, if that is allowed, is tha t the payment you 

are now suggesting to the committee ?

Mr. McLaughlin. Senator Bible, that $ 1^ million is because we’re 

going to have these expensive increases la ter on to take care of the 

anticipated pay increases, which have not yet been enacted.

Senator Bible. Are you asking for the increase of $1 ^ million th at 

the House allowed ?

Mr. McLaughlin. That is right, to take care of these restorations.

PAY INC REASES

Senator Bible. The restorations are based upon what anticipated 

increases, the 10 percent of classified pay, and how much for teachers 

and possibly the Commissioners?

Mr. McLaughlin. We are not asking for tha t in this budget, so it 

is not in this budget. You see, we do not know what the classified 

would be, we do not know what the police will be, and the firemen will 

be, and we do not know what the teachers will be, so we will have to 

ask for th at in a supplemental.

Senator Bible. Well at that time will you ask for an increase in 

the Federal payment?

Mr. McLaughlin. Yes, sir; it will have to be borne by a Federal 

payment.

Senator P astore. To be fai r about this, I mean to put it in the 

proper focus, when you come up for your supplemental and ask for 

an increase of the Federal payment, do you contemplate getting into 

this extended public works program at tha t time?

Mr. McLaughlin. I do not believe so.
34 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

SUPPLEME NTAL REQUESTS FOR PAY RAISE S

Mr. F owler. We will ask, Air. Chairman, for the full authorized 

Federal payment of $32 million when we come up for our supplemental for the pay raises.

Senator Pastore. Is this for the pay raises ?

Mr. Fowler. Yes, sir; for pay raises.

Senator Pastore. In other words, you mean that the difference between the $21(4 million and the $32 million tha t has been authorized, 

you are going to ask for that added Federal contribution to meet 

this new impact of the Federal pay raises?

Mr. Fowler. The Federal payment.

Senator Pastore. That pay raise is $15 million, so to speak, just 

in rough figures.

Mr. Fowler. It may run higher than that. We do not know what 

you will authorize for schoolteachers and the police and firemen. We 

estimate it around $15 million.

Senator Pastore. You are estimating it somewhere around 

$18,600,000.

Mr. F owler. It is $12,860,000 on an annualized basis, but it is because we have to throw this retrocative in here of nearly $6 million.

Senator Pastore. I realize that and tha t will bring the general 

total to $18,645,000. Now, how will you finance the rest of it? Will 

it be from Federal payment, the added amount of Federal payment? 

What will that be? Is it $10^ million ?

FIN AN CING OF PAY INCREA SES

Mr. Fowler. We have a statement here that we would like to introduce in the record as to how we propose to finance the pay increases for 1958 and 1959. The estimated costs, based on the Commissioners' proposals, amount to $17.4 million. The revenue resulting 

from increased business in the District of Columbia resulting from 

Federal and District pay increases, we expect to receive revenues of 

$2.6 million; for release of reserves for supplem ental, $1.6 million; 

unexpended capital outlay balances released to surplus, we estimate 

to be $1 million; unexpended 1958 balances to be applied against 

retroactive provision of pay increases, $1 million; and the additional 

Federal payment authorization available for 1959 (authorized payment of $32 million minus restoration requested in Senate of $21.5 

million) gives us $10.5 million; giving a grand total of $16.7 million.

That is based entirely upon the Commissioners’ estimate of what 

the pay raises will be. We do not know, of course. With the figures 

that we have, the deficit then would only amount to a few hundred 

thousand dollars which we could take care of, but we would, under 

our own estimates, require the full $32 million.

Senator Bible. May I ask a question there, Air. Chairman ?

Senator Pastore. Yes.

Senator Bible. I was just wondering if this entire matter was 

presented on the House side as to these anticipated pay increases?

Air. McLaughlin. I do not believe we put it in detad.

Air. Fowler. We have not done it in detail.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1 9 5 9 35

NECESSITY FOK SU PPLE ME NT AL BEQU EST

Mr. Lowe. It was not done in detail, but they were fully cognizant 

of the fact we had pay raises that we expected to cost around $12 to 

$13 million a year and tha t there was a retroactive amount of around 

$6 million a year to be financed. They fully understood these total 

figures and th at there would be a necessity for a supplemental appropriation request at a later date.

Senator Bible. If I may summarize it, as I understand it, you are 

asking tha t the Senate Appropriations Committee raise the fed era l 

payment $1% million in order to take care of the increases which you 

are asking over the House figure at this time ?

Mr. McLaughlin. Yes.

Senator Bible. Later on, you are going to present a supplemental 

in which you are going to request Federal payment appropriation wise 

which will be $10.5 million, is that correct ?

Mr. Lowe. Tha t is correct, Senator Bible. I think it particularly 

needs to be borne in mind that there is no actual entry in the books at 

this point, pertaining to any of these pay raises although the classified 

pay raise seems likely to go to the President today or tomorrow and 

there has not even been a committee report yet on the policemen, firemen, or schoolteacher pay raises. There have been hearings in the 

Senate on those latter three.

Senator Pastore. But, after all, we are trained to face facts here and 

we must, I mean the tradition has been and the practice has been, tha t 

when the Congress of the United States sees fit to raise the classified 

employees and to raise the postal clerks we usually do the same thing 

in the District of Columbia, which is no more than fair and which is 

the right thing to do.

SOURCE OF FUN DS

The minute you do that, you need more money in order to pay off 

this obligation. The big question is th is : Where do you get it ? Who 

produces it ? Now you work on a rath er tight budget in the District 

and if the Federal Government does not increase its payment you have 

to raise the taxes. Then we have this question : What do you do to 

handle this? You gentlemen feel this is the way it should be done. 

Well, we will have to talk about tha t when it comes up. We do hope 

the solution will be satisfactory to both sides. This is something that 

the Congress decided to do.

Senator Bible. T would just like to ask one more question on this 

point, please, Mr. Chairman.

Senator P astore. Yes.

Senator Bible. I am wondering, and this may be in the record 

already, but what percentage of the total expenditures will the Federal payment bear in this current fiscal year 1958 ?

Mr. Lowe. 12.4 percent, Mr. Chairman.

Senator P astore. We have a ch art here which I am going to ask to 

have placed in the record.

f The chart referred to follows:)
36 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

District of Columbia—Estimated method of financing general fun d cost of pay

increases for 1958 and 1959

Millions

Estima ted cost based on Commissioner’s proposals----------------------------$17.4

Revenue resulting from increased business in the District of Columbia 

resulting from Federal and District pay increases----------------------------- 2. 6

Release of reserves for supplements________________________________ 1. 0

Unexpended capital outlay balances released to surplus----------------------- 1. 0

Unexpended 1958 balances to be applied aga inst retroactiv e provision of

pay increases_________________________________________________ 1- 0

Additional Federal payment auth oriz atio n available for 1959 (authorized

payment of $32 million minus restora tion requested in Senate of $21.5 

millio n)______________________________________________________ 10.5

Total_____________________________________________________ 16. 7

Deficit_________________________________________________________ • 7

Ana ly si s of new position s allowed by the Comm issioners, allow ed by Hou se and

reque sted to be restored in Sen ate

Departm ent

Executive Office............ ......................................................

De par tment of General Adm inistration.............................

Office of Corporation Counsel.......... ...... ............................

Regulatory agencies:

Control of alcoholic beverages......................................

Adm inistration of parole laws.................-...................

Death investigations........ . ....................................... ..

Filing and recording property and corporation papers

Total, regulatory agencies......................... -..............

Public schools.......................................................................

Public Library ...................................................................

Recreation Departm ent . ...................................................

Metropolitan Po lice ........................ ..................................

Fire De partm ent.................................................................

Office of Civil Defense___________ _____ _______ ____

Dep artment of Vocational R ehabilitation ------- ... --

Courts:

Juv eni le..................................................... -..................

Municipal............ .......................... - .............................

Total, courts.............. ..............................- ................

Departme nt of Pu blic Hea lth......................- ......................

Department of Corrections. ...................... ........... ......... -

Department of Publie Welfare ............ ............................

Dep artment of Buildings and Grounds------- ---------- - -

Departme nt of Licenses and Inspections---------------------

Dep artm ent of Highways. . ...................... -.....................

Deprtment of Vehicles and Traffic----------------------------

Department of Sanitary Engineering........... .....................

Washington Aqu educ t............................................. ...........

National Zoological Pa rk ..................... . ..................... ........

Total, District of Columbia.......... . ..........................

Allowed 

by Commissioners

Allowed 

by House

Requested 

restored in 

Senate

5

23

17

0

18

10

5

5

4

4

18

4

3

4

18

4

2

29

1 264 

i 15

7

6

7

13

3

28

189

15

6

0

7

0

3

73

13

»2

14

19

14

19

33

361

41

144

12

36

18

11

18

8

14

33

192

41

90

12

24

9

8

18

0

14

159

54

7

1,085 717 322

1

 Includes positions for part-year only.

* P art of evaluation u nit included in base.

REVENUE SITUAT ION

Senator P astore. I would just like to have this as a generalization, 

and I do not particularly want to detail it too much, although I am 

curious about it and I suppose the District would be as well as the 

Members of Congress generally ; what is the revenue situation? ITow 

have the revenues been coming in by comparison to the previous years
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 37

ta ki ng into c onsideration th is prese nt dip in ou r economy? W ha t has 

been the situ ation ? Ju st giv e us a gene raliza tion on tha t.

Mr. F owler. In gen eral, Mr. Ch airma n, the reve nues have been 

com ing in very, very good. It has been rem ark ably good. I have 

myself been quite amazed. How ever, in the las t ana lysis of our revenue situatio n, we di d find a few items th at g ave us a lit tle wo rry , th at 

seemed to be dr ifting downward, b ut the income tax ha d fa r exceeded 

our expecta tions; and because of the increase of the income tax of 

several million dollars in our last reve nue con sidera tion, we saved 

ourselves some difficulties this yea r. Now wh at it will be next year 

we have no way of knowing, bu t we have a com plete revenue stat ement in th e record.

SA LE S TA X ESTIM A TES

Se na tor P astore. We ll, I m erely wante d a gene ral statem ent. As a 

matter of fac t, you have no t been dis appoint ed because o f the nati on al 

economy situ ati on as to y our reven ues here in the Di str ict . Now, h ow 

abo ut generally spe aking wi th reference to the sales tax , has th at 

been u p ?

Mr. F owler. The finance officer is here and I wou ld like to hav e 

him spea k on tha t.

Se na tor P astore. Ju st give us a gen era l s tate ment. Has it been disap po int ing ?

Mr. Back. The sales tax has not met estimates la st year and we do 

not an tic ipa te it will meet o ur origi nal estimates th is year.

Se na tor P astore. H ow fa r off was it ?

Mr. Back. It was a very small difference. Our est imate for the 

year was $20,500,000 and I th in k it is going to pro duce $20,200,000.

I t was close. La st year it pr oduce d a lit tle over $20,300,000 and we 

estimated $20,500,000. We think th at next yea r, with the pay increases, it will produce perh aps som ewhat more.

Se nator P astore. Do you have an y fu rthe r questio ns?

Senator Bible. I have no fu rthe r questions at thi s tim e.

Se nator Pasto re. Is the re an ythi ng fu rthe r fro m the Commissioners as to th is po int ?

Mr. K arrick. Tha nk you, no. I am satisfied with the state ment.

Se nator P astore. All rig ht, gentlem en, I suppose it might be well 

to discuss th is first item.

Mr. McL aug hlin. Yes, sir.

F edera l P aym en t

STATEMENT OF WALTER L. FOWLER, BUDGET OFFICER, DISTRICT 

OF COLUMBIA GOVERNMENT

Gen er al Sta te m ent

Mr. F owler. The first ite m, Mr. C hairm an, is the Fe de ral pay ment. 

Th e ap prop ria tio n for 1958 was $20 m illion. The estimate for 1959 is 

$25 m illion. The Hou se allow ance for 1959 was $20 million , a red uctio n of $5 million . The amend ment requ ested is on page 2, line 5, 

str ike out “$20 millio n” and insert in lieu there of “$21,500,000” an 

increase of $1,500,000 in the ap prop ria tio ns.

The res tor ati ons requ ested payable fro m the gen era l fu nd am ount 

to $4,015,950, howe ver, $500,000 of this will be financed fro m 1960
38 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

revenues, which leaves a net additional requirement of $3,515,950. 

After adjusting for the $1 million reserved for supplemental, the bill, 

as reported by the House Appropriations Committee, leaves a surplus 

of $2,242,767 in the general fund. Financing restorations, it is proposed to reduce this surplus to $226,817 and request an increase in 

Federal payment of $1,500,000, or a total of $21,500,000.

Now I understand tha t the committee would like a statement on the 

Federal payment and I have a statement prepared if you desire me to 

read it.

Senator Pastore. Well, we will just have you put it in the record.

Mr. F owler. Do you just desire to have it submitted for the record 

or do you desire to have me testify ?

Senator Pastore. Well, I think you ought to put it in the record 

and just give us a short resume of it. I think we all understand it 

pretty well. I do not think we have to talk too much about what it 

means to have $21.5 million as against $20 million. Just give us a 

general statement.

Mr. F owler. If you want me to go back to the history, Mr. Chairman, I will outline it briefly.

Mr. F owler. Since the creation of the municipal government of 

the District of Columbia by the Organic Act of 1878, the Congress 

of the United States has recognized the Federal interest in the city 

and the Federal Government’s obligation to assume a part of the financial burden of operating the Nation’s Capital.

The pattern and degree of the Federal Government’s participation 

in helping to finance the extra burdens imposed on the Government of 

the District of Columbia because of its unique role in the Nation’s 

affairs has not been consistent. In some years the Federal payment 

was sufficient to enable the District of Columbia adequately to fulfill 

its role as the Nation’s Capital City. In others, it was substantially 

less than the amount necessary to pay for the extra financial burdens 

which the Federal interest imposed upon the citizens of the Nation’s 

Capital.

FIN ANCIA L RE SP ON SIB ILITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

The Congress in 1878, when it passed the organic act, manifested 

keen insight into the problems th at then confronted and would continue to confront the local community. Its language expressed the 

Congress’ sense of responsibility for sharin g the cost of operating the 

Nation’s Capital in these positive terms:

To the extent to which Congress shall approve of said (budget) estimates, 

Congress shall app ropriate the amount of fifty per centum thereof * * *.

This reflected a conviction earlier expressed in these terms by the 

chairman of a Senate committee investigating the fiscal relationship 

bet ween the Federal and District Governments:

* * * the committee has been unable to sep ara te the inte rests of the Dis trict 

from the interests of the United State s. They rega rd it as the child of the 

Union—as the creation of the Union for its own purposes. The design of the 

Constitutio n and its founders was to create a residence for the Government, 

where they should have absolute and un limited control * * * (Senator Southard, 

1835).

VIEW S OF PR ES IDEN T TA FT

In 1896 William Howard Taft, who was destined later to become 

President of the United States and after tha t Chief Justice of the
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 39

Supreme Court, stated in referring to article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States th at:

The object of the gra nt of exclusive legislation over the District was, therefore, national in the highest sense and the city organized under the gra nt 

became the city, not of a State, not of a District, but of a nation.

FEDERAL PAYM EN TS TO TH E DIST RICT OF COLUMBIA

In 1921 the Congress of the United States discontinued its practice 

of paying 50 percent of the cost of operating the District of Columbia. The deterioration of large sections of the Nation’s Capital and 

the continuing struggle to maintain adequate municipal services and 

facilities can be attributed in large part to the discontinuance of this 

practice.

Since th at time, the percentage of local government costs borne by 

the United States has fluctuated from a high of 39.5 percent in 1924 

to a low of 8.5 percent in 1954. Since 1956, the Federal Government has borne only slightly over 12 percent of the total cost of 

operating the city.

REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY TH E DIST RICT’S SITU S AS TH E NA TION’S CAPITAL

The Nation’s Capital is necessarily the chief city of the entire 

United States and its most prominent showplace. Yet it is more than 

a seat of government. It is the symbol of our great Federal Union 

and has a place in the hearts and the minds of all Americans and of 

free peoples everywhere. In its essence it gives meaning to the personality and the spirit of a great Nation in a free-world society. 

These considerations impose such special requirements as: subordination of local interests to the Federal interest in matters of planning, 

zoning, and related activities; maintenance of wide avenues and beautiful streets; dedication of large areas of valuable land to Federal 

purposes; exemplary standards in its health, welfare, and educational 

programs; special tax treatment for large segments of the local community ; and numerous other factors which, on the one hand, occasion 

increased costs and, on the other, handicap revenue possibilities.

INCREASED COSTS

The extra costs which the District incurs because it is the Nation’s 

Capital can be illustrated by a few examples:

1. The act establishing the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Act require tha t most public works structures be designed to harmonize with the Federal Master Plan for 

the Capital City. Because of this, the new Highway Bridge cost 

$1.2 million, or 21 percent extra; and the structure of the new Constitution Avenue Bridge will cost $2.5 million, or 33 percent extra. 

The need for securing concurrence of other agencies in capital improvements frequently causes delays in construction and results in 

substantial additional costs when the work proceeds.

2. The federally conceived plan of the city calls for wide, beautiful, tree-lined streets such as few other major cities enjoy. Plantin g 

and maintaining these trees is costing over $450,000 this year, and 

further increases are in sight. Wide streets also mean additional 

paving costs.
40 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

3. Th e National Par k Service receives abo ut $2.3 m illion each yea r 

from the Di str ict of Columb ia for mainte nan ce and opera tion of 

fede rally owned and con trol led parks in the city . In addit ion , the 

Distric t pay s appro xim ate ly $550,000 per year to supp ort the Pa rk 

Police. Our p ark lands are f ar more e xtensive a nd our p ar k expenditur es gr ea ter than are cus tom ary in com parable cities.

4. The Dist ric t is uniq ue in th at Federal leg islation often imposes 

treme ndous extra costs requ irem ents. Fo r inst ance, un de r Publi c 

Law 648, 79th Congress, as amended, the Distric t is req uir ed to share 

the cost o f Federal g rants for the constru ctio n of priv ately owned and 

opera ted hospita ls. Th e poten tia l lia bility fo r this purpose is $19.2 

million . Thi rty to forty perce nt of the pa tie nts tre ated at these 

hospitals a re non-D istrict reside nts.

5. Because of Federal expansion in the area, Washing ton is now 

com pletely encircled by a thick ly settled area th at is more pop ulous 

th an the city itse lf, thu s neces sitating the con struction of expensive 

arteria l hig hways to enable sub urb an popu lat ion s to move quickly 

into and out of the city. Th e fact th at tw o riv ers hav e to be crossed 

by much o f t his traffic requires the construc tion of very costly b ridg es. 

None of these seems to imp rove the re tail -sales pa tter n in the Di str ict .

LIM IT A TIO N S ON RE VE NU E P O S S IB IL IT IE S

Ju st as the D istri ct’s obligat ion s are increased by virtu e of i ts place 

as the Na tio n’s Ca pit al, and des pite the economic benefits acc ruing 

fro m the large number of visitors, its revenue po ssibilitie s are substa ntia lly cu rta ile d for the very same rea sons. Sp ecifically :

1. Th e D istri ct was established and developed pr im arily to serve th e 

Federal Government as its Ca pital . As a res ult, it does not ha ve and 

probably never will hav e a sufficient volum e o f basic indu stria l activ ­

ity to su pp ort it. Th e Fe deral Government is actua lly the majo r “indu stry ” in the Di str ict . Rec ent stud ies show th at a cross-section of 

the Na tio n’s lar gest corpo ration s pay appro xim ate ly $1 in State and 

local tax es fo r every $20 spent fo r sala ries. I f the same rat io were 

ap plied to the total estimated Federal payro ll of $1,053 million in 

Washin gto n, and the Fe deral Gov ernment were to pa y to the D ist ric t 

the am ount which a private emp loyer of com parable size would pay 

in St ate and local taxes, the ann ual Federal paym ent to the Di str ict 

would he $52.6 million.

2. La nd owned by the Fe deral Gov ernment in the Di str ict, exclusive of stre ets and alleys, amoun ts to 43.0 p erc ent of th e total lan d 

area of the Di str ict . No taxes are pa id on this lan d and the str uc ­

tures thereon. No oth er majo r city has such a large par t of its l and 

and improvements ta x e xem pt. Th is area, tog eth er w ith the improv ements thereon, if taxabl e, wou ld yield $21.4 millio n in real-estate 

taxe s. A recent su rvey of taxes in the Distri ct revealed th at f or each 

$1 of re al-estate tax th at is pa id by business an a dd ition al sum o f $1.53 

is pa id i n oth er Di str ict busine ss taxes. Consequently, i f the Federal 

Government were tax able as a private business in the Di str ict , it 

wou ld pro bab ly pay total taxes of abo ut $54.1 million. This, as well 

as the $52.6 m illion cite d in the pre ced ing pa ra gr ap h could ju stify a 

Fe de ral paym ent of over $50 million , wi thou t rega rd to other considera tions.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 41

3. Wash ing ton at trac ts tax -ex em pt activitie s such as foreign gov ­

ern me nt agencies, pa tri otic org aniza tio ns, and oth ers, because it is 

the Ca pit al City. Each y ear more p ro pe rty is tak en olf the t ax rolls. 

Tw enty- eig ht million dollars more of pr op erty (p riv ately owned and 

foreign gover nm ent ) is exe mpt tod ay th an ju st 3 years ago, ma kin g 

a to tal of $203,100,000 such pr op erty th at is exempt.

Se nator P astore. On th at po int, if I may in te rrup t you the re, I 

th in k you deve loped it quite well before the H ous e on page 59 of their 

hea rings. You have the reve nues which would have been received 

from exempt prop erty in the Distric t of Columbia for the yea rs indicated : fiscal ye ar 1954, $25,427,400; 1955, $26,909,794; 1956, $27,538,- 

201; 1957, $29,156,352; and in 1958, $30,224,392; and it gets big ger 

and bigg er every yea r. j

REAL PROPERTY EXEMPT FROM TAXATION

Mr. F owler. May I, at this po int, just refer you to the rep ort of 

the Senat e committee unanimously adopted whi ch accomp anied the 

bill defining re al prop erty ex empt f rom taxa tio n in t he 77th Congre ss? 

Th is repo rt was also adopted by the House com mittee:

There is another class of property which is accorded exemption under this bill 

from taxatio n, and that is fede raly owned property. The inclusion of this property raise s the age-old question of what pa rt the Federal Government should play 

in the operatin g expenses of the District government. For many years the 

Federal Government contributed to such expenses a sum equal to 50 percent 

thereof. And this at a time when the landholdings of the Government were 

less than one-third of the present holdings, and the value of the buildings 

erected thereon was pitifully small as compared to the colossal figure which now 

represen ts their valuation.

While the growth of the Federal holdings was taking place, and the value increased to a staggering figure the Congress, periodically and consistently, lowered 

the Federal contribution annually until today it is less than 10 percent or $G 

million. This creates a situation which should receive the early, if not the 

immediate consideration, of the Congress of th e United States.

In these days of adjustment, it is imp ortant that the Capital City should know 

what to expect in the way of funds for its main tenance and operation. There is 

no reason to pass legislation of a piecemeal character, and it should not be 

difficult to arrive a t a fair and equitable figure which will render it unnecessary, 

year after year, for the officials of the District of Columbia to resort to haphazard and mak eshift measures to collect a sufficient amount of revenues to 

run the affairs of the city. This committee feels th at proper adjustment in the 

fiscal relationship between the two governments should be brought about without delay and recommends immediate steps be taken by the Congress.

By the same token, the uncertain ty which now exists with respect to those 

privately owned institution s which should be entitled to the privilege of tax exemption should be cleared, and the passage of this bill will accomplish th at end, 

while the settleme nt of the problem of a Federal contribution will simplify the 

work of the District Commissioners for many years to come.

Tha t was said by both leg isla tive committees when they passed the 

real estate tax bill.

FEDERAL CON TRIB UTIONS

In addition to th at , Mr. Ch air ma n, I would like, by refe rence, to 

hav e in the record the repo rt o f the Senat e Ap pr op ria tio ns Comm ittee, No. 579, o f the District of Columbia ap prop ria tio ns b ill of 1952 

as it referre d to Fe deral c on tribu tio ns; and also the r ep ort o f the Senate committee, 1753, on the D ist ric t of Columbia ap prop riation bil l of 

1953 as it refers to Fe deral co ntr ibuti on s; and the repo rt of Senate
42 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

committee Xo. 628, District of Columbia appropriation bill of 1954 

as it refers to the Federal contributions.

In all of those reports, we consistently find the Senate is very interested in the Federal relationship between the Federal Government 

and the District government. Consistently it has been interested in 

higher and better Federal payment. We would like those in the record and, with your permission, I would like at this point to insert 

the balance of my argument on Federal payment in the record.

Senator P astore. Without objection, it will be done.

(The material referred to follows:)

Tax revenue of all State and local governments and of the District of Columbia, 1

19^6-56

Aggreg ate am ou nt 

(In millions)

Pe rc en tage increase in 

am ou nt

Pe r ca pita Pe rcen tage in ­

crease in

pe r capita

1956 1946 1956 1946

Distri ct of Colu mb ia:

Tot al ta xe s__________ ____ _______ $130 $54 140. 74 $154.95 $62.43 148.20 Pr op erty taxes 2________________ 50 29 72.41 59.59 33.53 77.72 Othe r t a x e s.. ...................... ............ 80 25 220.00 95.35 28.90 229.93 All St ate an d local g overn me nts :

Tot al taxes________________________ 26,368 10,094 161.22 160 48 75. 67 112.08 Pr op erty t ax es________ _________ 11,749 4,986 135.64 71. 51 37.38 91.30 Othe r tax es ........................................ 14,619 5,108 186.20 88.98 38.29 132.38

Tax revenue of the District of Columbia, 1946-57

Aggreg ate am ou nt 

(in millions)

Pe rcen tage in ­

crease in 

am ou nt

Pe r c ap ita Pe rcen tage in ­

crease in

per cap ita

1957 1946 1957 1946

D istri ct of C olu mb ia:

To ta l taxe s________ _______________ $144 $54 166. 67 $172.98 $62. 43 177.07 Pr op er ty taxes i ________________ 53 29 82. 76 63.63 33. 53 89. 77 Other tax es .............. ......................... 91 25 264.00 109.35 28.90 278.37

1

 T he Fe deral pa ym en t to th e Distri ct of Co lum bia is no t reflected in t he figures show n herein, which 

repr es en t taxes ac tuall y paid by resid ents an d business es. Els ew her e, rec eip ts such as ou r Federal pa ym en t wo uld be taxe s pa id b y in du st ry lo cat ed in th e are a a nd are refle cted i n th e pe r c ap ita com pu tatio ns.

2

 A syste m of motor-vehicle registr ation fees was su bs titu te d for th e perso nal pr op erty tax on motor 

veh icles beg inn ing in fiscal year 1955 w ith a con seq uent sh ift of ta x revenue from pr op erty taxes to othe r 

tax es. Ho use hold effects were also exemp ted from persona l pr op erty taxa tio n begin nin g i n fiscal y ear 1955.

Sources: De tai l of cash r ece ipts for th e fiscal year e nd ed Ju ne 30,1957, for the Di str ict of Co lum bia , U. S. 

Dep ar tm en t of Com merce, Bureau of the Cen sus , Histo rical Statistic s on State an d Local Go ve rnmen t 

Fi na nc es 1902-53 a nd Su mmary of Go ve rnme ntal Fin ances i n 1956. Pe r ca pi ta da ta based on Bureau of 

th e Census rev ised estim ate s of popu latio n excluding Ar me d Forces overseas (series P-25) pu blish ed 

N ov . 4, 1957.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1 9 5 9 43

7 Washington metropolitan area tax jur isd iction s’ tax burden 1

A s s u m p ti o n s as to ta x p a y e r In co m e L o w

ta x

M e d ia n

ta x

H ig h

ta x

D is tr ic t

of

C o lu m b ia

ta x

M a rrie d c o u p le w ith h o u se a n d c a r ....................... ..................... $5 ,000 $220 $258 $309 $300 7j 500 308 350 417 403

10 ,00 0 498 552 579 550

15 ,000 864 890 958 873 S in g le in d iv id u a l w ith c a r __________ ____ . . . . 5,00 0 110 125 144 142

7 500 206 222 226 225

10 ,000 290 333 355 290

15 ,000 494 572 602 502 l a m i l y of 4 w ith b o u se a n d c a r.................................... ................. 5,00 0 212 249 275 275

7 5 0 0 300 342 378 378

10 ,000 478 520 535 520

15 ,000 816 849 938 838

1

 C o m p u ta tio n of ta x li a b il it ie s in M a ry la n d ju ris d ic tio n s in c lu d e s in cre a se d in d iv id u a l in c o m e ta x ra te 

e n a c te d b y 1958 le g is la tu re . T h e M a ry la n d sale s ta x r a te in cre a se eff ecti v e J a n . 1, 1959, is n o t in c lu d e d in 

th e s e c o m p u ta ti o n s .

This comparison covers 3 different family groups at each of 4 income levels. 

The low, median, and high tax liability at each income level in jurisdictions of 

the metropolitan area are compared with those of the District of Columbia. 

Thus, 12 different comparisons a re made, in 7 of which the D istrict is at or above 

the median and in 2 of which the Distric t is highest. In the other 5 comparisons 

the District is below the median, including 1 in which it is the lowest.

Afte r J an ua ry 1, 1959, when Marylan d’s increased sales tax rat e becomes effective, the District will still ra nk at or above the median in 6 of the 12 comparisons.

Since the tax systems in Virginia and Maryland jurisdic tions both in relation 

to the District and to each other differ, tax burdens accordingly vary and complete comparability is not possible.
44 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Record of actu al Federal pa ym en ts to the Dis trict of Columbia, general fund, Federal

paym ents f or the fiscal years 1.920-58, inclus ive

[I n mi lli on s]

Y ea r

A p p ro p ri ati o n t o 

ge ne ra l 

fu nd

F ed er al p a y m e n t 1 A ct ual p erce ntag e 

F ed er al p ay ­

m en t to ap ­

p ro pri ati on

A uth ori zationA ct ual Def icie nc y

1920 ____________ - _____ $19.4 $9.7 $9.9 + $ 0 .2 51.0

1921 ________________________ 21.5 10.3 9.2 - 1 . 1 42.8

1922 .................. ................................ 23.0 11.5 9.2 - 2 .3 40.0

1923 ................ - .......................... 23. 8 9.5 9.4 - 0 . 1 39. 5

1924 ______________________ 23. 9 9.6 9.4 - 0 . 2 39.3

1925 ____ _____________________ 31.2 12.5 9. 2 - 3 .3 29.5

1926 ________________________ 31.1 12.5 9.0 - 3 .5 28.9

1927 _______ ____ - ...................... 34.0 13.6 9. 0 - 4 . 6 26. 5

1928 _______ ___________ _______ 34.9 14.0 9.0 - 5 .0 25.8

1929 ________ __________ _____ - 36.0 14.4 9. 0 - 5 .4 25.0

1930 ................ ........... ............. . 40.7 16.3 9.0 - 7 .3 22.1

1931 .................. ....... ............... 45.6 18.2 9. 5 - 8 .7 20.8

1932 ______ ______ ____ - 43.8 17.5 9.5 - 8 . 0 21.7

1933 ..................................... .. 39.6 15.8 7.8 - 8 . 0 19.7

1934 ____ ______________ 29.7 11.9 5.7 - 6 . 2 19.2

1935 .............. ....... ............. 34.6 13.8 4.5 - 9 .3 13.0

1936 _______ ____ ______ 38.3 15.3 5.7 - 9 . 6 14.9

1937 ................................. 40. 2 16.1 5. 0 -1 1 .1 12.4

1 9 3 8 .. . . __________________ 41.1 16.5 5.0 -1 1 .5 12.2

193 9 ... __________________ 40.5 16.2 5.0 - 1 1 .2 12.3

1940 41.8 6.0 6. 0 14.4

1941 43.1 6.0 6.0 13.9

1942 47.4 6.0 6.0 12.7

1943 49.4 6.0 6.0 12.1

1944 54.6 6.0 6.0 11.0

1945 62.6 6.0 6.0 9.6

1946 64.7 6.0 6. 0 9.3

1947... 72.6 6.0 8.0 + 2 .0 11.0

1948 81. 7 11.0 11.0 13.5

1949 86.0 11.0 11.0 12.8

1950 98.3 11.0 11.0 11.2

1951. . 103.9 11.0 9.8 - 1 .2 9.4

19 52 .._ ______________________ 121.3 11.0 10.4 —.6 8.6

1 9 5 3 .? ....................... ............... ......... 113.6 11.0 10.0 - 1 .0 8.8

1954 129.1 11.0 11.0 8.5

1955 139.6 20.0 20.0 14.3

1956. . . _______________ 143.2 20.0 18.0 - 2 .0 12.6

1957____________________________ 155.6 23.0 20.0 - 3 .0 12.9

1958____________________________ 161.3 23.0 20.0 - 3 .0 12.4

-1 2 5 .0

» P ri o r to 1920 an d co m m en ci ng in 1879 th e au th ori ze d an d ac tu al F ed er al p ay m en t w as 50 per ce nt of 

th e D is tr ic t ap pro pri at io ns. In 1920-22 th is a m o u n t was ba se d on a 50 -p erce nt auth ori zati on. In 1923-39 

th is a m o u n t was b as ed o n a 4 0- pe rcen t a u th o ri zati o n . S ubse quen tl y t h e a u th o ri zati o n s w er e se t a t an nual 

lu m p s um s.

B ri ef H is to ric al B ac kg ro un d of F ed eral P aym en t

The organic a ct for the commission form of District government was approved 

Jun e 11, 1878 (20 Stat. 102, ch. 180). Section 3 of tha t act provided the method 

for transm itting the estima tes of the city government to the Congress and as to 

Fed eral participation provided as follow s:

“To the extent to which Congress shall approve of said estimates, Congress 

shall app ropriate the amount of fifty per centum thereof; and the remaining 

fifty per centum of such approved estim ates shall be levied and assessed upon 

the taxable property and privileges in said District other tha n the prop erty of 

the United States and of the District of Columbia.”

From 1879 to 1924, we were on the 59-50 basis—th is system being established 

as indicated by the act approved Jun e 11, 1878. Notwith standing this act of 

Congress, however, in making appropriations f or the D istr ict for the fiscal years 

1921 and 1922, Congress provided for a 40-00 basis. In 1923 the 40-60 b asis of 

app ropriat ing was made perm anent law. However, the District received varying amounts from 1925 through 1939. The law establishing the 40-00 basis of 

app ropriat ing was repealed by the provision of the D istrict of Columbia Revenue 

Act approved May 10,1938. It is noted that if the present provisions of autho rizing subsequent appropriations for any deficiency in Federal paym ent below the 

authorized amount had been in effect between 1925 and 1938 when the 40-60 ratio
DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 45

was law but a lump-sum payment was granted, the Fed eral Government would 

have owed the Distric t over $100 million.

The District of Columbia Revenue Act of 1939, approved July 26, 1939, auth orized to be appropriated, as the ann ual payment by the United States tow ard defray ing the expenses of the government of the District of Columbia, the sum of 

$6 million. This was tlie amount of the Fed eral payment for each of the fiscal 

years 1940 through 1946. For the fiscal y ear 1947, the Federal payment was set 

at $8 million. During these yea rs and up to July 1, 1947, the wa ter fund received no portion of the annual payments made to the D istr ict of Columbia government by the Federal Government. Afte r exhaustive hearings by a joint fiscal 

committee, the Congress approved the law in reference to the ann ual Federal 

payment to the Distric t of Columbia, being the District of Columbia Revenue 

Act of 1947, approved J uly 16, 1947. Artic le 6 of th at act provides as follow s:

“For the fiscal year ending Jun e 30, 1948, and for each fiscal yea r the rea fter, 

there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, as the ann ual paym ent by the 

United States toward defraying the expenses of the Government of the District 

of Columbia, the sum of $12,000,000, of which $11,000,000 shall be credited to the 

general fund of the Dis trict of Columbia and $1,(XX),000 shall be credited to the 

water fund of the Dis trict of Columbia, estab lished by law (title 43, ch. 15, 

D. C. Code, 1940 edit ion ).”

The District of Columbia Public Works Act of 1954 was passed and enacted into 

law May 18, 1954. By it Congress amended the Distric t of Columbia Revenue 

Act of 1947 ( 61 Stat. 361) by providing the following section:

“Sec. 2. (a) For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1955, and for each fiscal y ear 

the rea fter there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, in addition to the sums 

app ropriated under section 1 of this article, an annual paym ent by the United 

States toward defraying the expenses of the government of the District of 

Columbia in the sum of $9,000,000: Provided, Th at so much of the aggregate 

annual payments by the United Sta tes appropriated under thi s arti cle to the 

credit of the General Fun d as is in excess of $13,000,000 shall be available for 

capital outlay only, and then on a cumulative tota l basis only to the extent of 

not more tha n 50 per centum of the cumulative total of cap ital outlay appropriations payable from such general fund which becomes available for expenditure 

on or afte r J uly 1,1954.

“ (b) If in any fiscal y ear or yea rs a deficiency exists between the amount appropriated and the amount of $20,000,000 autho rized by this article to be appropriated, additional appropriations are hereby authorized for subsequent fiscal 

years to pay such deficiency or defiiciencies.”

Tlie District of Columbia Revenue Act of 1956 increased the authorized Federal payment to $23 million and requ ired tha t the amount in excess of $16 million 

should be used for capital outlay.

The budget estimate for $20 million for 1955 was approved by the Congress. 

The budget estimate for $20 million for 1956 was reduced by the Congress to 

$18 million, the budget estimate of $23 million for 1957 was reduced to $20 

million, and the budget estimate of $23 million for 1958 was reduced to $20 million. 

These reductions represent a present deficiency of $8 million in the Fed eral 

payment.

RESPON SIB ILITY OF THE LOCAL TAXPAYER

Senator P astore. I thought at this juncture if we can have it stated 

in simple language, we always have the argument about what is the 

responsibility of the local taxpayer, whether or not in comparison 

with other communities, he is meeting an equal responsibility and have 

we anyone here tha t can address us on that subject for about 2 

minutes ?

Mr. F owler. We have always consistently believed, Mr. Chairman, 

that it was our responsibility to see tha t our people in this District 

were taxed in a comparable manner with those in the outer metropolitan area. There would be no difference in the rate of taxation. Hav ­

ing once established that, this responsibility seems to fall upon the 

Federal Government.

Senator Pasture. Do you feel t hat the District taxpayer is doing 

tha t now ?
46 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. F owler. We feel th at they are and we so testified in the House 

and before the Join t Fiscal Committee.

Mr. McLaughlin. We have placed in the record, in conjunction 

with my statement, a comparison of taxes in the metropolitan area, 

Mr. Chairman.

Senator Pastore. All right, it might be well at this point in the 

record tha t reference be made back to the table tha t you spoke about, 

Mr. McLaughlin.

(See pp. 22-30.)

Have you any questions on this subject?

Senator Bible. I have no questions.

Senator Pastore. I hope that you will be here at the appropriate 

time to lend force and effect with your great influence.

SPECIAL TAX SITUATION

Mr. McLaughlin. May I say, Air. Chairman, in relation to that, in 

connection with the public-works program which we presented to the 

Congress, we pointed out tha t our scale of taxation is a little bit 

above the average in the area, but certainly at least equal to it. We 

all are aware of the problems of the downtown part of the cities 

throughout the country, that is, that the taxpayers are moving out 

to the suburbs and the tax absorbers are moving in. However, here 

we have a special situation. Of course, one thing is th at we are the 

Capital City of the U nited States. The other thing is tha t our city 

cannot expand to keep jurisdiction over those considerable number 

of taxpayers, I mean those able to buy small estates and able to find 

properties in the suburbs. We cannot expand and take in the county, 

for instance, as some of our well-known cities have because we are 

stopped at the District line. We have no way of following those 

people out, but we do have an increase in our tax absorption from 

the low income who are filling up, by the trickle-down system, the vacancies that are being created by our taxpayers who are moving out.

We have felt, as a Board of Commissioners, that, conscientiously, 

being sort of temporary trustees of the welfare of the city, we must 

report to the Congress that if taxation increases here to the extent 

of accelerating further the exodus of these taxpayers from the city 

and increases further the need for welfare funds, et cetera, as a result of the people who actually take up these spaces that these residents are leaving behind, eventually we shall have a city, and this is 

not too far in the future, that will have changed so much in character that the Congress, whose responsibility the city ultimately is, will 

not be able to repair those injuries to our Capital City by the expenditure of dollars; and I thought this is the proper time probably to state 

it on the record the situation on that point.

STUDY OF SITUATION

Senator Pastore. On that very point, I would assume, though, 

there is an advantage and disadvantage. Mv experience has been 

back home that many of the suburbs or the outlying districts actually 

received this exodus of people that moved out. Usually, the young 

families with children have a responsibility of seeing to it tha t they 

have good sewage systems and tha t sort of th ing and there is a crying 

need that something be done for them too, and I was wondering, along
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 47

th is line you jus t raised , M r. Com missioner, wh eth er a scientific study 

has ever been made as to th at?

I assume th at here in the District of Columb ia you are constru cting ma ny office buildin gs, which of course, is an advanta ge in ta xa ­

tion . Most of your hotels a re loca ted down here and you do no t h ave 

an exodus of y our hotels, bu t you do have the fam ilie s who move out 

to the outly ing distr icts, sub urbs, so to speak, and the y win d up in a 

different Sta te, eit he r Mary lan d or Vi rgini a, which increases the respo nsibilities of those localities to pro vid e schooling and wh at have 

you. I would assum e th at the y have problem s com parable to the 

problems th at we have, too, bu t alo ng th at line, in line with the po int 

th at you have rais ed, have a ny studies been un derta ken as to w ha t t his 

actua lly does to the tax p roblem s o f the Dist ric t of Columb ia?

I th in k this could be arg ued both ways. I th ink you are going to 

have a comparable arg um ent f or ma ny of th ese ou tly ing d istric ts, th at 

they are receiving these fam ilie s and now the y have to provide these 

schools; yet they wor k in the District and th at is wdiere they spend 

th ei r money.

Air. McLaughl in. Th ey do not, though.

Se na tor P astore. They do not ? I m ean, th at is the reason I would 

like to he ar som eth ing about it. Where do they spe nd their money?

Air. Karrick. In the shop pin g cen ters in Ala ryland and Virgini a. 

Tha t is in cre asing enormously.

Air. AIcLau giilin. A stu dy has been made, which I have seen, 

with in the pas t 6 months , and 1 believe it is in one of ou r presen tations, sho win g th at the retaile rs in the me tro po litan are a outside of 

the Distri ct of Columbia hav e increased, I believe, to the po int th at 

the re is only one oth er city in the cou ntr y ha ving th is increase in business in the pa st year, or wh ate ver per iod is specified, whe reas the retaile rs wi thin the Di str ict of Columbia, I believe there are about 15 

cities involve d, have increased, well they are abo ut 14 out of the 15 

cities. In o ther words, it is n early s tatio na ry withi n the Di str ict .

STATE OF THE NATION’S CAPITAL

Senator P astore. In other words, as fam ilie s move out, business 

moves out wi th it, est ablishin g these sho pping c enters and wh at h ave 

you, and you r lar ge departm ent stores decentralize also.

Air. AIcL augiilin. A es.

Air. L owe. Air. C hairm an, in the C omm issioners’ r ep ort to the Congress back in Fe br ua ry on the sta te of the Nation’s Ca pital, we 

developed a great deal of fac tua l inf orma tio n on th is problem of the 

Dist ric t and , in ma ny instances, it disp elle d prev ailin g notions as to 

the chara cte ristics of yo ur centr al city and its rel ati on ship to the 

suburbs. I t is quite tru e th at yo ur sub urb s have school po pu lat ion 

enrollments t hat are e xplod ing , but a t least in the case of the D istri ct 

we have the same thing, because we have a ch aracter ist ic of our 

population makeu p now where the low-income familie s have very la rge 

num bers of children and, histo ric all y, peop le have alw ays tho ug ht of 

school enrollme nts in the ce ntr al city as being sta tic to even declining. 

Tha t is not true here.

I could illus tra te if I c ould rea d you just one s ho rt pa ra gr ap h?

Se nator P astore. Yes, do tha t.

27235— 58- ■4
48 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Lowe. If I could read just a portion of this I think it would be 

informative. It rea ds:

Related to the trend of lower income groups that gra vitate to the city is a 

tren d for higher income groups that move to the suburbs. This has caused our 

expenses for welfare, education, health, hospitals, and law enforcement to spiral 

mostly in the last few years, increasing from $75 million in 1952 to a proposed 

expenditure of $115 million in fiscal year 1959, an increase of 53 percent. All 

other general government activities have increased from $27 million to $3S 

million in the same period or about 41 percent. Contrasted with this increase 

and level of expenditures is th e fact tha t the tota l personal income in the Dis trict 

of Columbia in the same period of time has increased from $1.94 billion to an 

estim ated $2.1 billion, or by only 8 percent.

Then we also have graphs tha t bring tha t out. We have graphs 

showing this business survey which was conducted by the Census 

Bureau and also a great deaf of other very pertinent information and 

if you would like it we would extract some of the more pertinent and 

briefer portions of this report and insert it in the record.

(The information referred to follows:)

Percent change in retail store sales, 1948 to 1954, group I I cities, central business

districts and standard metropolitan areas

C itie s

E n ti re st a n d ­

ard m etr op o li ta n a re a

E n ti re c it y

C en tr al

bus in es s

d is tr ic t

C it y le ss its 

cen tr al b u sines s d is tr ic t

S ta n d ard 

m etr opoli ta n 

are a les s c en ­

tr al bus in es s 

d is tr ic t

W ash in gto n, D . C __ __ _ ____ - 35.8 8.8 - 2 . 0 15.5 51.1

B al tim ore - ____________ (') (') - 1 .8 (') (')

B ost on_______ _______________ 35.1 23.9 2.7 39 .2 43 .2

B uff al o. ____________________ 33 .5 19.4 3. 6 26.4 41.0

C in c in n ati .......................................... 31. 1 25. 1 8. 1 36.7 40.4

C le v ela n d _____________________ 31.2 17.6 5.5 23. 2 39.4

H o u sto n ............................. ............ 48.6 51.6 10.2 93 .8 77.5

M ilw au kee - ____________ - - 26.6 20. 5 - 1 .0 27.7 34.1

M in n eap o li s---- ------------------------- (') (') 8.3 (') (*)

N ew O rlea ns _ _______________ 32 .3 25.5 9.8 39. 3 49. 4

P it ts b u rg h _ _________________ 15. 1 3.1 -1 6 . 1 17.4 22.4

St Lou is _________________ 32.5 18.9 -1 0 . 2 30.7 42.0

S an F ra ncis co--------------------------- 28. 6 12.7 .7 20.7 34.6

i W it h h eld b y C en su s B ure au to a void d iscl os ur e.

So ur ce : U . S. B u re au of t h e C en su s. U . S. C en su s of B us in es s: 1954, C en tr al B us in es s D is tr ic t S ta ti sti cs B u ll eti n .

Pu pil membership in public elementary and secondary day schools of the District of

Columbia and adjo ining county school systems, at or near the end of the 1st 6

weeks of school in certain years

Sc ho ol y ea r D is tr ic t of 

C o lu m b ia 1

A rlin gto n

C o u n ty ,

Va.

Fai rfax

C o u n ty ,

V a.

M o n tgo mer y

C o u n ty ,

M d J

P ri nce

Ge orges

C o u n ty ,

M d .

1939-40 ___________________ 92,297 7,450 7,768 14,129 17,758

1944-45 ___________________ 86,666 10,740 8,925 16,180 20, 595

1949-50 ________________________ 93,361 14,3 30 13,183 24,232 28,157

1954-55 - ............ ..................... -- 104,330 20, 515 27,885 47,403 45,836

1955-56 ____ _____ - ___ 106,301 21,3 63 33,237 52,267 50,004

1956-57 ............ - ___________ 107,312 22,2 55 38,467 57,473 53,365

1957-58........... .................................... - ................ 110,041 22,9 75 43,055 63,191 57,228

1

 Doe s n o t in cl ud e m em ber sh ip o f t h e D is tr ic t of C olu m bia T eac her s Colle ge (s). 

J D oe s n o t in cl ude m em ber sh ip o f t h e M ontg om ery C o u n ty J u n io r Co lle ge.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 49
50 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 51
52 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

RE AD JUS TM ENTS W IT HIN METROPOLITAN AREA

Se nator P astore. I th in k th at w ould be a fine idea and we will in ­

sert it in the record because I have always been curious abo ut that, 

an d the re may be a mistaken beli ef on the p ar t of some who think the 

Distri ct is being relieved of t his r esp ons ibility, but th at is n ot the case 

at all.

Mr. McLaughlin. Tha t is no t the case.

Se nator P astore. I mean th at the responsibilities seem to increase 

an d the fam ilies of the high er income gro ups are estab lishin g bette r 

homes in the outly ing sections of this com munity and you are losing 

th at income because they are doing th eir shop pin g elsewhere, closer 

to their homes, and th at seems to be the A me rican tenden cy today.

Mr. McLaug hlin. I t is especially so here, even if it is no t tru e in 

other me tro polita n areas, and we find, as Mr. Lowe ju st stated , th at 

the lower income people a re c oming down to th e core of the city where 

it does not cost so m uch fo r t rans po rta tio n and w here we have the public welfar e setu p and so f orth, and the oth ers are going out. I mean, 

this is not a movement, n ecessarily, from outside the m etropoli tan area 

int o our m etropolitan area, bu t it is a r ea djus tm en t wi thin the m etr opo litan area itself.

REASSES SMENT PROGRAM

Senator P astore. Al l ri ght; in order to dispel th is oth er notion 

abo ut rea ppraisem ent and wh eth er or not the local real estate ta xpa ye r is payin g his jus t tax burde n, you may answer this question fo r 

m e: How much add itio nal revenue from the r eapp raise me nt p rogram 

do you expect to receive, and what is the pict ure th ere ?

Mr. L owe. Mr. Back, o ur finance officer, can answer that.

Mr. B ack. Mr. Ch air ma n, we expect in the vicin ity of 5 percen t 

ove rall increase in the assessed values. Tr an sla ted into tax dollars , 

th at represents abo ut $2 million annually as a resu lt of the reassessment. Of course, the reassessment is being c arr ied out w ith the p urpose of eq ualizin g p ro pe rty assessments. Once the y are equalized, the 

assessment level could be set at any level th at the Commissioners direc ted tow ard 100 perce nt of ma rke t value. We are attempting to 

reassess all prop ertie s in the city in a 3-year period of time. 

We are now into the th ird year. We are sche duled to complete the 

tax able pro perties by September 1 and hav e the tax pa ye rs notified by 

th at time a nd offer all t axpa ye rs an op po rtu nity to come f orwa rd and 

prote st the assessment th at we have arriv ed at if they see fit to do so. 

Th e new assessed valu es will go on the tax rolls on Ju ly 1, 1959.

Se nator P astore. Now this may be an un fa ir question, and if it is 

you just tell me so : H ow close do you think you are going to come to 

real values on yo ur reassessment or is th at too ha rd ?

Mr. Back. Th at is a good question, sir. We are tryi ng to hit between 55 and 65 pe rce nt of m ark et value.

Senator P astore. Of m arke t value?

Mr. B ack. Of curr ent mark et value .

Senator P astore. How does th at c ompare with oth er communities?

Mr. B ack. That is high in compa rison w ith most other communities.

Senator P astore. Do you m ean it would be high he re ?

Mr. Back. I t would be highe r h ere th an in most other communities.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 53

Senator Bible. Wliat other communities? I)o you mean Maryland 

or Virginia ? Is that what you have reference to ?

CENSU S BUREAU STUDY OF ASSESSED VALUES

Mr. Back. In particular, but it would be high throughout the country. Now the Census Bureau, as you may know, has just completed 

a study of the assessed values throughout the country, covering some 

1,500 or 1,800 different jurisdictions. The ratio shown for the District 

of Columbia, and this is the old assessment, was between 48 and 49 

percent of market value. The District of Columbia was in the 10 

highest in the United States at tha t level. Of the higher level, which 

I am sure we are going to come up with, I do not know if we will be 

the highest.

Senator Pastore. Let me get this straight. You have already 

achieved, in some scientific manner of perfection, the relationship and 

responsibility of taxpayer to taxpayer in the real estate group by this 

study tha t was made? In other words, next-door neighbors cannot 

complain as to one another, “You are paying less than I am paying.” 

We have achieved that by just study ?

Mr. Back. Assuming that their properties are alike.

Senator Pastore. I mean that this scientific study was to take all of 

tha t into account?

Mr. Back. Tha t is right.

Senator Pastore. You are satisfied now, insofar as the relationship 

between the general real estate taxpayer and the real estate taxpayer 

within the District, you have achieved some semblance of accuracy?

Mr. Back. Yes, when the job is completed.

Senator P astore. When the job is completed.

Now, the next question is this : What will the assessment be with 

relation to the actual salable values of the property, and I know you 

feel tha t will be determined in the future, but, in any instance, you 

feel that here in the District it is a little higher by comparison than 

in any other comparable community ?

Mr. Back. Yes, it is.

COMPARISON OF AS SE SSME NT LEVEL W IT H OTHE R CIT IES

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, upon completion, it will be the highest in 

the metropolitan area and one of the very highest in the entire country as to the level of assessment.

Senator Pastore. And this is in a community tha t has a sales tax 

and has a personal income tax as well.

Mr. Lowe. That is correct.

Senator Bible. May I ask this question: You say tha t when the 

study is completed, tha t based upon the assessed evaluation it will be 

the highest in the Nation. Now in relation to the rate tha t you apply, 

how will that rate with comparable cities in the United States ?

Mr. Back. Well, when you relate it to the rate, we would probably be 

about average with other group 2 cities around the country.

Senator Bible. I think tha t is most important because the thing we 

are trying to arrive at is how much you pay on your house in the way 

of taxes and how much evaluation.
54 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Back. That is right. For the metropolitan area, I think we 

would perhaps be high, maybe with the exception of Montgomery 

County. They have increased their rate and we have to take another 

look at Montgomery County.

Senator P astore. What is the rate now ?

Mr. Back. In the District of Columbia, $2.30 for $100 evaluation.

Senator Beall. Wha t is it for Montgomery County ?

Mr. Back. I will have to check that.

MA RY LA ND A SS ESSM EN T

Senator Beall. Mr. Chairman, I might add tha t they also have a 

sales tax in Maryland, a 3 percent sales tax and an income tax, State 

income tax.

Mr. Karrick. There is no sales tax on groceries.

Senator Beall. There are certain exceptions.

Mr. Karrick. Yes.

Senator Beall. Are you sure about your assessments being higher 

in value than Montgomery County?

Mr. Lowe. Not today, but upon completion.

Senator Beall. I do not know, but I do know that in my mail I 

am constantly getting complaints from residents and property owners in Montgomery County about their assessments. Unfortunately, 

I do not have anything to do with it. It is done by the State tax 

commission with their own setup. As I understand it, they are assessed almost up to 80 percent of value.

Senator Pasture. I wish you could do this. I do not know how 

much a tax this is, but this is a question that has continuously been 

asked on the floor of the Senate and I think tha t you can anticipate 

it because you have met it every single year tha t this bill has come 

up here, so 1 wondered if we could somehow get a very simple 

resume drawing up this comparison which is of such great importance to us in debating this situation ?

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, attached to this Federal payment statement which Mr. Fowler was discussing a while ago is a one-page table, 

which in very simple terms, compares the tax burden in the metropolitan area, on a typical family basis, such as a family of 2 and 

a family of 4, and in there it even takes into account the new Maryland income tax, but not the sales tax because that is not yet in effect, and you will observe that the District is just about on balance 

with the average or median in the metropolitan area. There are 

jurisdictions in the metropolitan area where the typical families make 

somewhat more, but there are also jurisdictions where they pay somewha t less.

Senator Pastore. That is now in the record ?

Mr. Lowe. Yes, tha t is in the record as part of t hat Federal payment statement.

Senator P astore. Now, did you desire to stop at this time ?

Mr. McLaughlin. Mr. Chairman, at this point we must go now 

to meet the President of the Philippines and I wrould like to ask if 

I may testify this afternoon on these other matters?

Senator Pastore. Yes, you may come back at 2 o'clock and do that.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 55

Water F un d

STATEMENT OF DAVID V. AULD. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF 

SANITARY ENGINEERING

Gen er al State m ent

Sen at or P astore. Mr. Fow le r now I wo uld lik e to ad dr es s an in ­

qu iry to you fo r th e benefit of th e Co mmi ssi on ers re gar din g th e 

am ou nt o f $3.1 m ill ion prop os ed fo r th e w at er fu nd in 1959. I u nd er ­

stan d th e Co mm iss ioners in di ca te d to th e co mm itte e th a t such an 

am ou nt ca n be deleted from th e bill.

Mr. F owler. T h a t is co rrec t an d we ha ve the he ad of th at dep art ­

men t w ho wi ll give you fu rt h er testim on y on it, M r. D av id V. A ul d.

Sen at or P astore. A ll ri ght, Mr. A ul d, wi ll you do th at fo r us now.

Mr. A uld. Yes, Air. Cha irm an .

In pre pari ng ou r bu dg et eac h ye ar , it is cu stom ary to su pp lem en t 

our expe cte d income to th e w at er fu nd by th e ad di tion of a prop osed 

Fed er al loan or a loan au th or iz at io n. In th e bu dg et fo r 1959, to 

balan ce it as first dr aw n, re qu ired $3,100,000 of loan au th or iz at io n. 

The H ou se cu t so mething over $3,100,000 fro m th e requ est an d, in so 

do ing, rem ov ed th e necess ity fo r t h a t l oan.

Sen at or P astore. In ot he r wo rds , to s im pl ify this, th e cu t made by 

th e Ho use an d th e am ou nt you are as ki ng to be re stor ed now ha s so 

ch an ge d by the se fig ures th a t t his is no lo ng er ne cessa ry ?

Air. A uld. I t is to ta lly u nn ecessary fo r 1959.

A M ENDM EN T SUG GE STED ON WAT ER LOAN

Sen at or P astore. In so fa r as th e am en dm en ts prop os ed on the 

Fed er al loan to th e w at er fu nd , on pa ge 3, lin e 3, st rike ou t “$8,- 

600,000”, an d in se rt in l ieu th er eo f, “$5,500,000”. Is t h at all ri ght, M r. 

Fow ler?

Air. F owler. Yes.

Sen at or P astore. On pa ge 3, lin e 7 an d lin e 8, st ri ke ou t aft er the 

wo rd “ th e” , the fo llo wing l anguage:

following f unds: h igh wa y fu nd, $5,500,000, and w ater fun d, $3,100,000 

an d in se rt in lieu th ere o f: “h ig hw ay f und.”

Does t h at m eet w ith you r ap pr ov al ?

Air. F owler. T h at is p er fe ct ly all ri ght.

Depa rtm ent of H ighways

STATEMENTS OF J. N. ROBERTSON, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF 

HIG HWAYS ; WALLACE L. BRAUN, T RAFFIC ENGINE ER; WILLIAM 

LISSEK, CHIEF, OFFICE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION; HAROLD 

L. AITKEN, SPECIAL ASSISTANT; AND HORACE D. ROSE, DEPUTY 

CHIEF, OFFICE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

A m en dm en t R eq ue st ed

Capital outlay

Ap propriatio n, 1918-----------------------------------------------------------------$15,301,000

Estim ate , 1959_______________________________________________ 11, 512, 000

House allowance, 1959 (re duction of $54,400)____________________ 11, 457, 600
56 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59

AMENDMENT REQUESTED

Page 32, line 15, after “adjustment” in se rt :

“ : Provided further, Th at no pa rt of this or any other appropriation contained 

in this Act shall be expended for building, installing, and maintainin g streetcar loading platfo rms and lights of any description employed to distinguished 

same, except that a perm anent type of platform may be constructed from appropriations contained in this Act for stre et improvements when plans and locations thereof are approved by the Public Utilities Commission and the Department of Highways and the street-railw ay company shall after construction 

main tain, mark, and light the same as its expense.”

JUST IFICAT IO N

This action is necessary in order to accomplish the purpose of Commissioners’ 

Order No. 58-919 dated Jun e 10, 1958, which transf err ed the traffic engineering 

function of the former Department of Vehicles and Traffic to the Department 

of Highways. The language change requested is a tra nsfer of autho rity to the 

Depa rtment of Highways from the Department of Vehicles and Traffic.

HI GH W AY PROGRAM

Senator Pastore. Our next witness is Mr. Robertson, Department 

of Highways.

Mr. Robertson. Mr. Chairman, is it your wish that I describe the 

program that we have here in the District?

Senator P astore. I think it would be well if you do it.

Mr. Robertson. I just want to say first tha t the amount recommended by the House committee is acceptable to us. We are not 

asking for any restoration of funds either in operating expenses or 

capital outlay.

Senator Bible. Do you have enough for the little old bridge?

Mr. Robertson. I have sufficient funds for that purpose.

I would like to use the map, sir, in describing our program.

Senator P astore. All right, you do that.

Mr. Robertson. I will make this as short as possible to give you a 

general ideal of what the Highway Department is doing in the District of Columbia in connection with the Federal Aid Highway Act 

of 1956 and 1958.

Senator P astore. Pu t your pointer on the Capitol first, so I can get 

my bearings here.

Mr. Robertson. This is the United States Capitol. The red lines 

that you see on this map show the work tha t has been completed. 

This map is an old edition, but I just brought it to show you the plan 

or program tha t we have.

PUR POSE OF PROGRAM

[Pointing to map.] There is the East Capitol Street connection 

and the Kenilworth Avenue connection to the interchange out in 

Maryland, the Kenilworth Interchange, New York Avenue, and South 

Dakota Avenue projects. In addition to some of those projects, we 

have started quite a few others that you see in blue and green. The 

main purpose of this whole program is to improve the highway system 

in the District of Columbia to accommodate the traffic from all over 

the United States, especially from within the D istrict, Maryland and 

Virginia, which is the metropolitan area.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959 57

We have entering the District every day around 800,000 trips from 

Maryland and Virginia. Tha t does not indicate automobiles, but 

means trips back and forth, across the cordon line which is the District line. In addition to the traffic which is generated in the downtown area, [indicating], most of our streets and all of our arterials are 

running to capacity during the peak hours. The breakdown of a car, 

a rain or snowstorm, causes traffic to become congested. It is our hope 

and desire to improve the street system in the District of Columbia to 

accommodate the projected 1975 to 1980 traffic volumes.

I believe we will reach the saturation point in 1980. In addition to 

what we contemplate in the way of improvements in highways, building bridges, other structures, and widening streets, we will have to 

coordinate our work with other agencies. For example, the Motor 

Vehicle Parking Agency will have to provide enough parking to accommodate the influx of traffic, and we will also have to depend upon 

the development of mass transportation facilities. The three functions, the improvement to highways, mass transportation, and parking must be coordinated toward the one objective.

DIVERSION OF TRAFFIC FROM DOWNTOWN AREA

The inner belt th at you see here [indicating], the dotted line, some 

of it is blue and some yellow, is to relieve the downtown area traffic 

which we call the core, the central part of the city, of approximately 

25 percent of the traffic that goes through this area [indicating] to 

reach other destinations both in the District, Maryland, and Virginia.

We believe, with the improvement of various projects th at we have 

on this program, we can take at least 25 percent of the traffic out of 

the downtown area, thereby opening up this area [indicating] for 

shoppers, business and other purposes.

One of the projects tha t is very high on our priority list is the 

Anacostia Freeway. This route connects from the Kenilworth Int erchange, down the new Kenilworth Avenue to Fast Capitol Street, 

down the east side of the Anacostia River to the District line, threequarters of a mile into Maryland and across the Potomac River on 

the Jones Point Bridge.

JO NE S PO IN T BRIDGE

This bridge, I understand, will actually start construction this summer. The Bureau of Public Roads is the agency in charge of building this bridge. The Federal Government is paying the entire cost 

of the bridge; Virginia and Maryland are paying for their respective 

approach roads to this bridge.

Senator P astore. Where will the bridge be ?

Mr. Robertson. The bridge is not on this map. It is down below 

here [indicating]. If you are familiar with Alexandria, it comes to 

the south of Alexandria, at Huntin g Towers. The approach roads 

tie into George Washington Memorial Parkway, Route 1, and Shirley 

Highway on the Virginia side. All of the traffic now coming through 

Alexandria, up No. 1 and Shirley Highway desiring to bypass the 

District will be diverted to the east side of the river, then along the 

river, and back into the city, if they have a destination there.

The traffic will be routed into the circumferential route that is 

outside of the District and which goes around the District through
58 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Maryland and Virginia. That bridge [indicating] will serve both 

of these routes.

ANACOSTIA FREEW AY

On the Anacostia Freeway project we have under contract and 

in progress the structure across East Capitol Street, the structure 

across the railroads, here [indicating]. The contract for the fill is 

about to be advertised. It consists of a fill and sand drains for 

this portion from the end of the bridge shown here to Pennsylvania 

Avenue. This area is made ground, which requires sand piles for 

drainage.

The estimated cost of this project started at $19,900,000 and has 

grown to about $30 million due to the increased costs in labor and 

materials, and some changes in criteria.

Senator P astore. I s that all federally supported ?

Mr. Robertson. This is a 90-10 project.

Senator Beall. Wha t is that bridge halfway down just south of the 

Capitol ? Is that a bridge ?

Mr. Robertson. This one [indicating] ?

Senator Beall. Yes.

Mr. Robertson. Tha t is going to be another 11th Street or Anacostia Bridge.

Senator Beall. Tt has not been built yet?

Mr. R obertson. No, we are drawing the plans. Congress gave us 

the money for the plans last year. We are asking for funds for condemnation of property in this area. The actual star ting date of this 

bridge will not come for several years.

Senator Beall. I th ink th at is one of the finest improvements I have 

seen here in the last 15 years.

Senator Pastore. That bridge will serve the purpose of getting back 

into downtown ?

Mr. Robertson. This bridge will bring in traffic, from Marvland and 

the southern part of the District, desiring to come into the downtown 

area.

Tn order to get to the Navy Yard from Alexandria, one must come 

up the George Washington Memorial Parkway, across the Highway 

Bridge, through Maine Avenue to M Street, then on to the Navy 

Yard. Anybody who lives in Alexandria and wants to come across 

to this point [pointing to map] will be there in 10 minutes with this 

improvement. This route will provide a bypass of the central area 

for persons coming into this section to work or to make purchases.

CIRCUM FERENT IALS

While I am talking about these circumferentials. I might say that 

Maryland is doing a very fine job, as well as Virginia, in building 

the circumferentials around the District. They are also considering 

another one, which they will call the Outer-Outer Loop and will be 

outside of the circumferential route. We are considering an Int ermediate Loop and are making a study at present. This would come 

approximately across here [indicating], around the District, where 

tha t yellow line is shown. We have had this Intermediate Loop under 

study for some time.

Senator Pastore. When do you expect to have that road built?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 59

Mr. Robertson. Which one ? This one [indicating] ?

Senator P astore. Right in fro nt of you.

Mr. Robertson. In 2 ^ years. We plan to start construction over 

at Oxon Bay this year. Plans are almost completed—95 percent— 

and we are waiting on the permits from the Corps of Engineers. 

Three or four structures will be started at this point [indicating]. 

The target date for completion of this road project will be the date 

that the J ones Point Bridge is opened.

ST AT US OF ROUTE 2 4 0

Senator Beall. How about Route 240? lia s tha t been worked out? 

Mr. Robertson. I think Route 240 is in pretty good shape now, 

Senator Beall. We have not obtained the signature of the National 

Park Service as yet, but agreement has been prepared. The Commissioners have agreed with the Secretary of the Interior on ju st what 

is needed and details are now being worked out with the lawyers and 

engineers.

Senator Beall. Tell us about that.

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir.

Route 240 presented the following considerations. It was decided, 

after a public hearing a t which there was so much opposition not to 

bring the trucks down the river route—which the District felt was 

the proper route for coming into the District. Afte r meeting with 

Maryland, Virginia, and the Inte rior Department, it was decided that 

Route 240, would not be brought into the District of Columbia, but 

instead it would be carried around the outer circumferential, over the 

Cabin Jo hn Bridge. A connection to tha t bridge will be constructed 

by the Par k Service who will build a road along the river. We have 

worked out an agreement where the Park Service will bring their 

four lanes into the District a t the D istrict line, the P ark Service will 

pick up and build a park-type road from the District line, four lanes, 

down to Arizona Avenue and from there, it will carry six lanes to 

Glover Archibald Parkway, Glover Archibald Parkway into the District will be 8-lanes into the center part of town.

Senator Beall. That is coming down what street ?

Mr. R obertson. This red is Key Bridge and that is at 36tli and M 

Streets, righ t at the end of the blue line, and this is Canal Road th at 

runs along the river. This route uses part of Canal Road, and also 

part of the streetcar right-of-way, which we will have to purchase.

Senator Beall. That will be a four-lane highway ?

Mr. Robertson. It will be a 4,6, and 8 lanes project and 4 lanes where 

it enters the District. Where it enters from Glover Archibald Parkway into the west leg of the inner loop it will be an eight-lane road. 

We will have a parallel highway through Georgetown, running along 

the riverfront, next to the Whitehurst Freeway which becomes oneway east bound. The Whitehurst Freeway then becomes one-way 

westbound.

Senator Beall. On the map, point out the District line, on the 

Maryland side.

Mr. Robertson. The District line here is right at the edge of the 

man. That is at the reservoir. We are asking for money in the 

budget to study and to draw up detailed plans for the first section 

of this route, and I believe we will request construction money in our
60 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

ne xt ye ar’s budget, and have the proje ct com pleted when Mary lan d 

completes its proje ct to the D ist ric t line.

Senator Beall. You will be—Mary lan d is cro wd ing you a lit tle 

bit.

Air. Robertson. Senator, they are a lit tle ahe ad of us, bu t if the 

Park Serv ice does its pa rt, we will do our par t if we are able to get 

the necessary funds.

NORTH CAPITOL STREET PROJECT

Now, some othe r t hing s t hat are of i nte res t in th is thum bnail s ketch 

of the pro gra m, is the Ca pitol are a th at the chair ma n asked about. 

North Capito l Street is prop osed for widenin g an d is t o be proje cte d 

throug h the Soldiers ’ Hom e, out to Bla ir Road. I t will tie int o connections into M ary lan d a nd will cross G eor gia Avenue, and extend out 

to 16th a nd Easter n Avenue.

Senator Bible. Wh en is t hat going to be com pleted?

Mr. Robertson. We s hou ld have a co ntract some tim e late t his fall 

fo r a portion of it. In fac t, the contr act is bei ng advertis ed at the 

present time fo r the gr ad in g of the road thro ug h Soldi ers ’ Home. 

A str uc ture will be con struct ed here [pointing] which will soon be 

rea dy for adv ertisem ent. I t will pro vid e relie f fro m this part of 

tow n [Capitol are a] th roug h the Takoma Park area, the Pe tw or th 

are a, a nd into M ary lan d.

Senator Beall. Di d I un de rst an d you to say it will be com pleted 

wi thin a year?

Air. Robertson. Alaybe i t will be a l itt le more th an a yea r, because 

some of the str uc tures are r at he r large, w here we s epara te the grades. 

I do no t t hi nk i t will be a year, but r at he r—at lea st a ye ar and a ha lf. 

ADD ITIO NAL PROJECT S

Now, this gen era l pictu re is giv ing you an idea of wh at we have 

started. Pl an s to widen Rhode Isla nd Aven ue to th e Distri ct lin e a re 

underway. We are wo rking now throug h the So ldier s’ H ome , and 

bu ild in g this crosstow n road righ t th roug h here [in dica tin g]. That 

sho uld be comp leted aro und the 1st of Ju ly . We a re also wo rki ng on 

these fo ur streets here—one at a tim e—to repave , no t widen, to give 

a crosstown route .

Th e new shrin e at Catho lic Un iversity is going to at tr ac t about a 

mi llio n and a ha lf peop le. In the Soldi ers ’ Home gro unds, we have 

a new hospita l composed of three for me r hospitals, Garfield , Ep isc opa l, and Em ergenc y. Th e A^eterans’ Bu rea u is con siderin g bu ild ­

ing a hospital here , o r an office buil din g, so it is necessary tha t we constru ct a cros stow n rou te across this are a righ t here [in dica tin g]. 

Th is will ext end to Mich iga n Avenue, on into Mary lan d, and pro vid e 

a dire ct r oute across tow n.

Now this [in dicatin g] is abo ut 80 percent complete . We are advertis ing for th ese tw o jobs.

Th is A lili tary Road project which you a re all fam ili ar with, is under 

contract . One str uc ture is com pleted, over the creek , and Beach 

Drive , which is a high-level str uctur e. We a re acquiring the south ern 

po rtion o f the golf cou rse and str aigh tening Alili tary R oad o ut at th is 

point . The 16th Street bridg e will be moved down abou t 80 feet, to 

pro vid e a straigh t route f rom G eorgia Av enue throug h to 27th Str eet .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959 61

EFFECT OF HI GH WAY PROGRAM ON TREES

Senator Pastore. What do all of these superduper highways do to 

the character and beauty of the city, insofar as the trees, and what 

have you ? Have you given much thought to th at ?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. 1 know we get a lot of letters from residents in 

the city, or rather, in the District, who feel that somehow this detracts 

from or eliminates the characteristic beauty of the city.

Mr. Robertson. The Tree Division is under the Highway Dep artment, and whenever a tree is cut down in the District it is personally 

approved by me. I investigate it in a number of ways. Some of our 

trees live over 75 years, because we take good care of them. We are 

conscious of the fact that we should not cut down trees and make 

every effort unless absolutely necessary not to do so. This is the case 

of these four streets which we made one way in each direction. This 

was done so as not to widen the streets in that area, and in tha t manner save the trees.

We have gone into this whole problem and believe tha t when we 

have new roadways properly landscaped and properly planted with 

trees and shrubbery, et cetera, we will have a more beautiful project 

than you have today. So we do take into consideration everybody’s requests as to cutting down trees. We have to weigh the situation, the 

number of vehicles, the traffic th at is using the street, what the potential traffic is going to be. I attempt to make my engineers traffic conscious and tree conscious so tha t they will think of both aspects. We 

are sometimes criticized, but I can show you pictures of Scott Circle 

and Dupont Circle and Thomas Circle before they were underpassed 

and afterward. In my judgment these areas are much more beautiful than they were before.

EFFECT OF HIG HW AY ON PROPERTY VALUES

Senator P astore. What does it do to the property values?

Mr. Robertson. A lot of real estate people have inquired about 

streets being improved, because they realize it raises the value of the 

adjacent property.

I can cite you a few’ locations such as 12th Street and 21st Street, 

w’here they requested us to widen them which indicates that they knew 

the value would increase.

As far as the widening of streets in a residential area, in my opinion, 

if you do the proper landscaping and construct them properly and 

conform with what is there, it does not damage the property.

RIG HTS-O F-W AY

Senator Beall. Does not the acquiring of property for rights-ofway play a heavy cost upon this construction of this particular highway ?

Mr. Robertson. No, sir; except where we might have to acquire 

land on a new’ location.

Senator Beall. I mean in a new location where you are acquiring 

this property, and have to preserve the trees and things of that kind. 

Do you not have to buy a lot of property there ?
62 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 1959

Mr. R obertson. No, sir; not for a normal street. We happen to be 

blessed with very wide rights-of-way. The District has jurisdiction of 

from 90 feet up to 160 feet.

Senator Beall. So you do not have much property to acquire?

Mr. Robertson. No, sir; except on routes such as the Inne r Belt, 

then we would have to acquire property.

Senator Beall. Where is tha t ?

Mr. Robertson. For the Inn er Belt, [indicating]

Senator Beall. You have not acquired that yet ?

Mr. R obertson. We have acquired some property and have started 

the Southwest Freeway. Three contracts are in progress now.

Senator Beall. Is it expensive ?

Air. Robertson. Well, we are working it out with the Redevelopment Land Agency and are not paying too high a price for it. RLA is 

actually purchasing the properties, and selling it to us.

ASSESSED VALUE COMPARED TO MAR KET VALUE

Senator Beall. Mr. Chairman, getting back to the assessments, how 

does the sale of these properties compare with your assessed values?

Mr. Robertson. Mr. Back can answer that.

Air. Back. The sales? Which ones?

Senator Beall. On any of these properties that the District is acquiring for street improvements, when they buy the properties, how 

do they compare to your own assessments ?

Air. Back. To our own assessments ?

Senator Beall. Yes.

Air. Back. Well, of course, a lot of that is in condemnation proceedings, and it is a question of whether or not that is a tru e market 

value of the property. Alost of our property is assessed for about 50 

percent of market value, as it would sell on the open market. In condemnation proceedings, I do not know whether this is all a proper 

market value or not there.

To answer the chairman’s question,' I do not think there is any 

question but that good highways improve property values. There 

have been many people around the country tha t think these superhighways and limited-access highways do detract from property 

values that are close to them. I really do not know because I have not 

been too close to tha t but, generally speaking, better roads do improve the property values there.

PORTER STREET PROJECT

Senator Pastore. Now, Air. Robertson, the House deleted funds for 

the Porter Street project. What is the situation there now? I hear 

quite a bit about it.

Air. R obortson. Porter Street has been deleted from our program. 

We have accepted the action of the House. We have received many 

letters of protest, but only one man wrote and said to widen the 

street. All the rest of them said to not touch the street because of 

the trees.

Senator Pastore. And the decision now is not to touch it then ?

Air. Robertson. Yes, sir; we accepted the House action.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 63

Senator Pastore. I hope tha t the people read the newspapers, and 

they can save time and trouble for themselves, although we are interested in the subject and they are welcome to come to speak to it, 

because we love to have them, but they can spare themselves that 

inconvenience, because this is official now.

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir. I did star t to answer them, telling them 

of the decision. I think everybody will be happy for awhile.

Now, this is another map showing the 6-year program. That 

[indicating] is about as fa r as we can go toward a 13-year program, 

because of changes in the costs, etc. We like to progress in our construction with the Redevelopment Land Agency, because it does give 

us a better price advantage in acquiring property. We work together, and it has worked out advantageously for all of us.

SOUTHW EST FREEW AY

The Southwest Freeway is under construction now on the east end 

[indicating], from South Capitol Street over to 4th Street. We have 

designers working on plans from 4th Street to 10th Street. The 

Southwest Freeway has been designed to cross the Washington 

Channel.

We are waiting on the decision of the Congress regarding Highway Bridge. I understand they are going to meet Thursday to reach 

a decision on this matter. We will then be ready to go on with our 

plans which had to be halted until we could get a law on the exact type 

of bridge.

CON STITUTION AVENUE BRIDGE

On the Constitution Avenue Bridge, the plans are being drawn, 

and it has been finally settled where the bridge is to be located. As 

you know, it was moved up and down several times. There [indicating] is the location where it will be constructed across the southern 

part of Theodore Roosevelt Island. We are in agreement with everything with the Park Service, and have a signed agreement by the 

Commissioners, sent over to the Secretary of the Inte rior to sign. 

It has not been returned yet, but I know there will not be anything 

but minor changes in it.

Senator Pastore. How much will it cost, and how much longer will 

it take to construct ?

Mr. Robertson. The price that I have given to the Commissioners 

is the same as it was for the previous bridge.

Senator P asture. Would you name it ?

BRIDGE COST AND COMP LETION DATE

Mr. Robertson. $24,500,000. I can build this structure and the approaches for that amount of money, sir.

Senator Bible. It will be completed when ?

Mr. Robertson. That is what all of these reporters have been waiting for me to say.

Senator Pastore. Well, we have given them a place to hear it. 

right here.

Mr. Robertson. Mr. Chairman, I have set the target date as the 

last pa rt of 1961. The landscaping of the area, and maybe some minor 

roads, may run over that date, but I have set the
64 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

the target date, and 1 hope that on the 1st day of Jan uar y 1962 you 

can ride over it.

Senator P astore. I s that a 90-10 ?

Mr. R obertson. That is a 90-10 project. We have in Washington 

28% miles of interstate highways which gives us moneys on a 90-10 

basis. We have 206 miles of ABC roads for which we get 50-50 

money. The Congress saw fit to give us 66% percent for this revised 

program, and the jobs which are in this program will all be advertised 

before the 1st of October of this year. The work will be started, or 

be under contract at least, by the 1st of December, and they will be 

completed, as Congress has directed, by the 1st of December 19{>9. 

We have let two jobs under tha t particular program. One was Central Avenue and the other was Ridge Road.

This give you an idea [indicating] of the amount of work that is 

going on, and what work will be done in the 6 years. I know you 

can appreciate the difficulty that I have in planning these jobs in 

order not to tie up traffic, due to the fact that the streets are carrying 

to capacity most of the time. We will have to, probably, hold up 

this job [indicating] while we are completing this job [indicating]. 

That is my responsibility.

We also have with us Mr. Brown, the gentleman who is going to 

be chairman of the detour committee, and who has to work out all 

of these problems to keep everybody happy.

Now, I do not know if there is anything more you want to ask me 

about these projects [indicating].

INNER-L OOP PORTIONS OF 6-YEAR PROGRAM

In the 6 years, the only portion of the innerloop that will be constructed will be the Southeast Freeway, with its connections to the 

11th Street Bridge and connections to the John Philip Sousa Bridge, 

and 17th Street, plus the Southwest Freeway and a bridge across the 

Washington Channel to the Highway Bridge. The other section of 

the inner loop tha t will be constructed within the 6 years is in the 

vicinity of the Constitution Avenue Bridge as fa r as K Street, and ty ­

ing into the route tha t Senator Beall asked about, and its connection 

with Route 240. This portion of the inner belt here, and this portion of the inner belt [indicating] will be all tha t will be built in 6 

years.

COST OF IN N E R LOOP

Senator Pastore. Wha t would he the overall cost of the inner loop *

Mr. Robertson. The overall cost of the inner loop is $272,500,000.

Senator Pastore. $272,500,000?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir. It has 141 structures and 96 ramps 

planned as of this date.

Senator Bible. That is how many miles, roughly ?

Mr. Robertson. Seventeen and one-half miles, sir, including the 

connections. We included in that cost these spurs tha t run out like 

this [indicating] to the various bridges, and the arterial highways. 

They do not all show on the 6-year program, but will show on the 13- 

year program. So there are about 17 ^ miles on the inner loop.

Senator Beall. Are you planning any more underpasses in downtown Washington?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 65

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir; we have some on the books, such as an underpass on the center leg near E Street and Delaware Avenue SW.

Senator Pastore. Have you a map which shows the inner-loop 

system ?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir. This map shows it.

Senator Pastore. All right. Let’s go to the next one.

INNE R LOOP CONSTRUCTION

Mr. Robertson. On this next one, the inner loop was approved 

when the public works program was requested of the Congress, about 

2 or 3 years ago. It was a 10-year program at tha t time. The 

loop was different in some respects from the one you see here now. 

This west side, the north side, and south side were about the same, 

but it came over here to Fourth and Sixth Streets NE., just about here 

[indicating].

Senator Pastore. Put your pointer to where the Capitol is there.

CON SULTANT STUDY

Mr. Robertson. This is the Capitol here. The Commissioners felt 

that we had not gone far enough and had not been complete enough 

in our thinking for the inner loop. So we had a meeting with some 

of the prominent people here in the District, to plan this project, and 

the desire was expressed to have our consultant make a study.

The consultant came back afte r he made the study, and proposed 

a location up the 11th Street NE. corridor and what we call the 

central artery, which is about Third Street NW. This was followed 

out after his report was made, and the Planning Commission approved it with some reservations and some changes, especially on this 

[indicating].

This section in here, as I told you before, the southwest section, 

is the one actually started. The plans are well underway right now 

and about 80 percent completed, including this section across the railroad yards. The plans as well as the acquisition of right-of-way for 

this leg and down south here [indicating] are under consideration 

right, now. We have a consultant on both of these [indicating]. We 

are getting into the study of the west leg at Constitution Avenue here 

[indicating].

We will be presenting this west leg to the Planning Commission 

within a month, so that the portion tha t I related to on the 6-year 

program will be this portion and this portion over here past this point 

here [indicating].

Afte r the 6 years, the plan will be to extend to the north [indicating]. The north leg will be constructed next and will be followed by 

the central artery. J

COST OF INNE R LOOP SURVEY

Senator P astore. This survey cost $235,000 ?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. When was tha t done ?

Mr. Robertson. That survey was made about 3 years a«o It was 

finished in 1955. '
66 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1959

Senator Pastore. Now how long and how wide, and so forth, will 

this highway be, Mr. Robertson?

Mr. Robertson. It will run from 6 to 8 lanes. It will be depressed 

about two-thirds of the way and elevated about one-third of the way.

The ma jority of this [indicating] will be depressed and several sections will be covered over like a tunnel.

TU NN EL

For instance, here by the Capitol it will be in a tunnel from Independence Avenue, at least to Constitution Avenue.

We have talked to the Architect of the Capitol, and he does not 

want any opening in there, so we will have what is called a tunnel 

over there. 11 is covered over depressed roadway.

Senator Beall. The tunnel will run from where to where?

Mr. Robertson. From Independence Avenue to Constitution, 

maybe farther. We have not gone into the details far enough to tell 

you exactly. 1 believe this center leg probably will be the next to 

last thing we will do.

Senator Pastore. Now, you have pointed out some of the loop i tself, as presently being contemplated for construction; am 1 right ?

Mr. Robertson. Some of it is under construction and some of it is 

contemplated.

Senator P asture. Now is it being done in such a way that any segment will be of optimum utility even though it might not connect 

with the whole thing later on ?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir ; we planned it to have utility.

Senator P astore. In other words, any part tha t you construct now 

will have a value in and of itself, even as a segment, even though it 

is not connected with the whole?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir; any segment will have utility.

Senator Pastore. Now as to those people whose properties will be 

involved, will they be given their day in court?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir.

DIFFEREN CES OF OPINIO N

Senator Pastore. You certainly would expect that with a project 

of this magnitude there would be many points of view.

Mr. Robertson. We have had many points of view, and we have 

had public hearings on this first section through the Southwest, and 

had no difficulty at all. We will have public hearings on each section, 

as Congress sees fit to give us the money to go ahead. That is with 

respect to money to match the Federal aid.

On this west leg that we are talking about, even though it has 

been approved by the Planning Commission, George Washington 

1 University and George Washington Hospital and several other people 

objected to its location. We have studied another location, and 

are getting ready to submit that, throug h the Commissioners, to the 

Planning Commission within about a month, or if they do not have 

their next meeting next month, it will be the following meeting.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 67

INTR IN SI C VALUE OF INNE R LOOP

Senator Pasture. What is the intrinsic value of this? I mean, who 

are we trying to accommodate in the inner loop system, the citizens 

of the District or are we trying to reroute traffic that ordinarily does 

not go into that part of the city, in order to make it easier for that 

section of the city to flourish?

What I am leading to is: You are doing away with very expensive 

property in this, are you not ?

Mr. Robertson. It will be quite expensive, but as a result of modern 

freeways most of it will have greater value and will come out as a 

tremendous development. This has been the experience in other cities. 

I he whole Southwest area was taken in along with the redevelopment, 

and this whole Northwest section here in this central artery apparently 

will be the next area to be developed by the Redevelopment Land 

Agency.

Senator P asture. Developed as to what ? For business purposes?

Mr. Robertson. It is my understanding this particular area here 

I indicating] would be redeveloped for business purposes between 

Union Station, or the tracks and North Capitol Street.

Senator Pasture. Are the Commissioners enthusiastic about their 

projects?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir ; they want us to go right along with them.

Senator Pasture. II ow about the inner loop? How do the Commissioners feel about that ?

Mr. Robertson. The Commissioners are in favor of the inner loop.

ADVANTAGES OK IN NER LOOP

Senator Pasture. And this, you say, will accommodate the people 

who have business within this area, and will more or less siphon oft* 

people who do not have business in this part of the District but have 

to go into it because there is no other way of gettin g out?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir. This is going to be corrective in a traffic 

service sense. It started out being an inner loop that did not have too 

many connections, but it is going to be a collector and distributor as 

well as bypassing the traffic around the loop. We have complaints all 

the time where the people say they cannot- get downtown to shop 

without unreasonable delay. The merchants in the downtown area 

complain that they are paying quite a bit of the taxes of the District 

of Columbia and they say, “We want to keep this area healthy, and 

keep it alive, so the taxes can stay where they are. We cannot do that 

by having people cross here all day long who have no business here,” 

so our idea is to get the potential shopper close to the business district 

quickly and safely, and get bypassable traffic around such district. It 

will be better to keep bypassable traffic on this inner belt, where it will 

not interfere with business.

FAC ILITATION OF SH OP PIN G IN DOWNTOWN AREA

Senator Pastore. Of course, that is provided you do not make it 

easier for a shopper to go some place else to shop.

Mr. Robertson. We are not doing that. Cities across the Nation 

have found they cannot survive with outmoded transp ortation facili-
68 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59

ties. We are opening this up for the shoppers to come in; and, with 

improved mass transportation and parking, the people will come in to 

do their shopping in the District. The reason they do not come in now, 

in my opinion, is because they cannot get in and cannot get a place to 

park.

If you open it up so they can get in here, then you have done something for the city as a whole.

TRAFFIC SITUATION

Senator Pastore. My impression down here has been this: Of 

course, I am not qualified at this juncture at least, to speak on the 

efficacy of a plan, because I do not know that much about it, but I 

would assume that the District, naturally, through you and through 

the Commissioners, are not involving themselves in a project that is 

going to run into these tremendous amounts of money, $272 million, 

without having some objective with some tremendous value in mind, 

and my experience down here has been that you do not seem to have 

too much traffic in this south part of the city except in the morning 

hours and late evening hours.

Mr. R obertson. You do have the higher traffic volumes during the 

peak morning and afternoon hours, but we are carrying capacity loads 

on the arterial highways most of the dav.

Senator Pastore. That is right. That is because of the people 

who go to work either in the Capitol or downtown and you have that 

in the morning and in the evening when they leave, to go hack to their 

homes, and that has been my experience, as to when you have a lot of 

traffic, a tremendous amount, of traffic, but during the day there does 

not seem to be too much traffic.

I am trying to line this up, what this actually means, with relationship to this argument made by the merchants tha t this will bring 

more people in to do their shopping.

Mr. Robertson. It is not only being made by the merchants, but 

also by the owners of property.

PARK ING PROBLEM

Senator Pastore. I think one of your big problems downtown here 

is the parking. People do not have any place to leave their cars in 

order to do a little shopping. Has any thought or attention been 

given to parking?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. I mean, has any attention been given to it in line 

with tying it in with the projects, the inner loop you are talking about ?

Mr. Robertson. We are planning to consider parking needs in the 

design of the inner loop, in the various locations of same. We are 

making this study, so it will be tied in and have a parking lot, Mr. 

Chairman, right under this expressway in the southwest here, under 

this last contract.

Senator P astore. Would you repeat that again, please ?

Mr. Robertson. We are building a parking lot for the parkway 

agency under this freeway in the southwest area, which will accommodate people who work and people who will shop in the area. I 

think it will handle about 400 cars. We will do this around the loop 

as we progress, and where feasible.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 69

Senator Pastore. Now, have you any comment with relation to the 

opening budget tha t has to do with this inner loop ?

In other words, I think you have something here that, in my 

humble opinion I would like to have the members of this subcommittee sit down for a few hours with you and go through this thing 

thoroughly.

Mr. Robertson. I would like to do so.

Senator Pastore. In other words, this briefing that you are giving 

us now, because it is tied in here with these budget hearings where 

our time is pretty well allocated, and because, frankly, projects of 

this kind in order to be understood, have to be gone into thoroughly, 

and I do not think this is a sufficient enough briefing, therefore, I 

would hope, Mr. Robertson, that at some time in the not too distant 

future we could have another briefing on this so as to get into it more 

thoroughly so the people in the community will understand it a great 

deal better. I would suppose the District Committee would be doing 

this anyway, as far as that is concerned ?

Mr. Robertson. I will be glad to come at any time.

Senator Pastore. W ell, we would be very much interested, because, 

of course, in the long run, this is going to involve a tremendous amount 

of appropriations on the part of the Congress.

Mr. Robertson. Well, just name the day, and I will be glad to come 

up and go into the details very thoroughly.

Senator Pastore. You said this involves $272 million, and I was 

glad to hear you say that you planned it so tha t any p articular part 

of it could stand on its own feet until it was tied in with the other 

parts?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir; that is right.

PRESE NT AUTHO RIZATION S

Now, I will just take a few’ more minutes, if it is agreeable with you, 

Mr. Chairman, on these other two overlays. We are planning as 

shown on this next ma p: the dotted line is the engineering, the solid 

line is the construction, and the right-of-way is the dashed line.

The projects shown in red are actually under obligation. This 

amounts to about $27 million, for work tha t we are actually doing 

right now, and all of it has actually been authorized by the Congress.

Porter Street has been deleted from this program.

Senator P astore. Is Porter Street p art of the interchange, the inner'' 

loop?

Mr. Robertson. No, sir: it is not. It is in the secondary system of 

the Federal highways. This is what we have proposed for fiscal 1959.

Senator Pastore. Do you have any further questions ?

Senator Beall. No.

LOAN AUTHO RIZATION FOR HI GH WAY FUND

Senator Pastore. The bill authorizes a Treasury loan of $5,500,000 

for the highway fund. Why is tha t necessary since i t appears from 

the records submitted that around $20 million has already been authorized in prior-year appropriation acts, but yet no funds have been 

requisitioned from the Treasury pursuant to such authority?

Mr. Robertson. Off the record, I am Scotch, and I do not want to 

borrow anything until I have to.

Senator P astore. We want that on the record.
70 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Robertson. Hi ghwa ys are bein g pla nn ed all ove r the Un ite d 

State s inc lud ing the city of Wash ing ton , and we were sure th at it 

would tak e at least 21 to 24 m onths to get i nto h igh ge ar on construc ­

tio n of this type. Th is is due to the fac t th at complex planning , engin eer ing , and lan d acquisition , and oth er thing s, especia lly here in 

the Di str ict of Columbia are taki ng lon ger th an con tem plated. We 

hav e appro xim ate ly 8 o r 10, or maybe even more com mittees and or ­

ganiz ations to ap pe ar before to get appro val, includ ing the Pl an ning 

Comm ission, et cetera. You know how lon g it took us to get the 

Co nstitu tion Avenue Bridg e. After 8 years, we hav e ju st received 

approv al for constru ctio n.

Now, in view of all the plan ning and engin eerin g we have to do, 

it has tak en us th at le ngth of tim e to get st arted .

Now, w ith resp ect to th e $20 million. Th at has been autho rized th us 

fa r un de r an autho riz ati on fro m the Congres s to borrow $50 million 

under the Pu blic Work s Act. We have the au th or ity to bor row the 

$20 million, a nd as of t he end of th is fiscal year we will have obligated 

abou t $11 million, and T believe th at before this ye ar is out we will 

have und er obliga tion an addit ion al $10 million of the loan.

The reason, Mr. C hairm an, is that these lo ans a re revenue to us, and 

when we st ar t a proj ect th at may cost $12 million , we ha ve to obligate 

the e nti re con tract, so th at the revenue, or loan au thor ity , is necessary 

befo re you can even requ est the ap prop ria tio n. Wh en we come up 

here, we have to tell you where we are going to get the mon ey to finance 

the projects.

Se na tor P astore. W ha t will happen if we did knock out the 

$5,500,000?

Mr. R obertson. Tha t wou ld slow down my prog ram so much th at 

T would come to a co mplete ha lt, this coming year.

Se nator P astore. We ll, you hav e $20 million availab le.

NE ED FOR FI NDS

Mr. R obertson. Yes, sir: but over ha lf of it is obligated, and the 

jobs I am talk ing abo ut—f or instance, the South we st Freew ay, is 

going to cost $30 million. Th e bridg e going across at Const itution 

Avenue is $24,500,000. Now the minute I star t th at job, any portion 

of it, any section of it t h at I pla n, I have to obl iga te the money for 

th at section.

Now T may this year only be able to get in my foo tings but T will 

hav e to obligate funds fo r the proje ct as sub mitted to the Burea u of 

Pu blic Roads.

Se na tor P astore. Are you going to submit these pro jec ts for the 

record ? Are you g oin g t o spell them o ut ?

Mr. Robertson. They were spelled out in the House version.

Senator P astore. We ll, I see: they are in the Hou se version, yes.

Mr. Robertson. Yes, sir. So that we will need this borrowing 

power, and I will not bor row it if we do not need it, but we expect, 

now th at all our pla ns a re up to a cer tain po int, th at we are r ead y to 

go ahead.

We were a lit tle optim istic in the othe r 2 years, and pro bab ly 

it was my fault. The eng ineers were not as op tim ist ic as I was, bu t 

T hope we will soon get sta rte d. Due to the fac t th at Congres s w ants
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 71

us to get started because of the unemployment, we are putting on 

more pressure to get these jobs under contract.

As 1 said previously, all of these jobs in the emergency program 

are in addition to what we had planned, and we are going to have all 

of that emergency work under contract before October 1.

Senator Pastore. Do you expect to have all of this money committed by the end of the fiscal year?

Mr. Robertson. We expect to have it obligated, but actually the 

work will not be done.

Senator P astore. I realize that. It will be obligated.

Mr. R<)bertson. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Your argument is that if you take it out now it 

will put you in a position of not being able to obligate it and will 

postpone these jobs?

Mr. Robertson. Yes. If Senator Bible’s committee gives us the 

Highway Bridge, the Constitution Avenue Bridge, the Southwest 

Freeway, the Anacostia Freeway—all of those jobs are big jobs and 

you cannot break them down into contracts which are small.

Unless we get this $5i£ million this year we are going to be short 

of funds. AVe are not going to be able to carry on this program as 

Congress wants us to. This is going to be one of the biggest years— 

in fact, it is going to be the biggest year we have ever had in the 

Highway Department in the District of Columbia, and next year it 

will be even bigger.

Senator Beall. AY here will you get this $5,500,000 tha t you are 

talking about ?

Mr. Robertson. AYe will get tha t from the Treasury, sir. I tried 

to get it without interest, but I have to pay the going rate of interest, 

so therefore I do not want to borrow it until I have to.

We finance all of these jobs ourselves and then the Bureau reinburses us for the appropriate Federal share.

RE VE NU E FROM GA S TAX

Senator Beall. What revenue do you get from the gas tax?

Mr. Robertson. AVe get 6 cents.

Senator Beall. I realize that, but what is the total ?

Mr. Robertson. About $11 million a year in gas tax.

Senator Beall. And that is all retained in the Highway Dep artment ?

Mr. Robertson. It is not all retained in the Highway Department : 

no, sir.

Senator Beall. It is not ?

Mr. Robertson. It is not diverted, but we pay about $2 million for 

the traffic police and we pay for other expenses, which we believe is 

correct, but, even Mr. Lowe is nodding his agreement with my 

thoughts that some of this money should come back into the Highway 

Department.

There is about $4 million from the highway revenue tha t goes for 

other expenditures.

Senator Beall. Then you have only $7 million for actually highways ?

Mr. Robertson. Yes, I think it is $7 million from gasoline tax. And 

that is the reason we need the money.
72 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Senator Pastore. Are there any other questions of Mr. Robertson ?

Amendments Requested, Department of Highw ays

Operating expenses

Appropriation, 1958_________________________________________ $7, 207, 000

Estim ate, 1959 _____________________________________________ 7, 582, 000

House allowance, 1959 (reduction of $98,000)----------------------------- 7,484,000

A M ENDM EN TS RE QU ES TE D

(1) Page 18, line 7, after “services” insert “, including expenses of attendan ce 

of one person, without loss of pay or time, at specialized traffic engineering 

classes, including tuition and entrance fees

(2) Page 18, line 15, after “appropriation” ins ert Provided further, That 

the Commissioners are authorized and empowered to pay the purchase price 

and the cost of installa tion of new parking meters or devices from fees collected 

from such new meters or devices, which fees are hereby appropriated for such 

purposes.”

(3) Page 18, line 11, strike out “$7,484,000” and insert in lieu thereof “$7,907,- 

000”, or an increase of $423,000 in the appropriation.

(4) Page 18, line 11, strike out “$4,670,623” and insert in lieu thereof $“5,093,- 

623”, or an increase of $423,000 in the limitation.

Ap plicatio n of House redu ctio ns

E sti m ate cl as sific ation

Per so nal ser vi ce s......... ............................................

T ra v e l......... -............. - ..............................................

T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f tilin gs.......... .............................

C om m unic ati on s er vic es ,....................................-

R en ts an d u ti li ty s er vic es ........................ . .........

P ri n ti n g a n d re p ro d u cti o n ....................... . .........

O th er co ntr actu al se rv ic es --------- -----------------

Se rv ices pe rfor m ed b y o th er ag en cies -----

S uppl ie s an d m ate ri als __________ _____ ____

E q u ip m e n t....................................... .........................

G ra n ts , su bs id ie s, an d co n tr ib u ti o n s...... .........

R ef unds, aw ar ds an d in d e m n it ie s.. ............... .

T o ta l es ti m at e or a p p ro p ria ti o n .. ..........

E st im at e

1958

E sti m ate

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

by H ou se

$3,0 97,4 72 $3,1 74,4 35 $3,141 ,282

4,026 4,026 4,026

1,000 1,000 1,000

190,786 190, 786 190,786

1,890,885 1,964,478 1,954,003

15,350 15,350 15,350

865,106 965,1 06 965,106

92,231 92,231 92, 231

493,6 46 543,646 493,646

353,885 431,329 426,957

199,185 199,185 199,185

428 428 428

• 7,20 4,00 0 7, 582,000 7,484,00 0

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ec rease 

( - ) , bil l 

co m pa re d 

w it h 

es ti m at e

A m ount 

of r es to ­

ra ti on 

re qu es te d 

in Sen at e

—$33,153 $126,265 

535

-1 0,4 75 800 

2,00 0 

185,850 

20,1 00 

24,5 00 

54, 700 

8,250

-5 0,0 00

-4 ,3 7 2

-9 8,0 00 423,000

> In cl udes $157,000 t ra ns fe rr ed from “ Per so nal se rv ices, wage-s cale e m pl oye es .” Doe s n o t in cl ude $3,000 

co m par at iv e tran sf er to o th er ac co un ts .

Recapit ula tio n ifby activities)

E sti m ate c la ss ificat io n E sti m ate

1958

E sti m ate

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or decrea se 

( - ) , bi ll 

co m pa re d 

w it h 

es ti m at e

A m ount 

of r es to ­

ra ti on 

re ques te d 

in Sen at e

$265,172 

98,624 

462,333 

3,10 4,151

1,48 8,02 6 

436,930 

1,188,891 

159,873

$276,052 

109,226 

494,333 

3,234,151 

1,638,026 

436,930 

1,233,409 

159,873

$270,612 

105,556 

494,333 

3,203, 747 

1,588,0 26 

436,930 

1,224,923 

159,873

—$5,440 

2. P la nnin g, de si gn a n d en gin ee ri ng________ -3 ,6 7 0

4. E le ct ri ca l______ . . . . . ___ ______ ..

5. C onst ru ct io n an d m ain te nan ce of s tr e e ts ..

6. C onst ru ct io n an d m ain te nan ce o f b ridg es .

7. M ob ile equip m ent . . ..............

-3 0,4 04 

-.5 0,00 0

-8 ,4 8 6

8. M at er ia ls ’d ev elo pm en t an d sta n d a rd s___

$423,000

T o ta l es ti m at e or a p p ro p ri ati o n ............. i 7,204,000 7,58 2,0 00 7,484,00 0 -9 8,0 00 423,000

1

 In cl ud es $157,000 tr an sf er re d fro m “ Per so na l se rv ices, wage-s cale em pl oyee s. ” Doe s n o t in cl ud e $3,000 

co m par at iv e tran sf er to o th er ac co un ts .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 73

JU STIFIC AT IO N

This increase requested is as follows :

Traffic engineering__________________________________________ $423,000

This action is necessary in order to accomplish the purpose of Commissioners’ 

Order No. 58-919, dated June 10, 1958, which transferred the “Traffic engineering” function of the former Department of Vehicles and Traffic to the Department of Highways. No overall increase is involved inasmuch as this action will 

merely transfer the necessary operating funds of this function to the Department of Highways from the appropriation provided for the Department of Vehicles and Traffic.

TRA NSFER OF ACTIVITY

Air. Robertson. The Commissioners last week transferred “Traffic 

engineering” to the Highway Department. It came over as it was 

constituted from “ Vehicles and Traffic.” We are asking for transfer 

of the funds to operate “Traffic engineering.” There will be no additional cost. It is all coming out of the Highway funds and will be 

transferred from the Department of Vehicles and Traffic budget to 

the Highway budget. Some language is needed that pertains to the 

maintenance of platforms and parking meters. Those two items are 

by order of the Commissoners and documents have been prepared to 

spell out the change because tha t is the way I was told the committee 

would like to have it.

Senator Pasture. This is the first time it has come up?

Mr. Robertson. Aes. The change was made after the time that 

we were appearing before the House. I am sure the House knows 

about it, because Colonel Welling went over to see the chairman of 

the appropriations subcommittee.

Senator Pastore. Is there anything further on this item?

Mr. F owler. Tha t is all we have at this time.

Mr. Robertson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

SANITARY SEWAGE LOAN AUT HOR IZATION

Senator Pastore. Mr. Auld, it is noted that $4.3 million of tha t 

$5 million in the Sanitary Sewage Treasury Loan Authority has already been obligated in prior years. However, to date, none of the 

appropriated funds have been requisitioned from the Treasurer.

It further appears that estimated 1959 revenue collected on this 

fund are $4,416,000, which will more than offset the $4.3 million estimated obligations. What do you intend to do with this $4.3 million, 

this sum which is to be drawn from the Treasury but as yet has been 

unrequisitioned ?

Mr. Auld. Mr. Chairman, we have either under contract or about 

to be placed under contract, the major projects for which these appropriations were made, and under which these loan authorizations 

were justified.

At the time the work is completed and the contract obligations liquidated, we will need the cash to pay our contractor.

Just as Mr. Robertson said, we do not draw money from the Treasury under these loans until it is absolutely necessary, because at that 

time we begin to pay interest. So we defer borrowing as long as 

possible, in order to keep the entire sewage works fund in balance.
74 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

SU RPLU S IN SE W ER WORK S FUN D

I have a statem en t he re wh ich I have re ad an d ha ve modified, an d 

wh ich show s the ch an ge s mad e by th e Ho use, an d wh ich sho ws th at 

in clud in g th e ap pr opr ia tions as now st an din g in th e 1959 b ud ge t th e 

sew age wo rks fu nd wi ll ha ve a n ap pare nt su rp lu s of $1,555,000 at th e 

en d of 1959. T hat arise s no t th ro ugh th e lack of ne ed ing th e $4,- 

300,000 bu t simply becaus e in 1959, we have no t bu dg eted to th e fu ll 

ex tent of ou r ex pe cte d inco me. W e could forego in au th or iz at io n, 

say $1 million of th at $4.3 million, an d ex pe rie nc e no risk to ou r 

pr og ram .

If you wis h, I could sa y w ith in sa fe lim its , $1 million wo uld keep 

ou r fu nd all ri ght. I hope th at with an y such ac tio n it wi ll be w it hou t pr ejud ic e to a re au th or iz at io n of a lik e am ou nt when ou r bu dg et 

jus tifies it.

Se na to r P astore. Are ther e an y qu estio ns ?

Sen ator B eall. No qu estion s.

Mr. L owe. Do you w an t me to pro ceed, Mr. Cha irm an , on th e De ­

par tm en t of Ge ne ral A dm in is trat io n ?

Se na to r P astore. Yes.

Depa rtm ent of General Adm inistr ation

STATEMENT OF SCHUYLER LOWE, DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT

OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION. ACCOMPANIED BY MR. KENNETH BACK. FINANCE OFFICER

Budget E stima te and House Allow ance

am endm ent requested

Operating expenses

Appropriatio n. 1958___________________________________________ $4, 540, 000

Estim ate , 1959________________________________________________ 4,740,500

House allowance. 1959 (re ducti on of .$40,500)_____________________ 4, 700, 000

AM EN DM EN T requested

Pag e 4, line 24. strike ou t “$4,700,000” a nd inse rt in lieu the reo f “$4,740,500,” 

or an increa se of $10,500 in the appropria tio n.

Application of House reductions

Stan da rd classification

Es tim ate

1958

Es tim ate

1959

Amou nt

rec om ­

me nded

by House

Perso nal services________ __________

T rav e l. ........................................................

Tr an sp or tatio n of th in gs.........................

Co mm unica tio n ser vic es....... ..............

Re nts an d utility se rvi ces............ ..........

Pr intin g and repr od uc tio n....... . ............

Other co ntractua l ser vic es......................

Services perform ed by ot he r age ndas...... .......................................

Sup plies an d ma teria ls.............................

E qu ip m en t......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........

Grants, subsidie s, and co nt ribut io ns. .. 

Pensions , annu ities, an d ins ura nce

cl aims............................... .....................

Refun ds, aw ard s, an d inde mnitie s.......

To tal estim ate or ap prop ria tio n.

$3,222.074 

14,835 

300 

45,821 

70,854 

97,905 

250,085

6,850 

60,671 

30,268 

206.937

392.070 

250,000

$3,337,334 , 

14,835 

300 

45,821 

133,914 

98,605 

250.180

6,850 

63.692 

38,175 

214,894

385.900

250.000

$3, 303,3.54 

14,835 

300 

45,821 

133,914 

97,905 

250,180 |

6,850 

62,502 | 

35,775 

212,664

385,900

250.000

’ 4,840.500 ’ 4.800,000

Increase (+ ) 

or decrease 

(—), bill compared w ith 

est im ate

Amou nt of 

resto rat ion 

request ed 

in Senate

-$3 3,980 +$33,980

-7 00 + 700

-1 ,1 90 

-2 ,4 00 

-2 ,2 30

+1,19 0 

+2, 400 

+2, 230

.........................

-40,50 0 : +40,500

' Inclu des $206,170 br ou gh t forw ard from 1957 an d does no t inc lud e $100,000 car ried forward to 1959. 

Inclu des $2,500 tra ns ferre d from “ Perso nal serv ices, wage-scale em ploy ees.”

’ Inc lude s $100,000 b roug ht forward from 1958.

I
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1 9 5 9 75

Recapitulation (by activities')

S ta n d ard clas sific ation

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

8.

A d m in is tr ati o n_______ _______ ____

A dm in is tr ati ve s er vi ce s.................. ..

B u d g et.......................................................

Fin an ce :

(а) A cc ounting................................

(б) Asses sing _____________ ____

(c) C ollec ting __________ ______

R ef undin g er ro ne ou s colle cti o n s .. .......... ...........................

(d) D is b u rs in g _________ ______

(e) Pro ce ss in g________ ________

In te rn al a u d it in g ....................................

M an ag em en t............. ......... ......... . .........

Per so nn el:

(а) O per at io ns_____ ___________

(б) E m pl oy ee s d is ab il it y co m ­

p e n s a ti o n ...........................

(c) U n em plo ym ent co m pen sa ­

ti o n ...........................................

(d) W ork m en’s co m pe ns at io n,

ad m in is tr ati v e e x p en se s...

P ro cu re m en t......... ...................................

T o ta l e st im at e or a p p ro p ri ati o n ..

E sti m ate

1958

E sti m ate

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m en de d

b y H ou se

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ec re as e 

(—), b ill com ­

par ed w it h 

est im ate

A m o u n t of 

re st ora tion 

re ques te d 

in Sen at e

$37,500 $37,500 $37,500

142,880 204,305 204,305

99,180 130,910 130,910

446,6 80 475,887 475,887

1,51 1,90 9 1,49 2,98 3 1, 492,983

425, 912 456, 771 456, 771

250,000 250,0 00 250,000

71, 776 74, 926 74,926

421, 633 435.893 435,893

133,997 135,827 135,827

79,400 104,090 79,390 —$24, 700 +$ 24 , 700

218, 545 238,320 222.520 -1 5,8 00 +1 5, 80 0

236,170 230,000 230,000

155,900 155,900 155,900

209.600 209,6 00 209,600

207,588 207,588 207,588

| > 4, 648,670 2

 4 ,840,5 00 ’ 4,800 ,00 0 -4 0,5 00 +4 0,50 0

1

 In cl ud es $206,170 b ro ught fo rw ar d from 1957 an d do es n ot in cl ud e $100,000 ca rrie d fo rw ar d to 1959. In ­

cl ud es $2,500 tr ansf er re d f ro m “ Per so na l se rv ices, wag e-scale em pl oy ee s. ”

2

 In cl udes $100,000 bro u g h t fo rw ar d fro m 1958.

HOUSE REPORT

The committee recommends an appropriation of $4,700,000 for this Department. This is a reduction of $40,500 in the estim ates hut an increase of $100,000 

above the 1958 appropriation and an actual increase of $195,000 since the Departme nt voluntarily reduced the estim ated cost of the reassessm ent program 

in fiscal 1959 by $35,000. Budget increases approved by the committee are as

follows :

Reallocations___________________________________________________ .$18, 725

Mail service__________________________________________________ ’ S00

Budgetary analysis and control________________________________ 31, 730

Financial management___________________________ 79, 979

Classification and wage adm inistratio n___________________________ 3, 987

Rental of office space__________________________________________ 58, 500

In fiscal year 1950 the committee direc ted that a real property reassessment 

program lie institu ted after receiving testim ony th at some prop erties in the 

District had not been reassessed for over 20 years. During the hearings this 

year the committee received a progress report. The field program is expected 

to he completed by June 30 and in the coming fiscal year the Assessor’s Office 

will hold informal and formal hearings on proposed assessments. The new 

assessment on all real property in the District of Columbia will be placed into 

effect on July 1, 1959, and the Dis trict exjiects a net increase in revenue from 

this source of taxation amounting to approxim ately $2 million per year. The 

tota l cost of the program through fiscal y ear 1959 will be $786,809, and the entire 

temporary staff used in the program will be off the rolls by the end of the coming 

fiscal year.

JU ST IFICAT IO N

The increases requested are as follo ws:

(а) Management-----------------------------------------------------------------------$24,700

(б) Personnel_________________________________________________ 15,800

Total increase requested _______________________________ 49 599
76 DISTRIC T OF COLUMBIA APPROP RIATION’S, 19 5 9

(a) Management, $24,100

This amount is requested for two research sta tistic ian s and a resea rch librarian, with minor related costs, to strengthen the District’s long-range program planning.

The Commissioners are giving ever-increasing atte ntion to long-range plan ­

ning and the broader, more systematic approach to Distric t and areawide problems. The public works program, urba n renewal, and hospital survey a re examples of stric tly Distric t problems. The tran spo rtation survey, Route 240, Potomac bridges, river pollution, and water supply are examples of more farreaching problems. Whether the problems be strictly Distric t o r areawide, their 

solutions depend upon careful, extensive research. Such resea rch, in turn, 

must be based upon adeq uate fac tual data that have been compiled from many 

sources.

At present there is no machinery to correlate and pull together all of the inform ation and the data th at originate in the various sta tistical programs 

throughout the District. Although the information collected individually by 

the various departm ents serves its special purpose very well, in most cases such 

information is not sufficiently correlated to p ermit its most effective use in overall long-range planning, in total budgeting, and in developing comprehensive 

allied studies.

The chief concern of the research statisticia ns would be the coordination of 

existing Distric t government sta tistic al programs to insure that such programs 

are adeq uate for overall planning purposes. The staff also would focus attention on the regional picture by bringing together area statistics. The results of 

the staff’s work would be to make more effective the District’s long-range 

planning by devoting its full atten tion to statistical matters.

In addition to the work of the research statisticians in correlating municipal 

and regional stat istical program s, there is an allied activity of obtaining useful 

information available from other municipalities and from publications, consulting firms, and others. Although the Dis trict and Federal libr aries give excellent assistance, they cannot make the necessary analyses of the information obtain ed and pinpoint it to the par ticula r need of the District. The proposed research libr arian would fill this important need. In addition, the work of the 

librarian would supplement the work of the professional statistician s by providing for the systematic accumulation of information on the characteristics 

and experiences of other m unicipalities.

Application of funds.—The major pa rt of the requested increase to strengthen 

llie District’s program planning will be used in the creation of thre e positions 

(one GS-14 resea rch statistician at $10,320. another at GS-11 at $6,390, and 

one GS-9 research librarian at $5,440) and the remainder for retirement, insurance, and other related costs. The relation of the positions requested to the 

available positions is as follows:

Type of position Num ber

requested

Num ber

available

Research statistician_______ ______ _____- .......................... 2 0

Research libra rian................ ...................... ................................. 1 0

Financial analysis

Object

Personal services---------------------------------------

Printing and reproduction----------------------------

Equipment-------------------- ----------------------------

Gran ts, subsidies, and contributions---------------

Ac tivity 6,

management

_______________ $22,1 50

__________ZZZZ 1,000

(6 ) Personnel, $15,800

(1) Employee recognition program.—The District government is required, by 

the Government Employees’ Incentive Awards Act (title II I, Public Law 763, 

83d Cong.), to maintain an incentive awards program th at complies with the 

provisions of the act and supplemental United States Civil Service Commission 

regulations. While the Personnel Office has been given responsibility for administratio n of this program in the Distric t government, no additional personnel
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 19 5 9 77

ha s bee n prov ided . The Per so nn el Office is no t able to ab so rb th is ad dit io nal 

fu nc tion w ith it s pr es en t st af f w ithout se riou s ne glec t of ot her st af f work, p ri n ­

cipa lly th e wor k of pr oc ed ur e w riting . An or ga niz at io n of th e size of th e D istr ic t go ve rnmen t re qu ires fo rm al pe rs on ne l pro cedure s; th er ef ore , th e Per so nn el 

Office m us t develop th es e pr oc ed ur es an d ke ep them curr en t. At th e on set, it 

w as t ho ugh t th a t th e resp on sibi lity for ad m in is te ri ng th e Gov er nm en t Empl oy ee s’ 

In ce nt ive A w ar ds Act wo uld be a par t- ti m e duty th a t co uld be ab so rb ed by th e 

Pe rs on ne l Office. The ince ntive aw ard s fu nc tion ha s, ho wev er, de velop ed to 

th e po int w he re t he Pe rs on ne l Office now pr ov id es th e fu ll-tim e as si st ance of th e 

GS-11 em plo yee wh ose po sitio n w as in itia lly au th ori ze d fo r pro ce du re -w riting 

pu rpos es. The Per so nn el Office ca n no long er afford to per m it th e pe rs on ne l 

pr oc ed ur es fu nc tion to be ne gle cte d, an d mus t, th er ef or e, curt ail it s p art ic ip atio n in th e in ce nt iv e aw ar ds pr og ra m un less a po sitio n is ob tain ed to effecti ve ly 

ad m in is te r th is p ro gr am .

Be nefits rece ived by th e D is tr ic t to date de fin ite ly ju sti fy ha vi ng a pe rm an en t 

po sitio n to ad m in is te r th e ince nt ive aw ard s pr og ra m . D uring th e firs t 10 mon th s 

of fisc al yea r 1958, a to ta l of 92 ca sh aw ard s were gra nte d in a to ta l am oun t 

of $11,330. Of th is tot al , $2,435 was pa id f or 44 su gg estio ns , $7,945 fo r 45 ca ses of 

su st ai ne d su pe ri or p er fo rm an ce , an d $950 fo r 3 spec ial ac ts an d service s. A ctua l 

first-ye ar do llar sa vi ng s of $70,224 were re al ized from 10 of th e su gg es tio ns in 

re tu rn fo r an in ve stm en t of on ly $1,635 in aw ar ds . A su bst anti al pr op ortio n of 

th es e first-ye ar sa vi ng s will co ntin ue to be re al ized in su bs eq ue nt yea rs at no 

add itio na l cost. A to ta l of $9,095 w as pa id in aw ar ds fo r th e re m ai ni ng 76 contrib ut io ns , which ca rr ie d inta ng ib le be ne fits fu lly as sign ifi ca nt as th os e carr yin g 

tang ib le sa vi ng s bu t no t so ea sily mea su re d. The se be nefits wer e re al ized in 

te rm s such as bett er se rv ice to th e publi c, in cr ea se d efficiency in op er at io ns , 

el im in at io n of un ne ce ss ar y work, simpl ifi ca tio n of pr oc ed ur es , and im prov ed 

em plo yee morale . Of th e $9,095 pa id fo r in ta ngi ble benefits, $800 w as fo r 28 

sugg estio ns , $7,945 fo r 45 ca se s of su st ai ne d su pe ri or pe rfor man ce , an d $950 fo r 

3 sp ec ial a ct s an d service s.

(2) In se rv ic e trai ni ng prog ram.— At th e pr es en t tim e th er e is on ly a one-m an 

tr ain in g st af f in th e Pe rs on ne l Office to do es se nt ia l staf f wo rk, pr om ot e d is tr ic twi de tr ain in g pr og ra m s cove rin g ap pro xim at el y 22,500 emplo yees, an d pr ov id e 

tr ain in g as si st an ce to all ope ra ting dep ar tm en ts of th e D is tr ic t. T his is a fu nc ­

tio n which ca nn ot pr op er ly be pe rfor m ed by an y ot her or ga ni za tion w ithi n th e 

D is tr ic t go ve rn m en t. To da te , st af f sh ort ag es ha ve lim ite d the ef fo rts of th is 

pr og ra m to att em p t to sa ti sf y th e de m an ds mad e upon it by th e D is tr ic t’s opera ting de par tm en ts fo r tr ain in g as sistan ce . In th e pas t, th e Per so nn el Office ha s 

been ab le to pr ov ide th e pl an ni ng a nd di re ct io n fo r su pe rv isor y pla nn in g pro gr am s 

in the Office o ftl ie Rec or de r of Deeds , th e D ep ar tm en t of Build ings an d Groun ds, 

th e Pr oc es sing Divisi on of th e Fin an ce Office, an d th e B ure au of Pub lic H ea lth 

Nur sing . Also , th e Per so nn el Office h as been a bl e to pr ov id e fo r a lim ited n um be r 

of em plo yees from va riou s D is tr ic t dep ar tm en ts to ob ta in tr ain in g in ex ec ut iv e 

deve lopm en t, co nferen ce lead er sh ip , co rres po nd en ce (m ai l an d fo rm s) m an ag eme nt, bu sine ss mac hine s, an d pr of es sion al en gi ne er ing rev iew . W ithout ex ce ptio n, the tr ain in g pr og ra m s which th e Pe rs on ne l Office has bee n ab le to pr ov id e 

fo r ha ve re su lted in in cr ea se d job pro ficien cy. W ith its lim ite d staf f, ho wev er, 

th e Pe rs on ne l Office is fin din g it vir tu all y im po ssi ble to prov ide, when needed, th e 

plan ning , di re ctio n, an d co or di na tio n ne ce ss ar y to mee t fu lly th e ne ed s fo r addition al tr ain in g ac tivi ties in th e D is tr ic t. An ass is ta nt tr ain in g offic er wo uld 

en ab le th e Per so nn el Office to sa tisf y more ad eq ua te ly th e re quirem en ts of th e 

dep ar tm en ts fo r man y ad ditio nal su pe rv isor y tr ain in g co urses, to undert ake th e 

pl an ni ng fo r mor e ex tens iv e ex ec ut ive de ve lopm en t pr og ra m s, to develop mu chneeded ori en ta tion pr og ra m s fo r new em plo yees, to pr ov ide re fr esh er tr ain in g 

co urse s in specific pr of es sion al ar ea s, an d to un co ve r an d pr om ote tr ain in g in 

thos e specific job are as in wh ich it is fe lt th a t appro pri ate tr ain in g co ur se s will 

in cr ea se job pro fic ien cy an d pr od uc tive pe rfor m an ce . Exa m pl es of som e spe cific 

co urse s which are pr es en tly pl an ne d in cl ude : su pe rv isor y tr ain in g fo r sewag e 

pla nt su pe rv is ors ; su pe rv isor y tr ain in g fo r fo remen in th e R ep ai r an d Im pr ov emen ts Di visio n. D ep ar tm en t of Bui ld in gs an d G ro un ds ; co urse of tr ain in g in 

ca se reco rd ing in th e D ep ar tm en t of Voc ationa l R ehabil it ation: ex ec ut iv e de ­

ve lopm en t tr ain in g fo r key dep ar tm en t adm in is tr ati ve an d op er at in g officia ls

We are th er ef ore re qu es tin g th e se rv ices of one ad ditio nal em plo yee, an d 

ass is ta nt tr ain in g officer. Thi s em plo yee wo uld ass is t th e tr ain in g officer in 

id en tify in g tr ain in g needs, plan ning , co or di na ting an d de ve loping tr ain in g pro ­

gr am s. an d in de te rm in in g th e mos t e ffe cti ve m etho ds a nd te ch ni qu es to be used in
78 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

each program. lie would assist also in instructor training, the obtaining and distribution of training lite rature and materials, the main tenance of necessary 

records and tiles, and in the critical evalu ation of training results.

Application of funds.—This increase will be used to estab lish 1 GS-11 staff assistan t at $6,390 (employee recognition program) and 1 GS-9 assistan t training 

officer at $5,440 (inservice training program), and provide for retirement and 

other related expenses. The relation of the positions requested to the available 

positions is as fo llow s:

Typ e of position Num ber

requested

Num ber

available

Total

Staff assista nt... _ .................... -.............................................. 1 0 1

Training officer (assstant)...... ..................................................... 1 1 2

Financial analysis

Activity 7,

Object personnel

Personal services_______________________________________________ $11,830

Printing and reproduction_______________________________________ 600

Supplies and ma terials_________________________________________ 1,190

Equipment------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1, 400

Gran ts, subsidies, and contributions---------------------------------------------- 780

HO US E ACTION

Mr. F owler. Mr. Ch air ma n, tlie ap prop ria tio n for 1958 was 

$4,540,000. The es timate f or 1959 is $4,740,500. The H ous e allowance 

was $4,700,000, a red uction o f $40,500.

Th e amount requ ested—pa ge 4, line 24, strike out $4,700,000 and 

insert in lieu thereo f, $4,740,500. Th is is an increase of $40,500 in 

the approp ria tio n.

Mr. L owe. Mr. Ch airma n, we took a num ber of ra th er urgen t p roblems to the House Ap prop ria tio ns Com mittee and the y took care of 

most of them, which will he a grea t help to us. They did , however, 

eliminate $40,500 from our request, which rep res ented 5 urgentl y 

needed position s.

I will not go into the full details because th at is in the mimeograp he d justifi cation m ate ria l in fron t of you, but 3 o f the 5 positions 

eliminated , cos ting $24,700 for salarie s and rel ate d objects, are needed 

to imp rove our lon g-rang e pla nning .

NEED FOR LONG-RANGE PL AN NING

Senator Beall. W ha t pos itions did you say the y eliminated?

Mr. Lowe. They eliminated $40,500 from the do lla r portion of the 

request, which rep res ent ed 5 position s. Three of those 5 positions 

were conc erned with lon g-range p lann ing: 2 rese arch sta tistic ian s and 

1 research lib raria n. Those pa rti cu la r pos itions rep res ent $24,700 

of the total $40,500. W ha t we need those three pos itions for is to do 

a better job in research ing some of the ma ny problems th at are confro nt ing the District.

Senator P astore. I s this perso nnel that is to be added ?

Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir.

Senator P astore. How have you been doing it up to now ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 79

Mr. Lowe. We have not been doing it; that is just the point. We 

have made just a start at this time, with our existing facilities, but 

we need these three positions.

Senator Pastore. What kind of planning are we talking about here. 

PROGRAM PLAN NING AND ANA LYS IS

Mr. Lowe. Program planning and analysis, principally, Senator. 

Here is the type of thing that is involved: In an urban area such as 

we have here you pick up the papers and read every day about this 

problem or that problem, and that something needs to be done about 

it. At the present time we are not equipped to properly analyze the 

facts that apparently pertain to tha t problem, and to point up the 

conclusions in such a way that the Commissioners can make the best 

determination as to how to proceed to solve the problem. Sometimes 

there are very superficial indications that you should do this or that, 

which may cost you a great deal of money, when maybe a better analysis will show that you can do it for less, or maybe we get started too 

late on something and end up where we have to spend money on a 

catchup basis. We feel with these three positions we can do a job 

in continuing and improving the work we started to make in the report to the Congress on the State of the Nation’s Capital.

That, very briefly, is the type of thing that is involved in this request.

EMPL OYEES RECOGNITION PROGRAM

The fourth position out of the five positions is for a full-time employee, which will cost $7,826 for payroll and other objects, to carry 

out the employees’ suggestion program required by Public Law 763, 

83d Congress. We have never been given any additional positions to 

carry out this work. When the operation was first started, we were 

able to carry out the rather small amount of work involved on an 

extra-duty basis. However, just to give you an illustration as to what 

has happened, in the first year of the program we had only 83 suggestions submitted, which we were able to handle with our existing 

staff. In the second year, fiscal year 1957, we had 247 suggestions 

that were submitted. This year we are already beyond the 300 mark 

and will wind up somewhere between 300 and 400.

Senator P astore. Who submits these suggestions?

Mr. Lowe. These are employees’ suggestions. Also involved is recognition of employees for any unusually constructive work that they 

may have done. It is called the Government Employees Awards Act, 

which Congress made a mandatory program. They required the F ederal agencies and the District to carry out this program.

In order to comply with the law, year by year we have had to divert 

more and more of the time of our man who worked on personnel regulations over to this activity, where now he is no longer working on 

personnel regulations, so our regulations are suffering. We are asking for an additional position so that we can go back to where we were 

before on regulations and yet continue to comply with the requirement of Congress for the employee-recognition program.

27235— 51 6
80 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

TY PE OF AWARD

Se nator Beall. Are these awards given in the form of annual salary 

or are they a cash aw ard ?

Mr. Lowe. Both . Sometimes it is a lum p-sum amount. It may 

be only $10 or it may be $25 or sometim es it is several hu nd red dollars.

Se na tor P astore. H ow much money was aw ard ed th is pa st year?

Mr. Lowe. In the first 10 m onths of thi s ye ar we hav e paid out in 

aw ard s $2,435 for suggestion s which are estimated to hav e resulte d 

in $70,000 a year in savings. Th ere have been oth er aw ard s havin g 

wha t we call intangib le consideration s, where pe rhaps a pers on was 

give n a sup erior performance ra ting or an ou tst an ding performance 

rat ing.

Much of this work is done on an ex officio basis by the employees 

serving on the Aw ard s Com mittee, b ut we need a person to do the staff 

work. Somebody has to keep t rack of all of it and m onitor the system.

JU ST IF IC A T IO N FOR FULL RE STOR AT ION

Se na tor P astore. Of this total amo unt, the only amount cut is 

$40,500. Wh y do you need live addit ion al peop le? Wh y can you n ot 

minimize that? Wh y mu st you ask for the entire res tor ation?

It strike s me th at you are ge tting into an activ ity here th at has to 

be set up. I )o you have th e people alread y in m ind ?

Mr. L owe. We do not have a person.

Se na tor P astore. I s someone doing this job now?

Mr. Lowe. Yes; someone is doi ng the job, bu t anoth er job is not 

being done.

Se na tor P astore. We are always told th at same th in g every yea r, 

“the job is b eing done, but the person doi ng the job is n ot doing some 

oth er job .”

NEED FOR AD DITIO NA L PE RSO NNEL

Mr. L owe. Fr an kly, Senator . I dislike ha vin g to come up asking 

for $40,000 with an ap prop ria tio n of this size, bu t ou t of our fun ds 

th at we began this fiscal year with we will have less tha n $20,000 left 

over, to give you an idea of how close a b udget we a re worki ng u nde r. 

Th is ap prop riation gives us a gr ea t variety of work. We have to do 

tax assessing, and we have a budget office, a person nel office; and the 

acc oun ting , the au ditin g and the pro curement and other activities. 

Ou r money mu st be sprea d over a great ran ge of activities, bu t because of the imp ortanc e of these few categories of item s which the 

House did not choose to give us, we have presen ted it on the Senate 

side.

Se na tor P astore. Of course, you un derst and th at no m atter what 

we do in these m atters , we h ave to go to conference and it is t he questio nin g of ju sti fying a restorat ion th at the House ha s tak en out.

Mr. L owe. I u nders tan d.

Se nator P astore. An d it is a reflection, to some exten t, if you indis ­

criminately pu t these back wi tho ut some str on g justifi cation for it. 

It is a lways ha rd to t estif y in conferen ce on the basis th at the person 

doing th at job is no t doi ng some other job, because the C ongress—an d 

rig ht ly so, because the y are con sidering the taxp ay ers’ money—are
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 81

not impressed by the fac t th at the job is no t being done an d th at the 

pers on d oin g the job is not able to do some oth er job.

Mr. Lowe. 1 know exactly wh at you mean, because in my work on 

the distr ict budget we face the same th in g amo ng the othe r Distri ct 

agencies.

Se nator P astore. It is not easy.

DIVERT USE OF PERSON NEL ACTIV ITY FROM NORMAL FUNCTION

M r. L owe. No, it is not easy.

1 thin k, if you will look at the figures 1 ga ve you, as to the grad ua l 

progressiv e grow th o f this, you will see t hat in order to com ply with 

the law we hav e to dive rt a man fro m an othe r outfit w hich actua lly is 

a necessary act ivity.

Senator P astore. W ha t is the oth er ac tiv ity th at he is div erted 

from ?

Mr. Lowe. The mainte nan ce and pr ep aration of our centr al pe rsonnel regulation s.

You see, the Commissioners hav e to prom ulg ate reg ula tio ns and 

personnel policies f or the entire Distri ct gov ernment, and it h as been 

only in the pa st year th at this diversion has become so acute, bu t it 

will be even more acute in th e ne xt y ear; a nd today we a re d oin g almost 

nothing in th is field.

Senator P astore. My person al fee ling has been th at when I go to 

conferen ce on an ything th at we choose to restore, or th at we decide 

to restore, we should always have a good arg um en t to s ustain the item. 

It has to be a powe rfu l arg um ent, because the Hou se has alr eady 

cut it.

I daresay, offhand, th at the H ous e di d tre at you very, very well.

Mr. L owe. I am no t com pla ining abo ut the House.

NEED FOR STRONG JU ST IFIC AT IO N

Senator P astore. Out of thi s trem end ous budget of $215,153,500, 

the to tal amo unt cut by th e House was $11,877,000, and I wan t t o complim ent here aga in the Com missioners, because the y have not come 

up here and asked for us to pu t it a ll back; the y only ask fo r restor ation of $4,090,950. App aren tly the y have scrutiniz ed these figures 

quite well, and hav e come back wi th a res tor ati on which is even less 

than 50 pe rce nt of wh at was cut. I m ust say th at on an ov era ll budget 

which runs over $200 m illion the cut was not a lar ge one and appar ­

ently, it shows that the Hou se was v ery discrim ina tin g in wh at the y 

did cut and it shows a c ert ain am ount of str on g discri mi natio n on the 

pa rt of the Comm issioners in ask ing fo r th e r est ora tio n o f th is amount.

I would like to say th at if we went back to the Hou se on any one 

o f these figures, we shou ld be fortifi ed with a str on g arg um ent, and 

I daresay, and I must be h onest and fran k with you, sir, I do not seem 

to feel th at str en gth on this pa rti cu la r item of $40,500. I ju st do not 

seem to feel th at str ength .

Th is is no reflection on y ou: you have t he imm edia te tas k of deali ng 

with this from day to day, and I know what yo ur pro blem is, too.

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Ch airma n, before goi ng back to the actua l bu dget 

request and d iscu ssing t ha t, I would like to say as to the action on the 

pa rt of the House, I discussed th at with the chairm an, and I h ast ened
82 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

to tell him that 1 personally had not seen before any job as workmanlike and conscientious, concerning any appropriation action, as was 

taken on this appropriation on the part of the House.

Senator Pastore. 1 think the result indicates that.

Mr. Lowe. And that is despite the fact that 1 did feel it necessary, 

in relation to my own immediate work, to come before you and ask 

for this restoration. I do have these responsibilities to discharge.

Senator Pastore. Yes, I realize that. I have no criticism to make 

of you, and I compliment you for the fine work you have been doing 

as Director of this Department of General Administration and I 

merely wanted to say tha t in going to conference on these items, we 

like to feel that we are talking sense, and have something fortified 

with good strong reasoning.

Now, I do not feel that that is so on this partic ular item.

A SS IS TA N T TR A IN IN G OF FICE R

Mr. L( )we. The last and fifth item, to bring you up to the end of 

this, is for an assistant training officer. We do have one training 

officer in our personnel office, to assist the Federal Personnel Office 

and to assist the various District agencies and special agencies on 

special programs, to improve the training program of District employees; and we strongly feel the need for an assistant training officer.

Outside of the Police and Fire Departments, there are only two 

other training officer positions in the entire District of Columbia 

government, those being one each in the Departments of Public 

Welfare and the Recreation Department.

That concludes my presentation.

Senator P astore. Thank you very much, sir.

Office of the Corporation Counsel

STATEMENT OF CHESTER H. GRAY, CORPORATION COUNSEL;

ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. UNA RITA MORRIS, CH IEF , DOMESTIC

RELATIONS AND COLLECTIONS DIV ISION OF THE CORPORATION

COUNSEL'S OFFIC E

BUD GET ESTIM A TE AND H O U SE AC TIO N

Senator Pastore. All right, we will go to the next item.

Mr. F owler. The next item is the Office of the Corporation Counsel 

and Mr. Chester H. Gray of the Corporation Counsel is here. The 

appropriation for 1958 was $584,000 for his office and the estimate 

for 1959 is $693,000 and the House allowed $650,000, a reduction of 

$43,000.

The amendment requested is on page 6, line 3:

Strike out “$650,000” and insert in lieu thereof “$673,000”, an increase of $23,000 in the appropriation.

(The justification follows:)

Ope ra ting E x pe nse s

Appro priation, 1958---------------------------------------------------------------------$584,000

Es tim ate , 1050__________________________________________________ 993 999

Ho use allowance, 1959 (re ducti on of $43,000)_____________________ 650, 000
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 83

AMENDMENT REQUESTED

Page 6, line 3, strike out “$650,000” and insert in lieu thereof “$673,000”, or 

an increase of $23,000 in the appropriation.

Application of House reductions

St an da rd classification

Es tim at e

1958

Est im at e

1959

Amou nt

rec om ­

me nde d

by House

Increa se (+ ) 

or decrease 

(—), bill co mpared with 

estim ate

Amou nt of 

res toratio n 

requ ested 

in Sen ate

Perso nal s erv ices. ___ ____ .. . ___ $511,098 $604, 273 $570,313 —$33,960 +$19,170

Tra ve l....... ......... ........ ........................ 487 487 487

Co mm unica tio n serv ices .. 640 840 840

Pr in tin g and re pr od uc tio n.. 6,325 6.950 6,950

Other co ntractua l s er vi ce s... . .. ___ 8'438 15,633 1E004 -4 ,6 29 +643

Supplies a nd m aterials____ ________ 4,285 5,432 5,232 -2 00 +200

E quip m en t__ . 9,568 10,157 8,332 -1 ,8 25 +1,561

Grants, su bsidie s, and co ntrib utions . . 33,159 39'228 30 842 -2 ,3 86 +1 . 426

Refun ds, aw ards, a nd inde mnitie s____ 10,000 10,000 10,000

To ta l es tim ate or ap pr op ria tio n. 584,000 693,000 650,000 -43,00 0 +23,000

HO US E REPORT

“An appropriation of $650,000 is recommended for the legal office of the District government. The recommended amount is a reduction of $43,000 in the 

estim ates but an increase of $66,OCX) over the available funds in 1058. The committee suggests that the increase allowed be used to best advantage in the various divisions of th is recently reorganized Office.”

JUST IFICAT IO N

The in crease requested is as follow s:

Expansion of legal services, $23,000.—Of the increases requested for operational expenses, Office of the Corporation Counsel f or the fiscal ye ar ending June 

30. 1050, the House report on th e appropriations bill for the Distric t of Columbia 

indicates that the amount recommended is a $43,000 reduction in the estim ates 

submitted. The principal portion of the estim ated increases was for personal 

services to provide additional atto rneys and supporting clerical staff to handle 

a projected workload of some 1,500 mental health and miscellaneous hospital 

collection cases to be reac tivated by the Finance Office, Enforcement Unit. Approximately 200 of such cases per annum is the normal caseload. In addition 

to professional and stenographic personnel to handle these legal services, personnel expansions were requested to relieve backlog of other types of cases, including appeals. An ap propriation of $23,000 was requested for personal services 

and rela ted costs to provide professional and clerical staff necessary upon appointment of a second judge to the juvenile court.

Because the volume of collection cases to be forwarded from the Finance Office 

will be cumulative, it is believed that $20,000 of the amount of the reduction 

recommended by the House repo rt can be absorbed by delay in employing add itiona l lawyers for this purpose, althou gh it appears that the Finance Office ha s 

received full approval of i ts budget requests for additional investigative personnel to process the full number of cases anticipated. However, the House repo rt 

St ates : “The committee has allowed $75,000 for personnel and other costs for 

the second judge of the juvenile court. The legislation authorizing the additional judge is now in the conference stage b ut in the event the legislation is not 

enacted the funds recommended should be held in reserve and returned to the 

Treasury.” With two courts functioning, and considering the incre ased form ality 

of juvenile court proceedings in recent months, as well as added functions now 

man datorily imposed upon this office, 2 additional assistants, at least 1 of 

whom is experienced in trial work, are absolutely essential. Therefore, the 

amount of $23,000 is requested to he restored contingent upon the appointment 

of a second judge in juvenile court.

With the increased clerical and adm inistrative work of the Office of the Corporation Counsel at juvenile court, a GS-5 clerk-stenographer has been employed 

on a temp orary basis to aid the adm inistrativ e ass ista nt permanently assigned.
84 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

With the appointm ent of an additional judge and the necessary professional staff 

to assist the court, two additional permanent clerk-stenographer positions must 

be created to accomplish the work.

The following judic ial decisions and administrative changes at the court and 

in the Department of Public Welfare during the past y ear have doubled the work 

of the Office of the Corporation Counsel at juvenile co ur t: The Shioutakon decision requires assignment of counsel in juvenile cases where none was previously 

appointed, and the court’s practice is to assign counsel in all contested cases, both 

adult and juvenile, resulting in protracte d, legalistic, rather than informal, proceedings. (Exa mple: 3 juvenile jur y tria ls in 6 y ears (1945-51) vs. 14 juvenile 

jury demands during the first 3 months of 1958.) Detention hearing s and a controlled calendar have been initia ted, resulting in additional court hearings, requiring more extensive tri al pre para tion, reexamination of w itnesses to delays in 

tria ls, etc. The recent Kelly decision requires interviews of complainants in 

patern ity cases to he conducted by an Assistant Corporation Counsel. (Presently 

pending and scheduled interviews of complainants number 267, each requiring at 

least an hour.) Commissioners’ Order No. 57-1251, Jun e 28, 1957, has resulted 

in referral by the Department of Public Welfare of all public-assistance cases 

(averaging 65 per month) to this Office for legal action to assure reimbursement 

of assistance grants by court order. As of April 30, 1958, the current, pending 

matters assigned the juvenile court Office of the Corporation Counsel totaled 

1191, or an average of 595 cases per assistant. Formal motions and extensive 

memorandums of law, required by the court, have necessarily been forwarded to 

the main office fo r special assignment to another already overburdened assistan t 

in order to meet the time limitations imposed. (This other ass istant accrued 40 

hours of overtime during a 3-month period.)

In addition to the above, the Corporation Counsel was advised by the direc tor 

of social work of the juvenile court on June 11, 1958, that effective July 1, 1958, 

nons upport matters, previously screened and processed by the court’s intak e 

department, will be tran sferred to the Office of the Corporation Counsel for court 

action for certain additional processing and clerical work. Where the clerical 

personnel of the court has heretofore typed the legal pleadings drafted by this 

Office in such cases, the staff of the Corporation Counsel’s Office will now he 

required to type the papers, necessitating additional clerical assistance.

Application of funds.—It is planned to procure the services of the following 

position s:

1 GS-11 Assistant Corporation Counsel_____________________________ .$6, 390

1 GS-9 Assistant Corporation Counsel_____________________________ 5,440

2 GS-5 stenographers $3,670____________________________________ 7, 340

In addition, $3,830 will be utilized for related costs foi* the above positions.

Financial analysis

Ob jec t:

Personal services__________________________________________$19,170

Other contractual services__________________________________ 643

Supplies and ma terials_____________________________________ 200

Equipment________________________________________________ 1,561

Gran ts, subsidies and contributions__________________________ 1, 426

Total__________________________________________________ 23, 000

PROGRA M NE ED S

Se nator P astore. All righ t, Mr. Gray. You may proceed.

Mr. Gray. Mr. Ch airma n, in the origin al est imate for my Office, T 

based my requested increase upon inf orma tio n received from the 

Office of General Ad minist ratio n that the re would be a very drast ic 

increase in the efforts of the Fin anc e Office to collect delinqu ent hospital accounts. I was dire cted by the Commissioners to request an 

ap prop riation for addit ion al personnel to tak e care of the increased 

law busin ess res ult ing from those ste pped- up collection procedures. 

Tha t was the majo r item for which I resq uested an increased ap propr iated.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 85

Also, in antic ipa tio n of the enactment of the hill to pro vid e an 

ad dit ion al jud ge for the juv enile court, I requested $23,000 to provide 2 law yers and 2 stenographers to take care of the addit ion al 

jud ge in th e juvenile court.

At the pre sen t time , as you pro bably know, there is o nly one jud ge 

in the juv eni le court. The wor k of th at cou rt has increased materially. I have had to assign a law yer fro m one of the othe r activities 

in my Office t o augmen t the staff of one law yer at the juv eni le court. 

I have also had to employ an addit ion al ste nographer to tak e care 

of their increased workload. The legal rep res entat ion inc ide nt to 

several rece nt decisions of the co urt of app eals has doubled, if not 

trebled, the legal wo rk of my office.

HO USE ALLOWANC E

The House was very generous to me. It allow ed me an addition al 

amo unt of $66,000, but the Hou se also gran ted the requested increase 

of the finan ce officer for fund s with which to employ addit ion al 

personnel for this collection act ivity.

The House also gran ted the juv eni le court an addition al ap pr opr iatio n of $75,000 in this lan guage:

Tlie committee has allowed $75,000 for personnel and other costs for the 

second judge of the juvenile court. The legislation auth orizing the additional 

judge is now in the conference stage, but in the event the legislation is not 

enacted the fund s recommended should be held in reserve and return ed to the 

Treasury.

The House, un fortu na tel y, did not make a sim ilar ap prop ria tio n, 

on a conti ngent basis, for my Office, so I am in this situation:

If the addit ion al jud ge is provide d fo r the juvenile court, the n I 

shall immediately have to assig n not less t ha n 2 lawyers a nd 2 stenograph ers to tak e care of the wor kload which is alr ead y wa iting for 

th at ju dge.

BACKLOG OF CASES

There is hug e backlog of cases aw aitin g tria l in the juv enile court 

and the new jud ge, i f pro vid ed, will be faced with a real ly gr ea t task ; 

bu t necessa rily, my staff will have to prep are those cases for him.

Senator P astore. Yes. But why does it tak e 2 l awyers to pre pare 

cases for 1 judge.

Mr. Gray. Tha t is fo r this reason. The grea t major ity of the accum ulated cases are those arising un de r the Ch ild ren Born Ou t of 

Wedlock Act.

Un de r the terms of th at act, an As sis tan t Co rporati on Counsel is 

required to interv iew each comp lainant. No oth er means is possible 

under the v ery lan guage of the act, so th at with this req uir em ent one 

assista nt will have to be dev oting par t of his tim e to interv iew ing 

these com pla ina nts while the other one is up in court tryi ng the cases 

on trial, as to which he has alr eady interview ed the witnesses. In 

oth er words, you can not try these cases—and most of the m will be 

ju ry cases—w ith ou t a very caref ull y un derta ken interv iew of your 

witnesses.

NEED FOR INV ESTIGATIVE WORK

Se nator P astore. I realize th at. I realize th at , but I mean this 

process of inte rview ing the witnesses—and I have h ad some ex perience
86 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

in the courts, as I was a lawyer once myself, and was kept quite busy— 

but I do not see why you cannot have an investigator to do the investigative work which leads to the actual proceedings. I realize that 

a lawyer in a case has to talk with a witness after you have more or 

less refined the investigation to the point that you have the witness 

you want, because you may speak to 5 different people and only actually bring 2 to court.

Mr. Gray. That is correct.

Senator Pastore. Tha t does not have to be the work of a lawyer, 

but can be the work of an investigator. Now, it strikes me that when 

you can get to consolidate this court by having 2 judges instead of 1, 

certainly you do not have to have 2 new lawyers because at the present 

time you have 2 lawyers with the existing judge and it strikes me that 

maybe 3 lawyers, or 2 lawyers with a good investigator, could actually 

do that work, and do it well.

Now I am not trying to tell you how to do your business, because 

maybe I do not know too much abut the procedure there, and I am 

not saying it for that purpose, but rathe r, I am repeating what I 

said to the other gentleman, tha t when we go to conference here, that 

here we have an item raised by the House from an estimate of 

$584,000 to $650,000, and it strikes me with that increase, you have 

more or less consolidated the work, and I realize tha t it is a little 

more work, but you have received more money and the court has 

not been created yet. Tha t is another thing. i on do not have the 

second judge yet.

Somewhere along the line, of course, we will have to use discretion 

here, and I repeat again and I do not want to keep repeating it, because I know I am talking to very judicious and sensible people who 

have a practical sense as well as an academic one, but I do not want it 

to appear here that I know it all and they know nothing, because I 

hope I do not create that impression at all, but there is a constant 

review and rereview in order to justify these things when we go to 

conference. It strikes me tha t it would be p retty hard to stand up 

and say that we need two lawyers for a judge not yet appointed.

They would say: “Why do we not wait until he gets appointed and 

then come up some other time and when you actually need it you can 

do it? ”

RESTOR AT ION CO NT IN GEN T ON APP O IN TM ENT OF SEC OND JU DGE

Mr. Gray. I am asking for this restoration on a contingency basis, 

namely, under the same terms as the House suggested with respect to 

the funds appropriated for the additional judge and related other 

costs.

Senator P astore. “1 f the judge is appointed” ?

Mr. ( tray. Yes, sir. If the judge is not appointed, I shall get along 

without them, but if the act provides for that judge, and it is passed, 

from that moment on I shall need those two.

The reason I need those two is th is: that the present bill providing 

for that additional judge provides that the senior judge shall make 

the policy for the court.

Assuming that the present judge is made the chief judge of the 

court, he will undoubtedly follow his already-established policies 

which require the constant attendance in court of an Assistant Corporation Counsel. That means with all of this mass of interviews and
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959 87

pe nding cases—a nd I say “mass” adv isedly, my un de rstand ing is t hat 

the re are 199 of these “ born out o f w edlo ck” cases alone no w aw aitin g 

pre sen tation to the court (some of them are 5 months old, and some 

are set for p relim inary he ari ng as fa r in the futur e as N ovem ber), a nd 

267 inte rviews of comp lainan ts scheduled, each requ iri ng ap pr ox imately 1 hour. Ev ery one of these com pla ina nts will h ave to be i nte rviewed a second tim e due to the dela y in rea ching t rial , which means 

th at these two ass istants ha ve to div ide th ei r time, one of the m pu ttin g 

in ha lf a day in court and the n com ing back and int erv iew ing , and 

the n the oth er one going up to prese nt the cases on whi ch he has 

alr ead y con ducted his interview s.

NUM BER OF LAW YER S IN JU VE NI LE COURT

Senator P astore. H ow many law yers do you h ave o pe ratin g before 

th at one juven ile jud ge now ?

Mr. Gray. T wo.

Se nator P astore. Now you will have four ?

Mr. Gray. I will have 4 ap pe aring before 2 judges, assum ing t hat 

both ju dge s opera te on the same basis.

Se nator P astore. Yes. How m any new addit ion al employees were 

you g ranted in t his new budget ?

Mr. Gray. I was g ranted 10.

Senator P astore. Ten. How m any did you have before ?

Mr. Gray. I had a total of 80.

Se nator P astore. You would hav e close to 90, anyway.

INCREASED WORKLOAD

Mr. Gray. Yes, sir. May I point out, sir, th at all of these requ ests 

were attri bu table to the increased workload s which T alr eady men ­

tioned. He re are two new fun ctions being assigned to me, this increased colle ction work, w hich 1 should po int out is wo rk which should 

produce v ery su bstan tia l revenues to the D istrict of Columbia. These 

are law yers who will be engaged in collecting fro m rel atives of pe rsons com mitted to St. Eli zabeths or relatives of persons tre ated in 

the I). C. G eneral Ho spita l and oste nsib ly able to pay.

Se nator P astore. Why do th ey h ave to be law yers ?

Mr. Gray. Because these are legal actio ns.

Se nator P astore. Th at is when you get to th e p oin t of suing. Does 

no t any body pay unless the y are sued? I un derst and you need a 

law yer to file a petition or a suit, bu t you do not need a law yer to 

wr ite a lette r sayin g “Look, you owe money to us and you have to 

pay i t.”

Mr. Gray. These thi ng s do not come to my office until those ad ­

mi nis tra tiv e pro ced ure s have been exh austed. Wh en the y come to 

me they come to me fo r the purpo se of bringing suit.

Senator P astore. I beg your pardo n. All of this oth er pr elim inary 

wor k has alr eady been done ?

Mr. Gray. Yes. Th at is what the Fin ance Office will do with the 

addition al personnel.

Se nator P astore. And you have a backlog ?
88 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

TOTAL ADDITIONAL CASES

Mr. Gray. Th ousan ds of them. I was told the re would be an ad di ­

tio nal 1,524 cases a nuall y from thi s increased activ ity , so I have asked 

fo r personnel to han dle the a dd ition al workload o f 1,524 cases a year.

Senator P astore. Su its that have to be b roug ht ?

Mr. G ray. Yes, su its in cou rt.

Senator P astore. Where are they going to get the jud ges to hear 

these cases?

Mr. Gray. These ma tte rs are filed in several different cou rts, depending upon the amoun t invo lved and the type of case. They will 

not all come in at once, otherwise of course, I could not han dle them . 

They will come in in da ily gro ups, and some suits will be settled before act ually coming to tri al. Bu t I have exp ressed the thou gh t th at 

some of these suits will be fo r substan tial sums of money. The las t 

big one t hat I remem ber was fo r $18,000. I mean these are really s ubsta ntial lawsuits.

Senator P astore. I think it is a good inv estment, to collect these 

moneys th at are due.

Mr. Gray. Fo r example, sir, with only 3 ass istants wo rki ng on 

it, in 4 months we have alr ead v collected the sum of approx im ate ly 

$55,000.

Senator P astore. Did they allow von personnel for t ha t irrespectiv e 

of th e $23,000?

US E OP ADDITIONAL FUN DS GRANTED BY HOUSE

Mr. Gray. They allowed me $66,000 and said th at I might use it 

to the best a dvantag e o f m y office, but with thi s know n wor kload accumula tin g, I shall have to use this ap prop ria tio n of $66,000 for ad di ­

tio nal pers onnel, the majority o f whom will be assigned to this collection work , and it is only in the conting ency th at this new jud ge is 

provide d for the juven ile court t ha t T sh all need the amou nt for which 

I am se ekin g res toration.

Se na tor P astore. All rig ht, sir. Th an k you.

Office of Civil Defense

STAT EMENTS OF COL. JOHN E. FONDAHL, DIRECTOR . ACCOMPANIED

BY H. NE IL McKILLEN . ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FISCAL AND

SUPPLY

BUDGET ESTIM ATE AND HOUSE ALLOWANCE

Se nator P astore. All righ t, si r; we will tak e the nex t item.

Air. F owler. The next item, is th e Office of Civil Defense. The a pprop ria tio n fo r 1958 was $86,000. The estima te fo r 1959 is $200,000. 

Th e House allow ance was $80,000, a reduct ion of $120,000.

The amendm ent requested is on pag e 10, line 19:

Strike out “$80,000” and inse rt in lieu thereof “$181,000.”

An increase of $101,000 in the approp ria tio n.

Col. Jo hn E. Fondahl is Direc tor of Civ il Defense and will justify 

the action.

(T he just ificatio n follow s:)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 89

Ope rati ng E x pe nses

Appropriation, 1958____________________________________________$86. <><><>

Estim ate, 1959 __________________________________________ 200, 000

House allowance, 1959 (reduction of .$120,000)-------------------------------- 80,000

AM EN DM EN T RE QU ES TE D

Page 10, line 19, strike out “$80,000’’ and insert in lieu thereof “$181,000”, or 

an increase of $101,000 in the appropriation.

App lica tion of House reductions

S ta n d ard cl as sifica tion

Per so nal s er vi ce s..........................................

T r a v e l. ........... ......... .......................................

T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f th in g s .. ........................

C om m unic ati on s er vi ce s...........................

R en ts an d u ti li ty se rv ic es.........................

P ri n ti n g an d re p ro d u cti o n........................

O th er c on tr actu al se rv ic es------------------

Se rv ices pe rf orm ed b y oth er ag en ­

cies........ ................................................

Supp lie s an d m ate ri als..............................

E q u ip m e n t....................................... - ...........

G ra n ts , su bs id ie s, an d co n tr ib u ti o n s.. . 

T o ta l esti m ate or ap p ro p ri ati o n .

RECA PIT UL AT ION (BY ACTIV ITIES )

1. A d m in is tr ati o n ........................................

2. A tt ack w arn in g .......................................

T o ta l est im ate or ap p ro p ri ati o n .

E sti m ate

1958

E sti m ate

1959

A m ount 

re co m ­

m en de d 

by H ou se

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ec re as e 

(—), b ill c om ­

par ed w it h 

es ti m at e

A m o u n t of 

re st ora tion 

re qu es te d 

in S en at e

$65,7 70 

400

$127, 540 

1,318 

250

$59,7 70 

400

—$67, 770 

-9 1 8 

-2 5 0

+$ 61 ,770 

+9 18 

+2,50

3,850

2,250

7,350 

2, 250 

4,484

3,850 

2,250

-3 ,5 0 0 +3, 50 0

- 4 , 484 + 4 , 484

474 3,974 474 -3 ,5 0 0 +3, 50 0

4.00 0

5,062

19,738 

10,087 

14,800

4,000

5,062

-1 5 , 738

-5 ,0 2 5

-1 4 ,8 0 0

+2, 73 8 

+5, 02 5 

+ 14,800

4,194 8,20 9 4,194 —4,015 +4, 01 5

86,0 00 200,000 80,000 -1 20.0 00 +1 01 ,000

43,4 10 

42, 590

134,066 

65,934

43,410 

36,5 90

-9 0 ,6 5 6 

-2 9,3 44

+90 ,6 56 

+ 10,344

86,0 00 200,000 80,000 -1 20,0 00 +10 1,00 0

H O U SE REPORT

“For the operation of the District’s Office of Civil Defense an appropriation 

of $80,000 is recoin mended. This is a reduction of $120,(MM) in the estim ates 

and a reduction of $6,000 below the 1958 appropriation. The reduction below 

the 1958 appropriation is based on the fact that the Federal Civil Defense 

Adm inistration is to take over the operation and maintenance of the Distric t’s 

air raid warning system in March of 1959 and the committee has reduced the 

attack w arning activ ity accordingly.”

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

Development of civil defense program, $101,000— Civil defense organization, 

training, and public information capabilities have decreased in effectiveness 

within the Dis trict of Columbia every year since 1952.

Planning of protective measures and revision of plans produced in 1952 has 

been possible only due to Federal assistance through survival projects.

Through the assum ption by the Federal Civil Defense Adm inistration of the 

responsibility for air raid warning, and with the current capabilities of this 

office, the air raid warning capabilities with in the Dis trict have been increased.

To car ry on the continuing planning required and to conduct the training 

necessary to effectively implement the plans produced by survival projects will 

require as a minimum the additional personnel and materials requested in these 

increases.

Pending the active implem entation of the shelter policy of the Federal Government, the development of protective measures and the educating of the 

public through a public information program represen ts the gre atest contribution civil defense can provide to increase changes of survival in an emergency. 

With a small public information and training staff it is possible to accomplish 

a gre at deal in this most im portant field.

The prese nt civil defense organization provides extrem ely limited operational 

control capabilities. There is no “depth” in the key positions. The additional
90 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

positions requested in tlie proposed program would provide considerably g reater 

capabilities during an emergency in the control of operations and by providing 

emergency information to the public.

The reactivation of the volunteer warden organization is considered possible 

with a limited amount of full-tim e guidance and adm inistrative support. This 

organization, if thoroughly indoctrinate d and trained in the protective measures 

adopted, will form a most important adjunc t to other civil defense services organized around existing Distric t of Columbia agencies.

The justification for increases submitted to the House apply, with the exception of the performance of the function of receiving and disseminating air 

raid warning, which has now been assumed by the Federal Civil Defense 

Administration.

The requirement for operating and main taining civil defense radio communications and provisions for receiving strategic and other warning information over 

and beyond public action signals, and for disseminating and actin g on these instructions and information remains with the Office of Civil Defense. The personnel required to carry out these responsibilities cannot he materially reduced 

from those formerly required to receive and disseminate air raid warning by 

signal.

Additional funds are required for printing of instructions and protective 

measures for distribution to the public.

It is for the purpose of accomplishing this program, which is considered the 

minimum under which the District can carry out its civil defense responsibilities 

to the public, that the restoration of $101,000 of the funds disallowed by the 

House is requested.

Application of funds.—It is intended to apply the increases requested as follows: $01,770 for 13 positions as shown in original justificatio n and $39,230 for 

other objects. Included in this will be: $23,275 to reactiv ate the Plans and 

Trainin g Section: $10,344 to increase and maintain communications facilities: 

$15,142 to dissem inate information and instructions to the public; $16,405 for 

the expansion of the warden services; $2,300 to procure rescue equipment for 

use by the District of Columbia Fire Department; and $33,534 to provide for 

rhe increased administrative workload.

Financial analysis

O bj ec t A cti v it y 1 A cti v it y 2

Per so nal se rv ic es __ &61 770 T ra v e l. .. . . . . . . 918 T ra n sp o rt ati o n of t hi ng s 250 C om m unic ation se rv ic es ....... ............... .. . 3, 500 P ri n ti n g a n d re pro duct io n........ ............... 4, 484 O th er c ontr ac tu al se rv ic es .................. 3, 500 Se rvices p er fo rm ed bv oth er agen cies . 2,394 $344 Supp lie s an d m at er ia ls . . 5,025 E q u ip m en t ___ . . . . 4,800 10,000 G ra n ts , su bs id ie s, a n d c ontr ib uti ons .................. 4,015

T o ta l........... ............. . . . 90 10 244

101.000

1

CUTS IN APPROPRIATION

Colonel F ondahl. Mr. Chairman, we have been placed in the position of coming up here since 1955 and asking for increases that appear, 

perhaps on the face of it, exorbitant, but 1955 was the last year we 

were able to do any type of reasonable job under the responsibilities 

that we have under the law.

As a matter of fact, back in 1952, we were better off, and we have 

been on a retrograde ever since that time.

Now, this is not a case of new functions being added. The functions 

are in the law that prescribes what we are to do, and we feel, in order 

to carry out the responsibilities the Office of Civil Defense has to the 

citizens of the District, that what we are asking for initially and what
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 91

we are asking for restoration of here, are the minimum that we can 

work on.

It might be of interest to you to know that a recent report, submitted 

by the Commissioners to the House District of Columbia Committee 

on the effect of Reorganization Plan No. 5 and the number of positions in the District of Columbia, we were 1 of 3 offices th at suffered 

a reduction in positions. We suffered a reduction of 69 percent in 

the positions that we had as of 1952.

FUN DS AVAILABLE THR OUGH FEDERAL CIV IL DEFENSE FOR METROPOLITAN AREA

I think, also, that in the presentation made before the House at the 

time the House considered this, some information was developed that 

there had been an amount of, I believe it was stated, $1,500,000 of 

Federal money put into Civil Defense in the District of Columbia. I 

would like to explain tha t to this committee.

We know that in the current year there is approximately $630,000 

available through Federal Civil Defense for improvements in the a ir 

raid warning system, not in the District of Columbia but in the 

entire metropolitan area, and to a great extent that money will be used 

outside of the District of Columbia.

We have benefited by the Federal expenditures in the conduct of 

these survival studies that have taken place in the District; however, 

the last one, the Washington area survival plan project, included 28 

counties in Virginia and 5 counties in Maryland, so consequently that 

money was not all expended here.

The money tha t we have had made available to us from Federal 

funds for matching purposes has been very small, due to the fact we 

have not had the money to match the Federal funds.

Last year, it ran into approximately $1,300.

STATEM ENT ON PROGRAM

Now, I have a brief written statement here which justifies the program. Unfortunately, we are not able to come in here and tell you 

much about what we have accomplished because during the past few 

years we have not had the capability of doing many of the things we 

should be doing.

With your permission, I would like to read this statement.

Senator P astore. Proceed.

Colonel Fondahl. In requesting the restoration of $101,000 of 

the amount eliminated from our 1959 appropriation request by the 

House, I wish to emphasize the following points.

CONT INUED PL AN NING

The development and revision of measures for the protection of 

the public are of great importance. Constant research and development is underway in many fields. Measures and policies developed 

serve no useful purpose unless they can be translated into local plans.

PUB LIC INFO RMATION AND EDUCATION

With well-developed protective measures and civil defense plans, 

the most important action tha t can be taken by Civil Defense at present
92 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

is providing full information to the public with reference to the steps 

tha t they can and must take for their own protection. Civil Defense 

has very limited capabilities of controlling the action of the public 

and must depend upon an informed and cooperative populace, and the 

individual’s knowledge of the action to take which will best insure his 

survival.

A public information program on civil defense will result in enormous saving of life in an emergency.

TRAIN ING

Congress has intimated that personnel of existing agencies shall be 

utilized to the fullest extent possible in the civil defense program. To 

secure the most effective utilization of this personnel, it is essential 

tha t they be trained and indoctrinated in the civil defense responsibilities assigned. Basic civil defense orientation of both District employees and volunteers within the organization is a “must” to an effective organization. Civil defense services require assistance in developing materials for training courses in specialized subjects. This is a 

very important phase of the civil defense program, without which it 

loses effectiveness.

Interest in the program cannot be maintained without training 

capabilities. Utilization of personnel of other District of Columbia 

departments to conduct tra ining has not proved successful, and volunteers cannot be depended upon to accomplish this. A training officer 

with clerical assistance is a necessity in this field.

OPERATIONS

Control of disaster operations, coordinated direction of the efforts 

of the civil defense services, and coordination with nearby jurisdictions require as a minimum a small trained staff. Civil defense operations are complex to the point that thorough familiarity with the organization and the plans is required for effective operations. The 

duties of the Director, the operations officer, and the intelligence officer are such that they cannot be recruited on the “spot.”

This poses a real problem in the event of an emergency. With the 

organization proposed under the increases requested, the office would 

have at least two deep in command and would possess a greater capability in operational control.

UNDER STA FFING SITU ATION

The Office of Civil Defense, as presently staffed, does not have the 

capabilities of carrying out planning, public information, or training 

responsibilities. The civil defense program of the District is organized in accordance with the intent of Congress and assigned specific 

civil defense responsibilities to several District agencies.

In addition, the present plan proposes the assignment and training 

of all District of Columbia employees to post-disaster civil defense 

duties.

I want to point out tha t in general, whenever additional responsibilities are assigned to agencies, that agency is also provided with 

personnel and funds to carry out those responsibilities. This has
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 93

not been true with reference to civil defense. This has operated to 

place greater responsibilities on this Office.

This office requested the House to eliminate an increase for the 

operations of the air raid warning system in 1959, in view of the 

fact that FCDA is assuming responsibilities for this function.

RADIO COM MUNICATION SYSTEM

The Office of Civil Defense retains the responsibility for operation 

and maintenance of a radio communication system and for manning 

the area communications circuit installed by the Federal Civil Defense Administration. The former requirements of this Office with 

reference to air raid warnings are thus not materially reduced.

I feel that the program proposed under the requested restoration is 

urgent under the civil defense responsibility the District has to its 

residents, and tha t it represents a realistic and practical approach. 

The committee’s favorable action in restoring the funds to accomplish 

this is requested.

Senator Pastore. I hope you do not think, sir, there is a lack of 

sympathy for this sort of activity. The thing that disturbs me is 

whether or not we, as a nation, particularly Congress and the 

executive department, have lived up to our responsibility of providing a proper civil defense that is necessary in this nuclear and the rmonuclear age.

I will tell you very frankly that I do not think you could do the 

job with $101,000. It strikes me that we have no plans at all.

OVERALL NAT IONA L PLAN

Do you feel that the Federal Civil Defense Agency has an overall 

national plan?

Colonel Fondahl. I will say this: There has been developed during 

the past few years a great deal of planning that would result in a 

considerable saving of lives in event of an emergency.

There are only two concepts with reference to protective measures 

in civil defense: either you are under cover and safe or you are not 

there.

PLAN S FOR EVACUATION

At the present time, although there has been a shelter policy established by the Administration, it has not been implemented, so, actually, 

the only thing that we can plan for—and we admit that this is an 

expedient—is evacuation.

Senator Pastore. Evacuation?

Colonel Fondahl. Yes. We have the capability, mathematically, 

of moving a couple of hundred thousand people an hour out of the 

city with proper organization and with proper information to the 

public. We fully agree that we cannot control evacuation and that 

is where the public information factor in civil defense comes in so 

importantly-----

STRENGTH OF STA FF

Senator Pastore. How many people do you have working in your 

department ?
94 district of Columbia ap propria tio ns, 1959

Colonel F ondahl. I have 13 people, 6 of them a re rad io dis pat che rs 

and 2 o f them tech nicians. I have no plan ning staff. I have a fiscal 

officer and two clerks and a messenger.

Senator P astore. II ow man y more peop le would this give you?

Colonel Fondahl. Th is would give us 13 addit ion al positions.

Senator P astore. W hat would the 13 people do?

Colonel F ondahl. We were planning on inc rea sin g the plan ning 

staff. We were planning on a trai ni ng officer and clerical assistance.

We were pla nning on a pub lic inf orm ation officer and clerical help.

Senator P astore. Th at, you thi nk, would he safeg ua rding the 

District ?

Colonel F ondahl. I do not say that. I think it would be wo rth ­

while, as fa r as the final results in the event of an emergency.

NEED FOR A NATIONAL PLAN

Senator Pastore. I realize it may be a little b ett er, but the fact that 

distu rbs me is t ha t it would stil l be increasing a 10-foot rope to a 15- 

foot rope for a man drow ning 25-feet. offshore. It just does not do 

the job. It looks to me like good money chasing bad money in some 

instances.

Now, 1 hop e you do not tak e thi s in any derog ato ry fashion, but I 

am very much dis turbed th at we are not liv ing up to our responsibilities, and I can tell you if they gave you one million d ollars, maybe 

it would not be enough. I do not know, bu t it strike s me th at the 

im porta nt thing here is to develop a national plan th at will make 

some sense and then to get the local com munities to contr ibu te wh atever they can, if they must, or to put it on a nat ion al or Federal 

basis, if th at is necessary.

I know that when I was Governor of my State , when thi s came 

up fo r the first time it was the h ard est th in g to sell the tax payers on, 

because you did not have a ny thing to sell.

How ever, you are going to pu t more peop le the re who are going to 

keep themselves busy, but I won der if —and God forbid—but I 

won der if in an attack, even these 13 oth er peop le you are talking 

about will place us in a bette r position than we are in tod ay?

I feel th at if the job is to be done at all it has to be done rig ht. I 

am af ra id th at in a lar ge are a like the Ca pital City of the Un ite d 

Sta tes , a civil defense of about 30 peop le is no t the answer to this 

problem —it is big ger than th at, much big ger than th at —and I said 

the last tim e th at you were here, I think, th at I was very much 

dis tur bed over the fac t, not th at you did no t maybe deserve thi s lit tle 

ex tra money, but it was too lit tle to make any impac t on the treme ndous res ponsibility fac ing the com munity in case of attack .

TY PE OF ED UC AT IONA L PROG RAM

W ha t kin d of an edu cation al program do you have in the Di str ict ? 

Who has been told about these pla ns whi ch you hav e been talking 

about ?

Colonel F ondahl. We have n ot had too much capabil ity o f pla cin g 

it in effect. We have conduc ted some trai ni ng and there has been 

some trai ni ng done throug h the schools.

Se nator P astore. Wh om do you t ra in ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 95

Colone l F ondahl. Le t me cite some figures. We have no t been 

en tirely delinquent in this m atter because, du ring the pa st 5 yea rs, 

in variou s typ es of civil defe nse trai ni ng we hav e tra ined som eth ing 

like 20,000 people. T hat is a mere drop in the bucket ag ains t the 

requiremen ts.

Senator P astore. Where do you t ra in them ?

Colonel F ondahl. Most of these people were tra ined wi thin the 

Fe de ral agencies, wi thin a civil defe nse org aniza tio n th at opera tes 

un de r the Office of Civil Defense. We call it the Fe de ral Bu ild ing 

Services.

The grea t major ity of th at tra in ing, I wou ld say 75 or 85 percen t 

of it, was done wi thin Fe deral agencies and it has been possible because these people were tra ined on Gover nm ent tim e and wi thou t loss 

of pa y and privilege s du rin g-wo rking ho urs.

Senator P astore. I know, bu t tell me a lit tle more abo ut it. Who 

does the work, who goes th ere to tra in them o ut of yo ur office ? Where 

do you trai n them? Who t ra in s the m an d who does wh at? Te ll us 

more alxnit it.

Colonel F ondahl. Before we lost the only pers onnel th at we ha d 

who were actua lly eng aged in the business of tra in ing, in 1955, we 

were con ducting orien tation courses on overall civil defe nse ma tte rs.

It was a very small effort, bu t it accomp lished something.

TRAIN ING OK PUB LIC HE AL TH PERSON NEL

Fo r insta nce, we h ave ju st finished a course, in t he civil defen se pr ogram fo r all employees of our Public He alth Depar tment , which includ ed about 1,500 employees.

Se nator P astore. Where do you ta lk to them ?

Colonel F ondahl. Th is was done at the old Tuberculosis Ho spita l 

in which a civil defe nse liaison man in the Hea lth De pa rtm ent has 

offices and tr ai ni ng fac ilities. Th is was done also in co llaboration with 

the org anized Army medical units in th e city here.

Senator P astore. I s thi s the Federa l a gency o r you ?

Colonel F ondahl. No. We con ducted the training. Ac tuall y, the 

work was done in th is insta nce by an employee o f the Hea lth Dep ar tment.

How ever, he is assig ned civil defense liaison dut ies with us, and 

th at is all he does. ,

Now, th at is on ly 1 of 3 dep artm en ts th at actua lly assign person nel 

to us.

Senator P astore. You did not have to pay him ?

Colonel F ondahl. No. Tha t is rig ht. Th is, as I ind ica ted , was 

only 1 of 3 departm ents— the Police De pa rtm ent, the Fire D ep ar tment, and the H ea lth D epartm ent—who h ave conducted trai ni ng with 

th ei r own pers onnel. We have no t ha d the capabil ities; we have 

never had a tra in in g officer.

Senator P asture. I do not dispute th at at all. The only th in g is, 

1 doubt very much th at you would have the cap abi lities, even with 

the $101,000 more. I mean this is a big job, and it has to be done 

rig ht.

27235— 58----- 7
96 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

A IR RAII> W ARNIN G SY ST EM

Colonel Fondahl. We have a great deal of this research. There 

are millions of dollars spent on an air raid warning system.

Senator P astore. You have an item here of “Personal service,” and 

then down below that you have “Transportation” and “Communication service.’’ What would tha t be? Is that telephone, and what 

have you ?

Colonel Fondahl. Yes, sir ; it is telephone and postage.

Senator Pastore. Printing. Would that he the printing of instructions?

Colonel Fondahl. Yes, sir; instructional material and plans.

Senator Pastore. I)o they not give you that from the Federal 

agency ?

Colonel Fondahl. No, sir; well, they do give us a great deal of 

material, however, to tit it into local planning and into local requirements, a certain amount of work has to he done with it.

Senator Pastore. Equipment, $4,800. What kind of equipment ?

Colonel F ondahl. Office equipment.

Senator Pastore. What is that for?

Colonel Fondahl. For the new employees.

R ESPON SIB IL IT Y OF FEDERA L GO VE RN ME NT

Seantor Pastore. I hope that some solution will be found to this 

very, very important problem. I hope you do not get the impression that we do not consider it important. I merely have said that 

it strikes me that the Federal agency ought to come up with some 

kind of new plan and then if the local acommunities could not afford 

it, it strikes me that, from a defense point of view, it ought to be the 

responsibility of the National Government. Somebody has to do it. 

We always keep talkin g about the devastation effect of a nuclear 

bomb, a hydrogen bomb, and so on, and we are in constant dread that 

someday this thing may be started, and we always pray that it will 

not, that it never happens, hut, God forbid, if it ever did, we are 

wholly unprepared, wholly unprepared. Everyone seems to recognize 

the peril, but no one is doing anything adequately to meet it, and I 

submit again that 13 more people are not going to solve the problem 

here in the District of Columbia. It is not that you should not creep 

before you run, hut the fact of the matter is that the job is being very, 

very poorly done on a national level.

PEN DIN G LEGISLATION

Colonel Fondahl. As a matter of fact, there is legislation now, 

before the Senate to provide a greater assistance, through an administrative fund, to the States, and this is an indication th at they feel that 

the Federal Government has to take over more responsibility in 

this.

APP ROPR IA TI ONS OF OTH ER C IT IE S

The appropriations that we have received during the past years 

do not compare too favorably with the appropriations of some other 

cities of like size, where they have self-government.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 97

Fo r instance— I believe this is a correct figure— Baltim ore , last ye ar, 

received $400,000, where we had an ap pr op riation of $86,000.

The State s th at put the money into this, pa rti cu larly New Yor k 

and C ali fornia, ha ve done much b etter, and ha ve a more effective civildefense organiz ation than the others. I do not think the y are able to 

cope with the situatio n, either , but the y are bette r able th an we are.

TR AINING PROGRAM IN HIG H SCHOOLS

Senator P asture. I am not an expert on it, but I think th at they 

oug ht to star t this trai ni ng p rogra m righ t in the hig h schools. They 

ought to begin tea ching the young peop le abo ut the perils of this 

kin d of warfare th at we are talk ing about, and it oug ht to be done 

scientifically, and those young people would go home and instr uct 

their own people. I mean they would become the teache rs for th ei r 

own fam ilies . Th e country should be alerted if the peril is there, as to 

the need for all of this, and it is not being done.

All you do is th is: One day they will tell you th at in the case of 

an ai r rai d or an air attack you have to disp erse , and you then go 

along the hig hw ays an d the re you see bi llboar ds, billbo ard signs, which 

say, “ In case of enemy at tac k, this road is sh ut off.”

Now, how are you g oin g to get out ? The road is blocked off. There 

you are. The whole th ing is a litt le bit silly, almost g ettin g ridiculous , 

and th at is the reason the people have not had a feeling o f consciousness to the extent that we hav e needed t his s ort of thing.

I thin k that if you would take the young p eople of our hig h schools, 

who are quite intellige nt, and tra in them and talk to them about these 

perils, and let them know more about wh at is going on, we would 

accomplish something.

I dare say th at nobody in the Di str ict has ever talked to me about 

civil defense. Th e only time I hear about it is when the bud get item 

comes before this comm ittee, and I do not run into anyo ne th at says, 

“ I was invited to go to such-an d-su ch a place to listen to a lecture 

abou t what to do in case of an atom ic bomb or atom ic wa rfa re.”

IJie job is jus t not bein g done. You see, we cannot do it with 6 

or 7 people, and I gran t you that. Somewhere along the line we 

ought to have a definite, nat ional prog ram of civil defense. Somebody oug ht to get pr etty busy on it, and very soon.

Th an k you very much.

( olonel" hoxDAiiL. I might say th at , with refe renc e to high schools 

and oth er schools, we are working with them and expect to be able 

to do bette r with the pres ent school admi nistr ation than under the 

last one.

There has been some edu cation in civil defense in the high schools. 

One or two high schools have very excellent pro grams. I am in full 

accord with your e xpressions on the valu e of that typ e of trai ni ng .

W e are. at the present time, em plo ying th ree people, dur ing the sum ­

mer period, under sur viv al-pla n fun ds, to prepare a comprehensive 

school plan.

Senator P asture. Th an k you very much.

We will recess until 2 o'clock.

(Wher eup on, at 1 p. m., the subcommittee recessed until 2 p. ni. 

of the same d av .'
98 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Afternoon Session—2 p. m. (T uesday, J une 17, 1958)

E xecutive O ffice

STATEMENTS OF ROBERT E. McLAUGHLIN, PRESIDENT OF THE 

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS; DAVID B. KARRICK, COMMISSIONER; 

LT. COI. ROBERT E. MATHE, ASSISTANT ENGINEER COMMISSIONER; ARNOLD LEVY, MEMBER, BOARD OF ELECTIONS; AND 

RICHARD K. LYONS, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS’ YOUTH 

COUNCIL

AM ENDM EN T RE QU ES TE D

Sen at or P astore. T ^e com mittee wil l com e to orde r.

M r. F owler. Mr. C ha irm an , th e E xe cu tiv e Office is th e ne xt ite m, begin nin g on pa ge 4 of th e justi fic ations. The ap pro pri at io n fo r 1958 

wa s $370 ,930; th e es tim ate fo r 1959 is $422,000; th e Hou se allow ance 

was $382,000, a re du ctio n of $40,000. Th e am en dm en t requ ested on 

pag e 4, lin e 9, strike ou t $382,000 an d in se rt in lieu th er eo f $421,650, 

an inc rease of $39,650 in ap pro priat io n. The re ar e fo ur item s. Col. 

R ob er t E . M athe will ju st if y t he item of c oo rd in at io n of p ub lic -w orks 

pro gr am , an d th e item fo r a pl an ni ng co or dina tor. M r. M cL au gh lin 

an d Mr. A rn ol d Le vy wi ll ju st if y th e ite m re gula ting ele ction of 

deleg ates. Mr. M cL au gh lin wi ll ju st if y th e ite m of th e W as hi ng to n 

M et ro po lita n Reg iona l Co nfe ren ce.

(T he justifi ca tio ns fo ll ow :)

Operating Expenses

Ap pro priation, 1958______________________________________________ $370, 9.30

Es tim ate , 1959__________________________________________________ 422, 000 Ho use allowance, 1959 (re du cti on of $40,000)--------------------------------- 382,000

amendment requested

Pa ge 4, line 9, strik e ou t “$382,000” and in se rt in lieu thereo f “$421,650”, or an 

increase of $39,650 in th e ap prop ria tio n.

Applic atio n of House reductions

S ta n d ard clas sific at ion

H

P er so nal s er vic es------------------- -------------

T ra v e l........- ....................................................

C o m m u n ic ati o n ser vi ce s............. ........... -

P rin ti n g a n d r ep ro d u cti o n------------------

O th er co n tr actu al serv ic es. . .......... -

S upplies an d m a te ria ls .............................

E q u ip m e n t....................- ..................... .........

G ra n ts , su bs id ie s, an d c o n tr ib u ti o n s.. 

U n v o u ch ere d......................................- .........

T o ta l est im ate or a p p ro p ria ti o n ..

RECAPITULATION (B Y ACTIVITIES)

E xecu ti ve Office of th e B oar d of 

C om m is si on er s ........................................

Office o f t h e S ecre ta ry ------ -----------------

C om m is si on er s’ Y o u th C ounci l............

U rb an r en ew al..............................................

R eg ula ti ng e le ctio n of d ele g ate s. .. 

W ash in g to n M etr opoli ta n R eg io na l

C on fe re nce ..................................................

T o ta l e sti m ate or a p p ro p ria ti o n ..

E sti m ate

1958

E sti m ate

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ous e

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ec reas e 

(—), b ill com ­

p ar ed w it h 

est im ate

A m ount of 

re st ora ti on 

re ques te d 

in S en at e

$286,691

3. 431 

3,201 

8,617 

32, 754 

6,106 

550

18,080

11,500

$326,146 

3,431 

3,581

9,14 7 

38,643 

6,586 

1,760 

20,206 

12,500

$293,411

3,431

3,201 

8,617 

36,099 

6,111 

550

18,080

12,500

—$32, 735 +$ 32 ,735

-3 8 0

-5 3 0

-2 ,5 4 4 

-4 7 5

-1 ,2 1 0 

-2 ,1 2 6

+3 80

+3 90

+2, 33 4

+4 75

+1. 21 0 

+2, 12 6

370,930 422,000 382,000 — 40,000 +39 ,650

150,049 

129.334 

42, 673 

48,874

170,274 

134,024 

43,528 

48,87 4

7,30 0

18,000

155,924 

133,814 

43,388 

48,874

-1 4,3 50

-2 1 0

-1 4 0

+14 ,350

-7 ,3 0 0

-1 8, 000

+7, 30 0

+18 ,000

370,930 422,000 382,000 -4 0, 000 +39 , 650
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 99

HOUSE REPORT

“The committee recommends an appropriation of $382,000 to finance the 

Executive Office of the Distric t of Columbia Government. This is a reduction 

of $40,000 in the estimate but an increase of $11,070 above the 1958 appropria tion. 

The specific budget increases approved by the committee are as follow s:

Reallocations___________________________________________________ $4,120

Apprenticeship Council___________________________ _______________ 2, 600

Increased costs________________________________________________ 4, 350

“The commitee is in sympathy with the objectives of the Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference for which an appropriation of $18,000 was requested. 

However, testimony indicated th at none of the adjacent governing bodies pa rticip ating in the conference are contributing any fund s toward its operation. 

The committee can find no logical reason fox- the Distric t to beax- the entire 

cost of the conference and has, therefore, denied the requested appropriation .

“For regulating the election of delegates the sum of $7,300 was requested. 

The committee has again denied the request due to the almost nonexis tent 

workload of the past 2 years. Necessary funds to finance the anticip ated 

workload prioi- to the next election in May 1960 should be justified during the 

hearing s on the fiscal 1960 appropriation bill.”

JU ST IFICAT ION

The increase requested is as follow s:

(a ) Coordination of public-works program

(1) Restoration of fund s in the amount of $4,700 to provide for the employment of a secreta ry in the Office of the Engineer Commissionei- is requested. 

Within the last week a new Assistant Engineer Commissioner has been assigned to the D istr ict by the Office of the Chief of Engineers. This new assis tan t will be assigned to coordinate certain phases of the public-works activities 

supervised by the Office of the Engineer Commissioner.

In addition to the added secretarial load required for supp ort of the newly 

appointed Planning Advisory Council, the heavy adm inistrative load alre ady 

imposed on the sec retarial staff of the Engineer Commissioner’s Office is reflected by the fact that 1 secretary curren tly does the work for 2 Assistant 

Engineer Commissioners. Further, the amount of coordination and liaison 

required in order to supervise activities of the various public-works departm ents 

continues to grow with the expansion of the public-works program and other 

allied activities in the government of the District of Columbia. It is urgently 

requested that funds be provided for the restoration of this secretarial position 

in order that there will be 2 secreta ries to do the work of 3 Assistant Engineer 

Commissioners plus 1 planning coordinator, all of whom are very imp ortant in 

the functioning of the Engineer Commissioner’s Office.

Application of funds.—-One secretarial position, GS-6 at $4,080, an electric 

typewriter and rela ted costs in insurance and civil service retirem ent con tributions.

Financial analysis.—The requested increase will be distributed as follow s:

Activity 1:

Personal services____________________________________________$4, 080

Other contractual services___________________________________ 17

Equipment __________________________________________________ 325

Grants, subsidies, and contributions_____________________________ 278

Total ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4, too

(2) Restoration of fund s in the amount of $9,650 is also requested to provide 

for employment of a planning coordinator. This employee will serve the Commissioners’ Planning Advisory Council in addition to performing other missions 

in the field of public works for the Engineer Commissioner. He will coordinate 

activities in connection with the public-works program and make a continuous 

analysis of progress, including the need for specific projects proposed by the 

various departments. The accomplishment of this assignment will fac ilitate the 

work of the Planning Council and the Board of Commissioners, will save a ppointment and review by additional citizens’ committees, and will improve liaison 

with Congress on the newly enacted public-works program. The new program is
100 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

larger and will require closer surveillance for proper control. It is urgent that 

fund s he restored to the budget for employment of this professional employee 

who will coordinate activities in this imp ortant field for the Engineer Commissioner and the Planning Council.

Application of funds.—One planning coordinator, GS-13 at $<S,990 and related 

costs in insurance and civil service retirement contributions.

Financial analysis.—The requested increase will be distributed as follows :

Activity 1:

Personal services___________________________________________ $8, 990

Other contractual services------------------------------------------------------ 18

Grants, subsidies, and contributions------------------------------------------ 642

Total ______________ ____________________________________ 9,650

(b) Regulating election of delegates, $1,300

The District of Columbia Primary Act of 1955 provided for the election every

4 years of delegates to the national nominating conventions and of the officers of 

the local par ty organizations.

Since the first election held in 1956, the Board of Elections has asked for a 

small appropriation for each of the years between the q uadrennial elections. The 

first such request was made to the House Appropriations Committee before the 

first election was held. At the time of the hearings, the number of voters 

registered totaled less tha n 3,000. The committee, naturally, was not impressed 

by the need for funds in the years between elections. Within a few weeks, 

however, last-minute registratio ns brought the tota l to 59,000, of whom 45,000 

voted in the 1956 election.

In the second year following the 1956 election, the Board of Elections again 

requested a small appropriation which was not allowed. Despite this disallowance the Board has continued to hold a few meetings to consider amendments to 

the act of 15)55 which will be submitted to Congress in the very near futu re. It 

has not had the funds, however, to do the many things essential to the maintenance of an “accurate and curre nt” register of voters as directed in the 

statute.

For fiscal year 1959, the situation is quite different from that of the two 

preceding years. The Board must catch up with the backlog of work accumulated since 1956. The Board also must star t early to plan for the 1960 election 

if it is to avoid another hectic period of hasty planning and hurried preparatio n 

such as preceded the 1956 election. The Board will hold many more meetings 

in 195!) than in the other between-election years. It also needs full-time secretaria l services if the necessary changes in regulations and operating instructions 

ar e to he ready in ample time for the 1960 election.

Although tiie Board has been able to meet the basic requirements of keeping 

the registry open during the past 2 years, it has not been able to complete all 

the entries necessary to the maintenance of the complete record system. It has 

not been able, for example, to punch on the mas ter cards the fact that the person 

actually voted in 1956. Yet such a record is essential to the maintenance of a 

curre nt registry and the u ltim ate purging from this list of the names of persons 

who have died, moved away, or otherwise been disqualified for voting.

The thre e members of the Board are private citizens who devote only a few 

hours a month to the conduct of the Board. Two of them are engaged in the 

private practice of law, the third member is a public spirited businessman who 

serves also on the Board of Education without compensation. These men have 

to make a living. Therefore, the Board of Elections lias to have some people to 

do the staff work, and for this purpose the Board urgently requests th at the 

modest amount of $7,300 be restored for this communitywide program.

For this staff work the Board has only the part-time services of a member of 

the Distric t of Columbia Management Office and of a prac ticing atto rney who 

has an interest and a va st knowledge of election procedures.

Application of funds.—This amount includes the services of one secretary, compensation for the 3 Board members ($25 per meeting) and related costs.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1959 101

Financial analysis

Activity 5:

Personal services____________________________________________$5, 265

Communication services______________________________________ 350

Printing ami reproduction ____________________________________ 190

Other contrac tual services___________________________________ 950

Supplies and materials_______________________________________ 275

Grants, subsidies, and contributions___________________________ 270

Total-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7, 300

(c ) Washington metropolitan regional conference, $18,000

This conference is composed of governing officials from the jurisdictio ns in the 

Washington are a: it includes all members of the governing bodies of Alexan dria 

and Falls Church, Va.; Arlington and Fa irfax Counties, Va .; Montgomery and 

Prince George’s Counties, Md.; a State senator from Virginia and the member 

of the Virginia House of Delegates serving on the Tri-State Tra nsp ortation 

Commission; a Sta te sena tor from Maryland and the member of the Maryland 

House of Delegates serving on the Tri-State Tra nsporta tion Comm ission; a 

member representing the District of Columbia Committee of the United States 

Senate; a member representing the District of Columbia Committee of the 

United States House of Representatives; and the three members of the Board of 

Commissioners of the District of Columbia.

The organization is volu ntary in cha rac ter and completely non partisan in 

motivation and action. Its purpose is to resolve problems affecting all the 

communities represented in a manner mutually satisfactory.

Application of funds.—As the Distric t of Columbia is the focal point from 

which most problems emanate, it is sincerely believed tha t it should take the 

lead in supporting this conference. The organizatio n has jus t completed its 

first year and all staff work has been on a volunteer basis. While the conference is proud of its accomplishments to date, its experience points up the need 

for a full-time staff to hand le the adm inistrative duties. Other metropolitan 

areas have established similar organizatio ns and the more successful ones have 

been those with an energetic sec retariat devoting prac tically full time to its administration. It is the belief of the Commissioners that the District should 

make the initial contribution to this operation which even now is an effective 

influence in the area.

Financial analysis

Activity 6:

Personal services__________________________________________ $14, 499

Communication services____________________________________ 30

Printing and reproduction___________________________________ 200

O|h er contractual services___________________________________ 1,349

Supplies and ma terials_____________________________________ 200

Equip me nt-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 885

Gran ts, subsidies, and contributions__________________________ 936

Total----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

1 8 , 090

COORDINATION OF PUB LIC WORKS PROGRAM

Colonel Mathe. I have two items in the coordination of public 

works program. One is a secretary, GS-6, at $4,700 for the Office of 

the Engineer Commissioner and the other one is a planning coordinator, who will do coordination of the public works program in a GS-13 

position for $9,650.

First, in regard to the Secretary, we have assigned to the Engineer Commissioner’s office two Assistant Engineer Commissioners at 

the present time. These are two officers furnished by the Corps of 

Engineers, myself being one, and Colonel Hunter being the other. 

For the past 3 years, I have been here, and am about to leave. 

I have no profit motives involved in this. We have been sharing a 

secretary for 3 years.
102 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

I feel th at the be st resu lts can be ac complished by t he A ssi sta nt E ngin eer C ommissioners ha ving m ore sec ret ari al su pp ort. A t the pr esen t time, our wor kload in the En gine er Com mission er’s office has increased to the degree t hat Colonel Well ing has asked the Chief of E ngin eer s to assig n a th ir d En gine er As sis tan t Commissioner. The 

Chief of En gin eer s has agreed to do so. li e will arriv e in Sep tem ber 

of this year. Tha t make s 3 A ssistant En gine er Com missioners and 1 

secreta ry.

We feel th at we need an addit ion al sec retary in ou r office to tak e 

car e of the secre tarial load.

Senator P astore. I s th is a case of bein g p ennywi se and pound foolish? Ar e the ass istant eng ineers ever delaye d in the full opera tion 

of t he efficiency of their work because o f the lack of ha ving availab le 

a secr etary ?

Colonel Mathe. I fee l very de finitely so.

Senator P astore. You say you will hav e three begin nin g in Septem ber ?

Colonel Mathe. We will h ave three .

Se na tor P astore. H ow much is her sala ry ?

PLA N N IN G COORDINATOR

Colonel Math e. Her salary, with all expenses included, is $4,700. 

Th is involves $285 fo r a typewr ite r. In a ddition, we are ask ing fo r a 

pl an ning co ord ina tor fo r th e p ublic-w orks prog ram . If this man were 

assigned, we would h ave 4 ind ividuals f or 1 secretary . She could n ot 

possibl y do all the work that is req uired fo r fou r people.

In rega rd to the plan ning coo rdinator, we have, as you know, just 

rec ently revised the pub lic-wor ks pro gra m. We sta rte d ou t with a 

10-y ear public- wor ks prog ram and fou nd th at a fter 3 y ears of o peratio n it was so outda ted and outm oded th at we h ad to go back and revise and review the entire th ing and come up with a new 6-year pr ogram to finish ou t the 10 years.

I t is our fee ling th at in or de r to prop erly hand le the public works 

prog ram we need one in div idual in the E ng ineer Com mission er’s office 

who is permanently assigned to doing n othing bu t wo rki ng w ith t hat 

public works program , co ordin ati ng the vario us aspects of it, maintain in g up-to -da te sta tus of the pub lic works prog ram, coord ina tin g 

aspects involving th e various Distri ct de partm ents, pr ep ar in g pr iorit y 

fo r annual budget pro posals, continuing the lon g-r ange p rojection of 

the prog ram , worki ng with all the departm ents on refinemen t o f d ata , 

pla ns, cost, and so forth .

Se na tor P astore. Co uld n’t th is th ird depu ty help in that?

Colonel Math e. Yes, I wo uld say th at ------

Se na tor P astore. Why don’t we tr y it th at way fo r the beg inn ing 

and see how it works out, although I know th at Colonel Well ing is 

very m uch intere ste d in that.

DI VE RS IT Y OF FU N CTIO N S

Colonel Math e. Th e f unctions of the Eng inee r Comm issioner are so 

diverse th at he needs th e assistants to tak e care of these va rious aspects. 

F or example, my job is almost entirely on urban renewal. I am trv -
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 103

ing to coordinate the actions of the Land Agency, the Planning Commission, the Housing Authority, and the various departments involved 

in this program. Colonel Hunter is involved primarily with planning, with regard to the Planning Commission. The additional functions involve zoning, all forms of regulations, architect-engineer contracts, Public Utilities Commission, and a myriad of other jobs.

Senator Pastore. What will the third fellow do from the Army 

engineers ?

Colonel Mathe. It is the hope that this third individual could take 

some of the load off of Colonel Welling in regard to the Public Utilities Commission and so forth.

Senator Pastore. They have had this coordinator working there, 

haven’t they ?

Colonel Mathe. Well, actually we had an individual we hired last 

year when we were revising the public works program. We hired 

him on composite funds out of the Departments of Sanitary Engineering, Highways, and Buildings, and Grounds. During this period 

of time, which was a critical period, in which we had to get facts 

and statistics for a complete revision of the program, we had to have 

someone doing this work, so we got the assistance from the departments.

JU ST IFIC AT IO N FOR NEW POSITIO N

Senator Pastore. Could you do this for our record? Could you 

prepare just a very short one-page statement so we could get it into 

the record, showing why the third deputy would not exactly fill the 

bill, if that is the case, and why you would need the fourth man, and 

what his activity actually will be. I would pre fer you spell it out in 

detail rather than generalize.

I am very much impressed with the fact that you need a stenographer there, and that you are going to bring in a third man. But 

there you are, you are going to have a thir d man anyway. Let’s get 

a little justification for the fourth one, so that if we have to go 

on to conference on it, we will have something right out of the horse’s 

mouth.

Colonel Mathe. Very well, si r; I shall do that.

(The statement referred to follow s:)

In order to get a clear understanding of the functions to be performed by the 

third Assistant Engineer Commissioner and the planning coordinator for the 

public works program, it is considered desirable to include a statem ent of the 

functions regularly performed by the normal complement of three Assistant 

Engineer Commissioners. Upon assignment of the third assistant, he will undertake the regular duties of Assistant Engineer Commissioner for Operations.

AS SIST AN T ENG INE ER CO MM ISSION ER FOR URBAN RENEWAL

1. Responsible to the Engineer Commissioner for—

Urban renewal program, including coordination with the National Capital 

Housing Authority, Natio nal Capital Planning Commission, and the Redevelopment Land Agency in the development of plans and schedules, and the inte gration of operations of all agencies and departm ents of the District pertinent 

thereto.

Code enforcement, including enforcement activities of the various depar tments, procedures, and techniques of execution, sufficiency of codes and regulations as they pertain to urba n renewal and the conservation and rehabilitation 

of housing.

Public housing, including the various activities of the N ational Capital Housing A utho rity with the D istrict government on site approvals under term s of cooperation agreements.
104 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Redevelopment, including the redevelopment activities of the Redevelopment 

Land Agency.

2. Chairman of Urban Renewal Operations Committee, Board for the Condemnation of Ins anitary Buildings.

3. In direc t charge of the Office, of Urban Renewal.

ASSIS TA NT ENG INEER COM MISSIONER FOR PLAN NING

1. Responsible to the Engineer Commissioner for—

Long-range planning in the fields of highways, traffic, parking, sanitar y 

engineering, and water supply.

Zoning, and all rela ted activities involving the planning, interpreta tion , and 

enforcement of zoning regulations.

2. Represents the Engineer Commissioner on National Capital Planning Commission, National Capital Regional Planning Council, Zoning Commission.

3. Alternate to the Engineer Commissioner on Metropolitan Area Traffic 

Cou ncil; Joint Steering Committee, Mass Tra nsp ortatio n Survey.

4. Member of Coordinating Committee of the National Capital Plan ning Commission, Zoning Advisory Council, Regional Staff Committee, National Capital 

Regional Plan ning Council.

ASSIS TA NT ENG INE ER COM MISSIONER FOR OPERATION

1. Responsible to the Engineer Commissioner for general supervision and coordination of the following ac tiv ities:

Operations, including construction, maintenance, repair, snow removal.

Engineering, including design of Dis trict facilities, design stan dards, technical engineering and the rela ted field of regulatory standa rds included in the 

various codes, such as the building code, plumbing code, electrical code, etc.

Contract management, including estab lishm ent of contract procedures and a 

review of architect-engineer and construction contracts.

2. Represents the Engineer Commissioner on Distric t of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Board, Public Utilities Commission, Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference.

3. Member of Contract Appeals Board, District of Columbia Building Code 

Advisory Committee.

PLAN NING COORDINATOR FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAM

If the Congress grants our request for a public works program planning coordinator, be will work exclusively on functions rela ted to the established 6-year 

public works program and his functions will not duplicate those of any of the 

Assistant Engineer Commissioners. Regardless of departm enta l origination of 

cap ital outlay items, the planning, design, and construction of facilities in the 

public works program fall within the purview of the Engineer Commissioner 

and his departments. Hence, almost all funds are obligated through the engineer departments, and engineering and cost controls exercised prim arily by 

the Engineer Commissioner. It is essential tha t one individual devote full time 

to maintaining for the Engineer Commissioner the up-to-date sta tus of the 

program, correlating the engineering and planning aspects on the one hand with 

the budget aspects on the other. The incumbent of this position will be resjionsible to the Engineer Commissioner for—

1. Continual evaluation of the 6-year public works program for the Dis trict 

of Columbia.

2. Long-range projection of the public works program.

3. Coordination of those aspects of the public works program involving more 

than one department.

4. Review of data, plans, and costs to insure refinement as items reach approp riation stage.

5. Recommendation of priorities of items for inclusion in the annu al budget 

request.

6. Recommendation of changes and revisions in the public works program, as 

necessary, based upon his analysis.

7. Provision of staff support for Commissioners’ Plan ning Advisory Council.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 1959 105

ELECTION OF DELEGATES

Commissioner McLaughlin. The next item, Mr. Chairman, is regulation of the election of delegates to the national convention. I 

would like to say a few words on that, and then ask the chairman to 

receive testimony from Mr. Arnold Ixwy, who is Acting Chairman 

of the Board of Elections of the District of Columbia.

Senator Pastore. This has come up once before, hasn’t it ?

Commissioner McLaughlin. Yes, sir. We had no funds at all 

during the past year to administer this. I am sure that Mr. Levy 

is going to handle the details on this, but I would like to mention to 

the chairman the difficulties that we had in getting this kind of a law 

passed for the District of Columbia. A few years ago the delegates 

to the national conventions and the members of the local political 

party organizations were being elected by various means.

I know in some instances at cocktail parties and things like that, 

and in some instances even less auspicious circumstances. We were 

able to get this law enacted giving us what we call the primary law 

in the District of Columbia, which has enabled us to hold elections 

for the first time in about 80 years, under statute.

STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMANEN T REGISTRATION

This statute requires certain things to be done which would take 

the time of, certainly, one employee. These things just have not 

been kept up. We have been able, by having this function tran sferred—having no funds for it whatsoever—to the office, in general, 

of the secretary of the Board of Commissioners, to accommodate 

anyone who comes in, either to register or to change his registration.

But the matter of analyzing the situation, as is required under the 

statute, the matter of purging the files and keeping them correct, and 

the matter of bringing the files up to date since the election th at we 

had back in 1956—those things we have made no progress on at all.

If we do not have funds until 1960 we shall lie in as bad a situation 

as we were in 1956, when it was really quite ridiculous.

Senator Pastore. It was my impression that, in some sort of way, 

the job was being done. Am I being told now that, because of a 

lack of this individual, the job is not being done ?

Commissioner McLaughlin. Anyone who comes up to register will 

be registered by a clerk in the office of the secretary.

COMPLIANCE W IT H STATUTE

But the job of compliance with the statute, in keeping certain records up to date and all of that sort of thing, is what I am referring to.

As a matter of fact, the changes in the records that would have 

/ resulted from the 1956 election we have not been able to do. Mr. 

Levy is more familiar with this than I am.

Senator Pastore. Mr. Levy, tell us exactly what your problem is 

on this item. What discomfort or what disadvantage do we experience because of a lack of this position?

Mr. Levy. Basically, Mr. Chairman, the judgment of your colleagues on the House side, as reflected in their comment, makes clear 

why they take the position they do. They regard this as a once-in4-years proposition. In fact, they use words as descriptive of what
106 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

they call the nonexisten t worklo ad, re fe rrin g to the fact th at the re 

are v ery few people t hat come in to reg ister. W ha t Mr. McLaughlin 

is sayin g is th at the Ele ctions Bo ard is obligate d, un de r the sta tute, 

to ma int ain a perm anent registr y, kee ping it accurate and perm anent. The Commissioners have conside red th ei r prob lems, and the 

dem and s on them , and hav e been most helpf ul to the Bo ard fro m 

tim e to time when a crisis comes u p. But th e da ily , workm anl ike job 

of kee ping these records cu rre nt is no t being done. In fac t, af te r 

these elections were over, these records were p ut int o deep freeze and 

no thing is b eing don e to keep them curr ent.

PE RM AN EN T REGISTRA TION

Senator P astore. I s this perma nent r eg istra tio n ?

Mr. Levy. Yes, s ir ; it is.

Se na tor P astore. I m ean, if you got on there and y ou were eligible 

fo r the convention in 1956. you are still elig ible in 1958 ?

Mr. L evy. Tha t is true, sir. How ever-----

Se na tor P astore. 1960, rathe r.

Mr. Levy. Yes, sir. How ever, the folk s with the political pa rti es 

who work with th ese figures tel l us th at on mail ing th ey ge t a o ne-th ird 

re tu rn now fo r change in addresses and the like. We ju st have a 

sit ua tio n on our hands with which we can not come to grips . Sir, I 

would like to say th is to you------

Se na tor P astore. Do n’t go over that too fast. Le t's get the problem.

Mr. Levy. We ll, the b asic defect in the sit uatio n, Mr. Chairma n, is 

th at rec ords which o ught to be m ain tained on a curre nt basis, acc ord ing 

to the sta tute, and which are to form the basis for the election-----

WORK OF BOARD

Se nator P astore. Give me an exam ple of k eep ing the rec ord curre nt.

Mr. Levy. For exam ple, sir, if a person has moved from one pr ecin ct t o anoth er pre cin ct, or h as moved out of th e Di str ict, we have no 

way of keeping in to uch wi th tha t.

Se na tor P astore. How is one person going to keep in touch with 

eve rybody who moves out of the Distr ict ?

Mr. Levy. One person is not going to be able to keep in touch with 

th at , sir, b ut one pers on is g oin g to be able to maintain the records on 

a basis so tha t we can get up forms o f que stio nnaires, pos t c ard s, and 

th e like, and we can corre ct obvious errors.

For exam ple, Se nator Pa sto re, when the folks came to vote at the 

election las t tim e af te r the registr ation, hu nd red s, if not tho usa nds, 

of errors manifested them selves in im prop er record ation. Th is was, 

bas ically, a volunteer job, as I thi nk you know.

We have not even been able to correct those records. Nor hav e we 

been able to pu t on the public record how these folks voted at the 

election, in terms of checking their vo tin g by pa rty and in terms of 

the registrat ion .

Senator P astore. H ow is one person going to do all of this?

NEED FOR ST AF F

Mr. Levy. Mr. Ch air man, you are very prop erly ask ing the questio n : Are we going to be able to do a full-tim e, 100-percent job with 

a sing le clerical employee? No, sir, bu t we are going to have the
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 1 0 7

ad vanta ge of staffing, and wha t I am abo ut to say to you, th at you 

know, with your vast experience, how lit tle public vol unteers, even 

compensated on a per diem basis, as Bo ard mem bers are, can do in 

the absence of stalF. Staff is y ou r lifebloo d, sir, in ter ms of keepi ng 

yo ur processes going a nd bringing m atters before the a tte ntion of the 

Bo ard and in k eep ing a regularize d act ivity.

Th is Bo ard has no staff. Now, the Com missioners, un de r this 

sta tute, are obligated to give assistance, and, un de r the tight bu dget 

w’ith whi ch they ope rate, and the jugg lin g job which the y do in the 

public inte res t, they yield to to da y’s crisis first. Th ey ha ve been m agnificent in th eir efforts to coopera te. Bu t, basically, the y hav e no 

clerical employees ava ilab le fo r this act ivity. In effect, we are op eratin g wi tho ut c lerical staff.

Mr. Ra ba ut and his colleague s feel, and say, “ Let’s forge t a bout t hi s 

fo r a no the r year. Wh en you come up ne xt year , come in and tell us th e 

whole job th at has to be done in th at yea r, and you will get wh at app ro ­

pr iatio n you nee d.”

We say to you, rec ogn izin g th at th is is an issue of judgme nt, and 

although res pec ting Congressm an Rab au t’s jud gm ent, we very violen tly disag ree with it.

Th is is no t a once-in-every-4-year effort. The peop le in the Un ite d 

State s will pay fo r this job twice ove r the amount it will tak e us to 

do it necessarily next time , in the efficiency o f the opera tion.

I appreciat e you would like some ma the ma tical demo nstration 

som ewhat more specific.

Se na tor P astore. No; I wou ld like an argume nt as to th at whi ch 

will overrule any arg um ents you hav e mad e so fa r wi th M r. Ra baut. 

Th ere you are.

When we go back w ith th is arg um en t, he has h eard e ve rything you 

have to ld me.

Mr. Levy. May I give you the argu men t th at is close to our home 

an d heart s? I t is like say ing to a fello w who has to make up his t ax 

re tu rn f or th e cu rre nt A pril 15 d ate , “ Do n’t pay any a tte ntion to y ou r 

records all year long , and when Apr il 14 comes alon g, then get it all 

toge ther and get it do ne.”

If you ever h ad it done th at w ay—I expect you are too competent to 

get it done that way—you know the misery and heartaches.

TOTAL REGISTRATION

Tha t is the basis of this . We hav e 58,000 registr ati on s, sir, and 

45,000 fo lks voted. It is a m ass o perat ion and a perm anent o peration .

Se nator P astore. Do you hav e many cards or many let ter s now 

th at have no t been processed, of people who have moved?

Com missioner McLaug hlin. I can’t specifically ans wer th at, Mr. 

Chairma n. I know thi s, th at the y hav e no t been able to reco rd on 

the IB M ca rds th e resu lts of the la st election.

Se nator P astore. Wh o run s th e IB M machine now ?

Com missioner McL aug hlin. Th is was being done fo r the election 

board s by the compa ny itse lf.

Mr. Levy. That is correct, Mr. Ch airma n. I t is a com pen satory 

service.

Se nator P astore. Wh o pays f or it?
108 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Levy. Under contract. It was paid out of the $40,000 appropriation we had 3 years ago.

Commissioner McLaughlin. You see, it just had to be dropped 

after the election.

Senator Pastore. I would like something more than just saying— 

“keeping the records current.” That could be almost anything. I 

would like to know more about what is your backlog. Give me something statistical that will have some evidential proof. Will you do 

that ?

Mr. Levy. Certainly, sir.

DUTI ES OF NEW PO SI TI ON

Senator Pastore. Tell me how many letters you have in the files 

of addresses tha t have been changed, that you have not been able to 

process, and things of that kind.

Let us see if we cannot spotlight this item a little better. I know 

what the feeling is. The feeling is tha t you would not need this 

actually until 1960, when the election comes, and for that reason this 

person would not have a great deal to do.

In better than general terms, specifically tell us what this person 

is supposed to be doing which is not being done.

Air. Levy. May 1 leave two perfectly brief notes with you, sir?

Senator Pastore. We will take it up again. I will tell you very 

frankly I am a little apprehensive in what is going to happen to it. 

But we will keep talking about it until we get a better realization of 

it.

Give me something more documentary, please.

Mr. Levy. Very good, sir.

(The information requested follows:)

Sta teme nt on Board of E lec tions Workload

The basic records consist of the follow ing:

(a) Registration affidavits, 59,000.

(b) Voter identification cards, 59.000.

(c) Citywide alphabetic index, 59,000.

(d) Precinct lists of voters, 1,200 pages.

(e) Certificates signed by voters at the polls in the 1956 election, 45.000.

It is estim ated that 2,000 requests for changes in spellings of names, stre et 

addresses, par ty affiliations, and the like were reported to the Board of Elections 

by the polling place workers. These requests for changes appe ar as marginal 

notes on the precinct lists, on the certificates signed at the polls by the voters, 

and on the envelopes containing challenged ballots. Since 1956, approximately 

100 changed or new reg istratio ns have been received at the Central Registry 

Office.

The Board of Elections recognizes that the register cannot be “accu rate and 

curre nt” as of every day in the years between elections.

The majo r workload facing the Board of Elections today is the orderly planning of the procedures necessary to conduct the 1960 elections. One phase of 

this is to work out the deta iled steji-hy-step procedures to make the register of 

voters curre nt before the 1960 election. We are not now concerned with making 

all of the estimated 2,000 changes in our existing backlog.

Even more important, however, is for the Board of Elections to have some 

full-time employee to car ry out the detailed work of the Board in developing 

new regulations and procedures. This work cannot wait until the start of fiscal 

1960. Right now, for example, the Board of Elections is prep aring its 1960 

budget. One way of bringing the register of voters up to date in 1960 is to 

make a mail canvass of voters. To make a realistic estimate of the cost of such 

a canvass, the deta ils have to be worked out carefully. This is only one item in
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 109

the 1960 budget request. It is for such purposes that the Board of Elections 

needs the full-time services of one employee, salarie s of Board members, and 

other funds. An expenditure of $7,000 now ap pears to be justified in developing 

careful plans for an election which may cost $50,000 or more in 1960.

W ash in gton Met ro po lit an R eg io na l Con fe re nc e

Com missioner McLaughl in. Mr. Ch air ma n, may 1 take up th e n ext 

item ?

Se nator P astore. Mr. Lev y, it was nice to have you here.

Com missioner McLaughl in. Th e Wash ing ton Metr opoli tan Regio nal Conference. We are a sking the restor ati on o f $18,000 fo r th at 

item.

About 15 mo nth s ago we org ani zed the Wash ing ton Metropoli tan 

Reg ional Conference, which, as the justification indicate s, bring s togethe r the mem bers of all the governing bodies of the metr opoli tan 

are a, th at is, in addition to our Distri ct of Colu mbia. We have the 

4 counties, 2 in Ma ryland, and 1 in Vi rginia, and th e cities o f Alexandr ia and Fa lls Churc h in Vi rgini a. We had a me etin g ju st las t 

Th ursd ay nigh t, a sem iannua l meetin g, of this Conference, at which 

we had over thr ee-qua rte rs of all the governing bodies here in one 

room, ta lk ing ov er o ur reg ional problems.

We feel th at this is one of the most significant things th at has 

happene d with respec t to regional prob lems, which are very com plicated, as you are f ull y awa re, b eing from Providen ce.

essen tia l to wel fa re of m et ro po li ta n area

Th e District of Columb ia act ually is quite a pionee r in this work. 

Th ere are only 3, 4, or 5 othe r me tro po litan are as in the country th at 

have starte d in th is direction a t all.

We had , of course, our first ind ication th at the House com mittee 

was disallowing this Execu tive Se creta ry and a sec retary or clerk, 

and this ful l item o f $18,000, on Fr id ay , at noon. So we have not h ad 

an op po rtu nity to get aro und and do much work. We could bring 

peop le in here to tes tif y before you, if you wish. But just in this 

time , we ha ve h ad th is react ion.

Fi rst, I might say th at the statem ent in th e House re port con cerning 

this matter is th at they are sim ilarly sym pat het ic, bu t they say------

Se nator P astore. Wh y sh ould the Di str ict pa y it all ?

Com missioner McLaug hlin. Yes; th at is rig ht. Ac tua lly , our 

feeling is th is: Th at somebody must lead in this thing. We have led 

it. We feel th at the problem gen era tes here, r eally, and tha t this ha rd 

core, the Execu tive Secre tary and the sec retary , can very well lie borne 

by the Distric t and th e Federal Gove rnm ent.

REACTION FROM ADJACENT COU NTIES

1 lowever, he re is the reactio n we ha ve had in these 2 day s f rom some 

of the surro un ding people. I have a tele gram from Ann W 'ddn s, 

cha irm an of the Board of Cou nty Super visors, Fa irfa x Conn v; she' 

sa ys :

Feel that work of Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference is essential 

to w elfare of en tire metropolitan area.
110 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPR OPRLATIONS, 1959

PROBLEMS OF METROPOLITAN AREA

Senator Pastore. Mr. Commissioner, while yon are here, give us 

some of these problems. Give us examples for the record. What are 

some of the problems tha t this conference is to cope with.

Commissioner McLaughlin. The Conference has taken up the 

problem of water supply and water pollution. That was started before General Lane left. He was chairman of our subcommittee. 

Colonel Welling has taken it up now, and it has worked very effectively. It has even brought about an acceptance through all of this 

metropolitan area of the proposition of establishing standards of 

pollution for the effluent going into the streams. I mean, they have 

gotten right down to work, right to brass tacks.

Of course, one of the greatest effects of all of this is that we now 

know each other. Tha t does not cost any money. I want to say before 

I pick up any other items tha t in New York, which has one of the 

most effective of these regional conferences, in fact they have reached 

the action stage and call it a regional council now, they say tha t they 

could have gotten nowhere at all without a very effective secretariat. 

The secretariat has to bear the brunt of organizing the thing, getting 

the data to act on, all tha t sort of thing, to lead on.

Our second item, I would say is welfare and public health.

They have held meetings and they have already made considerable 

progress in the area in both the field of public health and the field of 

public welfare.

Taking a sort of practical project, we took the situation with respect to taxicabs. There is no regulation at all on the rates of taxicabs when they go across a State line. So the legal committee of this 

group have brought in all the regulation people of the area, all the 

taxi owners and representatives of the drivers, and we have been able 

to get an agreement throughout the whole region as to maximum 

taxicab rates in interstate commerce.

Tha t is, it is on a voluntary basis, but they are going to bear a sort 

of “Good Housekeeping” seal on the cabs so tha t you can identify all 

the cabs that are working under this agreement.

We think it is going to work very well. I am sure you have had 

constituents who have come to town, who have gotten a taxicab, and 

who have gone out to Chevy Chase, Md., for instance, and have been 

overcharged.

We are attempting to protect them.

QUESTION ED NEED FOR EMPL OYEE AND RELATED ITEM S

Senator P astore. Yes; but why do you have to have a personnel man. 

and why do you have to have these other items? I can understand 

some of these other items. Of course, they have to have supplies, 

telephones, and what have you. But for instance, the head of taxicabs 

in the District of Columbia, can’t he get along with the head of the 

taxicabs, let’s say, in the adjoining districts, and have a meeting 

among them ?

The point they make in the House report is tha t they don’t see 

why the other participa ting communities should not make any contribution to this.
DISTRICT1 OF COLUMBIA APPR OPRIATION'S, 1959 111

FIN A N C IA L CO NT RI BU TI ON BY PARTIC IP A TIN G C O M M U N IT IE S

Commissioner McLaughlin. I started to read the telegrams tha t 

have come in in 1 day, Mr. Chairman. Yon see, we have not reached 

the point yet of attempting to get financial contributions from all of 

the other areas. This is one of the forward things in this country, in 

metropolitan areas, the establishment of this Conference, in this particular area. Nobody questions that.

I have telegrams and letters here, just in one day, from all of these 

jurisdictions, saying that they are going to try to budget to take care 

of part of the expenses of this Conference in the future.

Senator Pastore. We ought to insert those into the record.

Commissioner McLaughlin. Will you, please?

Senator Pastore. In other words, it is fair for me to say tha t in 

answer to the observation made by the rep ort of the House, tha t there 

is an intention here tha t the participating communities will make a 

contribution towards sustaining this Conference?

Commissioner McLaughlin. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. And tha t this is the beginning of it?

Commissioner McLaughlin. And they all consider it extremely 

important.

(The material referred to follows:)

Falls Church, Va. Jun e 17, 1958.

Commissioner Robert McLaughlin,

District B uilding, Washington, D. C.:

Feel that work of Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference is essential 

to welfare of entire metropolitan area. Fa irf ax County willing to consider 

participa tion in staff expenses in connection with its next budget.

Ann Wilk ins,

Chairman, Board of County Supervisors.

Silver Spring, Md., Jun e 16, 1958.

Hon. Robert McLaughlin,

President, District of Columbia Commissioners,

District Building, Washington, D. C.:

If the Senate committee will resto re fund s for a continuation of the outsta nding work of the Metropolitan Regional Conference I am confident the surrounding jurisdictio ns will wan t to assist in their forthcoming budgets for nex t year.

Wilbur N. Baughman, 

President, Montgomery County Council.

Falls Church, Va., June 16,1958.

Commissioner Robert McLaughlin,

503 District Building, Washington, D. C.:

A metropolitan area conference has solved some of the are a problems and

will solve many more as we work together. It is my plan to include in the next 

budget money to help promote this work.

Thomas A. O’Halloran, 

Mayor, City of Falls Church.

27235— 51
112 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Alexandria, Va., June 13, 1958. Hon. Robert McLaughlin,

Chairman, Board of Commissioners,

District Building, Washington, D. C.:

As mayor of the city of Alexandria, I heartily support your request for the 

restora tion of $18,000 in the Distric t’s budget, eliminated by the House of 

Representatives committee, and orginally sought for use of the Metropolitan 

Regional Conference, of which my city is a member.

I believe that the manifold problem confronting the entire metropolitan area, 

fully wa rra nts the effective continuation of this cou ncil; that it has in the past 

and will in the future serve as a necessary instrum entality for the cooperation 

and solution of those vita l regional problems which affect every jurisdiction 

with in the Washington m etropolitan community.

I am likewise certain that other member bodies will be entirely willing to 

consider some appropriation in their next budget to assist in carryin g forw ard 

the important responsibility with which we are all concerned. I sincerely tru st 

that the Senate committee will accede to your plea and restore these funds. 

Sincerely yours,

Leroy S. Benheim, 

Mayor, Alexandria, Va

Annapolis, Md., .lane 18, 1958. Commissioner Robert McLaughlin,

President, Board of Commissioners, District of Columbia,

President, Metropolitan Regional Conference,

District Building, Washington, D. 0.:

The Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference is one of the most important developments in our metropolitan area. Strongly urge all steps lie 

taken by Congress to supply funds for permanent organization and staff as its 

successful operation will be of tremendous importance to our Nation’s Capital.

Edward S. Northrop,

Sta te Senator, Montgomery County. Md.

Arlington, Va., Jun e 13,1958. Hon. Robert E. McLaughlin,

Chairman, Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference,

District Building, Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. McLaughlin : I am distressed to hear that the appropriations 

committee has deleted from the District of Columbia’s appropriation request 

funds to provide an executive secretary and a secretary for the Washington 

Metropolitan Regional Conference as a nucleus of a staff. I understand tha t 

the committee’s report bases the deletion on the fact tha t none of the other 

member bodies is contributing funds.

Arlington County feels that the conference is an organizatio n of real benefit 

to the metropolitan are a and should continue to function actively. Fur ther, 

the county deems that a contribution to the expenses of the conference is an 

item worthy of consideration in the county’s future budget planning.

I sincerely hope tha t the funds deleted will be restored, and I will be happy 

to appear in suppo rt of their re storation if you so desire.

Very truly yours,

Ralph Kaul,

Chairman, County Board of A rling ton County, Va.

House of Delegates, 

Annapolis, Md., Ju ne 17, 1958. Mr. Robert McLaughlin,

Chairman, Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference,

District Building, Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. McLaughlin : Prince George’s County Commissioners Frank J. 

Lasn er and A. Preston I’errie join with me as members of the Washington 

Metropolitan Regional Conference and its Steering Committee in expressing to
DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959 113

yo u ou r co nc ern fo r th e es ta blish m en t of a fu ll tim e se cre ta ri at fo r th e 

conference.

I t is ou r co nv ict ion th a t th e es ta bl is hm en t of th is co nf er en ce has bee n a 

mam moth st ep to w ar d th e ult im at e so lu tion of man y of th e prob lems of th e 

M etro po lit an W as hi ng ton are a. We feel th a t its ac tivitie s sh ou ld co nt in ue 

an d w ha te ve r fa ci lities which ca n be prov id ed to fa cil it ate ac hi ev in g des irab le 

re su lts shou ld be pr es se d for .

We ur ge yo u to ta ke w hat ev er step s may be ne ce ss ar y to pre ven t th e remov al 

of th e au th ori zati on fo r th e se cre ta ri at in you r bu dg et an d ap pr ov e you r use 

of th is l ett er in th a t co nn ec tio n shou ld y ou deem it d es ira ble.

Very tr uly yo urs,

Car lto n R. Sic k l e s.

(Also, there is submitted for the record an editorial appearing in 

the Washington Evening Star, on Monday, June 16, 1958, as follows:) 

U n w is e E co nomy

The Hou se A pp ro pr ia tio ns Co mm ittee, re po rt in g D is tr ic t bu dg et es tim at es 

fo r nex t ye ar , ga ve a sy m pa th et ic p at on th e ba ck to th e new W as hi ng to n 

M et ro po litan Reg iona l Co nferen ce fo r it s ef fo rts to att ack met ro prob lems 

on an ar ea w id e ba sis. Th en , w ith a simple st ro ke of th e ax , it re fu se d to le t 

th e D is tr ic t sp en d $18,000 fo r a sm all adm in is tr ati ve st af f to ge t th e fledgling 

or ga ni za tion off th e grou nd .

Thi s is one of thos e in st an ce s in which th e mod est size of th e bu dg et 

re qu es t w as no ga ge of it s im po rtan ce , an d we feel su re th e co mm itt ee fa iled 

to und er st an d it s un iq ue s ta tu s.

F or th e first tim e, th e co nferen ce ha s dra w n to ge th er th e W as hi ng to n a re a ’s 

elec ted an d ap po in te d po litica l le ad er s to seek unified so lu tion s to th eir com mon 

met ro he ad ac he s. W hat mak es th is so sign ifi ca nt is th a t th e co nferen ce 

me mbers, un like pla nn er s an d oth er ad vi se rs, ha ve th e po wer to put th eir 

de liber at iv e co nc lusio ns in to effect. Alre ad y, th ey are ta lk in g ab out am bi tiou s 

ap pr oa ch es to some of th e mos t dif ficult m et ro prob lems— tr ansp ort ati on, w at er 

su pp ly an d po llu tion ab at em en t. But, as a grou p, th eir pr og re ss is be ing ha m ­

pe red by th e lack of a dm in is tr ati ve fac ilitie s.

The co mmitt ee disa llo wed th e $18,000 on gr ou nd s th a t al l th e are a ju ri sd ic ­

tion s shou ld kick in on th e st af f expense. W e ha ve no do ub t th a t in th e fu tu re , 

as th e co nferen ce grow s an d its staf f ne ed s mul tip ly , jo in t fin an cin g cl ea rly will 

be re qu ired an d forth co ming. Sub ur ba n ju ri sd ic tions, in fa ct , pr ob ab ly will 

in si st up on it in or de r to in su re th a t adm in is tr ati ve co nt ro l is no t lod ged in the 

centr al city.

At th is stag e, ho we ver, th e co nferen ce is ju st fe el ing it s wa y. It s me mb ers , 

si tt in g down to ge th er fo r th e fi rs t tim e, are ju st be ginn ing to develop con fidenc e 

in ea ch ot her as well as in th e po ss ib ilitie s of m et ro co op eration. If th e Hou se 

up ho lds th e co mm itt ee cu t. we hope th e Sen at e re st ore s it so th e co nferen ce 

will ha ve a fig hting ch an ce to live up t o it s po te ntial .

PERS ONAL SERVICES

Senator P astore. Are there any further questions?

Commissioner McLaughlin. You mentioned a personnel man. It 

is a man under the item of “Personnel services,” but he would he an 

executive secretary, and his work would he very important, because 

this is pioneering work. He has to assemble all the work being done 

in the 4 or 5 other metropolitan areas successfully in this field, and 

push the matter along.

co m m is si o n er ’s youth co un ci l

Senator Pasture. We have a communication here, Mr. Commissioner, from Mr. Hennings. I don't know that I should take up the 

time to read it, but it has to do with the Youth Council. It is the item 

that appears in the appropriation as $42,673, as the estimate for 1958.
114 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

The estimate for 1959 is $43,528 and the House allowance is $43,388, 

a cut of $140. The letter from Mr. Hennings asks an increase of this 

sum.

Commissioner McLaughlin. I have a copy of tha t letter, Mr. 

Chairman.

Senator Pastore. Are you ready to comment on it ?

Commissioner McLaughlin. I would like to.

Senator Pastore. At this point, I will put this letter into the 

record.

(The letter referred to follows:)

U nit ed Sta te s Sen a te,

Com m it te e on t h e J udic ia ry,

Sub co mmitte e T o I nv es tiga te J uvenil e D elin q u en c y,

Washington, D. C., June 11,1958.

H o n . J o h n O. P ast ore,

Chairman, Subcommittee on District of Columbia,

Senate Appropriations Committee, Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Chairman : E ver since the estab lishm ent in 1953 of the Dis trict of 

Columbia Commissioners’ Youth Council for the prevention and control of ju ­

venile delinquency, I have followed its work with gre at inte rest. The program 

of this group has been carried out with imagination and intelligence. They 

have demonstrated a willingness to face forthrigh tly the juvenile delinquency 

problems of the Distric t of Columbia and to apply constructive measures directed toward their alleviation and correction. The Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Jud iciary To Investiga te Juvenile Delinquency, of which 

I have the honor to be chairman, only recently commended the District of Columbia Youth Council for some of the excellent work which it is doing.

On Feb ruary 14, 1858, the District of Columbia Commissioners held a conference on youth fitness for the purpose of considering means of implementing 

the President’s national youth fitness program. It was the consensus of the 

conference that responsibility for planning and executing such a program should 

be delegated to the existing Commissioners’ Youth Council. There can be no 

doubt th at the thinking of the conference was greatly influenced by the outstan ding record achieved by the Youth Council during the past 5 years. Another fac tor which undoubtedly influenced the thinking of the conferees at the 

youth fitness meeting was the fac t tha t the Youth Council alre ady has a functioning organization for dealing with delinquency and that it would be more 

economical to expand the work of the Council to cover all the youth of the Distri ct of Columbia, rather than to estab lish a completely new organization.

This new responsibility was welcomed by the Youth Council. As shown by 

the atta che d material, it has given serious consideration to the matter of extending its services to deal with family life, education, health, recreation, and 

religious life. Afte r careful study, it has found that an efficient job can be done 

with an added budget of $38,000. Such an amount is small indeed when compared with the untold good which can result from th is enlarged, positive program 

aimed at the tota l fitness of youth on a physical, mental, and spiritu al level.

It is my und erstanding th at your subcommittee is today considering the budget 

for the District of Columbia, which includes among other items an allotm ent of 

$45,000 for the Youth Council. Inasmuch as an additional $38,000 will be needed 

for carrying out this tota l youth fitness program aimed not only at delinquent 

children, but a t all youth of the D istrict, I should greatly appreciate the serious 

consideration of your subcommittee with regard to the additional modest sum 

needed, thus making a total budget for the Youth Council of approximately 

$84,000.

I am advised that the Commissioners of the District of Columbia are prepared to express the ir views on the merits of this proposed program and to 

endorse it in principle if you should desire to question them about it.

Thanking you for any consideration which you may give to this requ est which 

can have such far-reaching beneficial effects on the child ren of the District of 

Columbia, I am

Sincerely yours,

T hom as C. H e n n in g s, Jr., Chairma n.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 115

P roposed P rogram and B udget

On Febru ary 14, 1958 the Distric t of Columbia Commissioners’ Council on 

Youth Fitn ess held a conference to consider ways of implem enting the President’s national program. It was the consensus of the conference that responsibility for planning and executing the fltuess program should be delegated to 

the Commissioners’ Youth Council.

The basic reasoning was (1) that the Youth Council’s program fo r delinquency 

control, treatm ent and prevention was already working to some extent (pa rtic ularl y in the prevention programs) toward the concept of total fitness. (2) Any 

planning to work w ith the en tire city must of necessity use a grassroo ts approach 

and a working plan of this kind was already an ongoing pa rt of the Youth 

Council’s program. (3) Setting up another program would require support 

from the same organizations and individuals who are now activ e with the 

Youth Council.

The Commissioners, on Jun e 3, requested the Youth Council to submit a 

proposed program and budget which would expand operations of the Commissioners’ Youth Council to encompass the aims and objectives of the national 

program for youth fitness. The attach ed material outlines the program we have 

planned, the proposed amended order, the reorganization of the committee structure of the council and the area boards, the staff requirement and the budget 

necessary. The increase in funds required is $38,530. We believe th at this is 

sub stantially less tha n would be the cost of setting up another agency to car ry 

out the national program, and we are convinced th at the proposed combined and 

unified program is more effective tha n eith er program would be operating as a 

sep arate unit. The are a board approach which covers the entire city has in the 

past 4 yea rs been proven effective. As a ma tte r of fact, the gre atest improvement has been in those are as in which there has been a concentration of effort 

on the pa rt of the are a boards. The proposed plan makes this “machinery” 

available to the youth fitness program and, on the other hand, the youth fitness 

concept strengthen s and stim ulates the existing are a board programs.

The juvenile delinquency population of the Distric t of Columbia is approximately 2 percent of the total child population. The services of the Youth Council have, of necessity, been aimed toward a much lar ger percentage of the 

District children tha n the 2 percent, but was far short of the total. The new 

program expands the scope of our operations to include the total child population of the District of Columbia. According to an estimate of Jul y 1, 1956, this 

population was 225,000. We propose to serve this group in such a way that its 

mental, moral, spiritua l, and physical fitness will be improved. This aspect 

of tota l fitness includes the control, treatm ent and prevention of juvenile delinquency which will, of course, continue to be an imp orta nt pa rt of the Youth 

Council’s overall work.

We are requesting that the order to the council be amended to include the 

concept of tota l fitness as a directive to the Youth Council. We are also requesting th at the Commissioners appoint additional members to the council and 

th at they be selected particularly on the basis of the ir qualifications to advise 

in the field of youth fitness. A copy of the amended order is attache d.

The organization al structur e of the Youth Council committees is shown on an 

atta che d cha rt. In addition to the two special committees, departm ent heads 

and professional advisory, the committee activity is broken down into five categories: family life, education, religious life, health, and recre ation. We contemplate th at the area board committee organization will correspond with that of 

the Central Council and that each of the five co nstituen t committees will work 

closely w ith its coun terp art on each of the a rea boards.

The family life committee will stre ss the aspect of social fitness. It will 

devise and execute programs to strengthen the family as a unit. It would seek 

to develop programs for education and counseling in family life, and improve 

parent-child relationships, growth, and development.

The education committee would work with the public, priv ate, and parochia l 

schools in those problems that reach into the larg er community. This would 

include ways of dealing with incorrigibles in the schools, the problem of dropouts and potential dropouts. This committee would be concerned with the 

employment program including training of the unskilled, placement, and some 

job supervision. Various aspects of adult education would fall within the purview of the education committee.

The religious life committee would be concerned prim arily with the spiritual 

and moral fitness of youth. They would develop religious counseling. They
116 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

would work toward a more meaningful use of church facilities and more inclusive church-centered community living.

The health committee has as its prim ary concern the physical and mental fitness of all youth. Physical education and child guidance programs would be 

handled by them. They would develop nutritiona l, hygienic, and supportive 

services.

The recreation committee would take responsibility for working with neighborhood groups of all varieties, including the antisocial. They would develop 

sports, games, athletics, social, creative, and cultural programs designed to 

reach the entire population. They would work closely with the District of 

Columbia Recreation Department.

The staff requirement to c arry out this program is seven persons to work with 

the are a boards. The special committee of th e Council has considered this very 

carefully and their opinion is that a worker cannot handle more than three area 

boards if he is to do a really effective job. Broadly, three are a boards would 

mean approximately 100 board members who would be the planning and policymaking groups in each neighborhood. Three area boards would also mean 

responsibility for an average of something more than 32,000 children. Carrying out the board program we have outlined would nece ssitate the staff representatives working with all public and priv ate agencies, citizens and service 

groups, professional agencies, and all areas of community organization in the 

District. This tota l participation has been accomplished in area L in the 2d 

precin ct here. There are 15 agencies represented in the board membership. 

The schools, churches, and every organization group in the 2d precinct known 

to us has been a part of t ha t program. The effectiveness is revealed in the drop 

of the rate of delinquency in that area , in the increased employment placement 

of youth, and in the control which has been exercised over the gang activ ities 

which at one time constitute d a serious thre at there. Through the social hygiene 

programs and other educative means, we have contributed substan tially to the 

improved total fitness of that area . We have been able to accomplish this because we concentrated on that area with its special need. We are convinced 

that we can do this in all sections of the city if we have the staff to do so.

The economy of this program can be measured in term s of delinquency prevention. The cost of carin g for one boy at National Trainin g School is $2,500 

a year. The cost at Children’s Center at Laurel is appro ximately $2,100 a year. 

The measu rement of economy along other lines is more difficult but the reduction 

in communicable diseases, venereal disease, and emotional disturbances should 

be demonstrable. It is apparen t that the saving effected by preventing the 

institution aliz atio n of 20 boys more than compensates for the additional funds 

needed to c arry out the tota l program.

Proposed budget, reorganization District of Columbia Commissioners’ Youth Council

Staff

Present Proposed

Grade Salary Grade Salary

NBT.....................................................................

A FM ____ _______ ___________ __________

JA W .. .. ............................................................

BR S................... .................................... .............

D K R ........................... ........................................

New (5 ). .. . 

Clerk (new)

D FM ......... .

Vacan t.......

Consultants.

Tota l

Administrativ e:

Trave l.................................

Communications___ ___

Prin ting and reproduction.

Insurance and repairs____

Supplies..............................

Retirement........

To tal...............

Personal services.

Grand to ta l. ..

11

9

9

9

9

5

3

$fi, 820

5,77 7

5,98 0

5.44 0

5.44 0

3,6 70 

3,1 75 

4,40 0

13

11

11

9

9

9

6

5

3

40 ,7 02 ....................

1, 05 6 .....................

308 ....................

615 ....................

192 ....................

270 ....................

2,43 4 .....................

4,8 75 ....................

40 ,7 02 ....................

45 ,577

Increase

$8 ,990 $2 ,170

6,39 0 613

6,39 0

5,44 0

410

5,44 0

27 ,200 27 ,200

4, 08 0 

3. 67 0

4,08 0

3, 17 5

4, 400

75 ,175 34 ,473

1,05 6

608 300

1,50 0 885

400 208

.500 230

4,86 8 2,43 4

8,9 32 4,05 7

75 ,1 75 34 ,4 73

84 ,107 38 ,530
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS. 19 59 117

J une 12, 1958.

Memo F rom Richa rd K. Lyon Re Cha ng es E ffectuat ed by P roposed N ew Order

1. Adds promotion of tota l youth fitness to purposes and functions of Council.

2. Elim inates authority to depa rtment heads to designate represen tatives 

on the Council.

3. Adds judge of juvenile c ourt as ex-officio member.

4. Increases number of appointive members from 12 to 18.

5. Requires convening of Council at least 6 times a year in lieu of at least 

4 times a year.

PROPOSED DRAFT OF AMENDED ORDER 

Government of th e Dist rict of Colu mbia

EXECUT IVE OFFICES

Wa shingt on, D. C.

October 16, 1953 

Amended April 21, 1955

Ordered: Amended March 19, 1956

Amended J une 12, 1958

There is hereby created a committee to be known as the Commissioner’s 

Youth Council.

PART 1. PURPOSE AND FUN CTION S

It shall be the purpose and function of the C ouncil:

1. To study ways and means of promoting the total fitness of youth in the 

District of Columbia, including the prevention and treatm ent of the delinquent 

behavior of children.

2. To develop a broad understanding of the premise that the fitness of youth 

pertain s to the tota l human entity, combining all components of mental, social, 

spiritual, and physical attribute s of th e young citizen.

(o) The Council shall recommend to the Board of Commissioners legislative and regulatory provisions designed to raise the level of youth fitness 

and to reduce and control juvenile delinquency which its studies indicate are 

necessary or desirable.

(ft) The Council shall designate specific area s throughout the Dis trict of 

Columbia and select and appoint for each such area a committee which shall 

study the condition of youth fitness and develop and execute programs to 

promote it in that area. The number of such areas and the boundaries of 

each shall be determined by the Council.

(c) The Council shall evaluate and coordinate the work of the are a committees, and form ulate the overall policies to be followed by them.

(d) The Council shall promote the efficacy of existing programs and the 

launching of additional programs which will enhance the fitness of American youth. The Council shall seek to coordinate, stimulate , and improve 

the functions of existing agencies, both governmental and private, with respect to the total fitness of youth.

PART 2. COMPOSITION

The Council shall consist of the following ex-officio members: The Director 

of Public Welfare, the Sujierintendent of Schools, the Superintenden t of Recreation, the Chief of Police, the Director of Public Health, the judge of the juvenile 

court, and 18 members appointed by th e Board of Commissioners on the basis of 

personal qualificatins. Persons appointed to membership on the Council shall 

be selected, insofar as possible, in such a way as to provide i>ersi>ective on, and 

insight into, the youth fitness of th e community.

PART II I. TERM OF OFFICE OF APPOINT ED MEMBERS

The members shall be appointed by the Board of Commissioners for a term 

of 1 year. Should a vacancy occur, other tha n by the expiration of a term of 

office, a successor shall be appointed to serve the unexpired term. Members 

shall be eligible fo r reappointment.
118 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

PART IV. OATH OF OFFICE

Members shall take an oath of office as f ollo ws:

“I, --------, having been duly appointed by the Board of Commissioners as a

member of the Commissioners’ Youth Council, do solemnly swear that I will 

support and defend the Constitution of the United Sta tes ; th at I will perform 

such duties as may be assigned to me as a member of said Council to the best 

of my ability without fea r or fa vo r; that I will exercise my best judgment and 

will consider each matter before me from the viewpoint of the best intere st of 

the District of Columbia, as a whole, so help me God.”

PART V. COMPENS ATION

Members shall serve without compensation. However, ex officio members 

shall be considered in normal-duty sta tus when serving on the Council during 

regular hours of duty.

PAR T VI. ORGA NIZATION

The Council shall determine its own form of orga nization and establish 

rules of procedure. The Council shall select its officers ann ually from among 

its members. It shall convene at least six times each yea r at regularly scheduled 

meetings. It shall hold additional meetings at the call of the presiding 

officer of the Council, a majority of the Council membership, or the Board of 

Commissioners.

PART VII. ADMI NISTRA TION

The Council shall be responsible for the adm inistration of the functions set 

forth in this order. The Board of Commissioners shall fur nis h such administrative, stenographic, and clerical services as are required for the conduct 

of t he business of the Council.

PART V II I. EFFECTIVE DATE

The provisions of this order, as amended Jun e 12, 1958, shall become effective 

on an d after J uly 1,1958.

By order of the Board of Commissioners, District of Columbia.

Com mission er’s Youth Council

Com missioner McLaug hlin. We have Mr. Ri ch ard K. Lyo n, c ha irma n o f the Com missioner’s Youth Council.

Se na tor P astore. All r ight , Mr. L yo n; we will he ar you on this.

Mr. Lyon. Mr. Ch airma n, I appre cia te the op po rtu nity of coming here at this very late ho ur to su pp ort this req ues t fo r addit ion al 

fund s fo r the Yo uth Council. We certa inl y wou ld have been under 

the wire much sooner, bu t we were not in a pos itio n to prese nt this 

enlarged pro gra m to t he B oard of Comm issioners unt il only la st week, 

whi ch exp lains the late ness of o ur p res entation . The reason th at we 

are seeking approx im ate ly $38 ,000 of ad ditio na l fu nd s is because of a 

pro posed chan ge in the concept and organiz ati on of the Com missioners ’ Yo uth Council. Since 1953, when we were form ed, we have been 

charg ed p rim arily with the responsi blity of red ucing and preventin g 

juv enile delinquency in t he D istri ct of Colum bia.

presi dent’s program for yo ut h fitn ess

Und er the Presiden t’s p rogram fo r youth fitness, a conferen ce was 

held here in Fe brua ry, at which were prese nt all of the local priva te 

and governmental agencies who had a stake in total y outh fitness.

As a res ult of t hat conference, it was recom mended th at responsibility fo r this enlarged prog ram be assi gned to the Com missioners’ 

Yo uth Council subject to the approv al of the Bo ard of Commission-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 119

ers. It took us some months to formally present the conferees’ report 

to the Board of Commissioners, because of financial limitations. But 

it was presented, and the Commissioners approved the recommendation in principle that the Youth Council take on this additional 

responsibility.

We were told to go back and see what it would entail in terms of 

additional money and additional personnel to do the enlarged job.

RESPONSIBILITIE S OF COUNCIL

Senator P astore. What do you do with your present money ? What 

kind of a job do you do? What are some of your responsibilities?

Mr. Lyon. The city is divided up into 22 area boards at the present 

time, and our job on the Youth Council is one of coordinating and 

stimulating the work of the constituent area boards. Prim arily, it is 

a grassroots job, on the premise that each local community in the Distric t of Columbia knows best how to cope with its own individual 

problems.

Our job on the Youth Council is to coordinate and stimulate the 

activities of these boards. We are not a program forming or executing agency. We are more of a coordinating and stimulating agency, 

which brings together all of the Departments of the District of Columbia government and representatives of the various social agencies, 

and we sit on a Board which is comprised of the 6 departmental 

heads, and various lay leaders in the community.

Our job, as I see it, is to disseminate information and inspiration to 

these local area boards, to do an effective job in the field.

TOTAL EMPL OYEES

Senator Pastore. How many people do you have working for 

you?

Mr. L yon. Actually on the Council itself there are 18. But there 

are over 500 lay leaders throughout the city who are participating on 

a voluntary, uncompensated basis on the area boards.

Senator Pastore. These activities at the grassroots level, is that a 

civilian participation?

Mr. Lyon. We not only bring together the private agencies, but the 

governmental units in each of these boards are represented. We have 

the Recreation Department, represented by roving leaders who cope 

with gangs in the various communities. Modestly, I might say, and 

we hold our breath when we say it, in the past 3 years the trend of 

juvenile delinquency has gone down in the District of Columbia and 

we hope we have played a small part in this result. I am sorry to 

say, throughout the country, the trend is upward.

Senator P astore. Wha t is this new responsibility ?

Mr. Lyon. Heretofore, we have been charged with responsibility 

for approximately 2 percent of our child population. This new assignment would entail responsibility for 100 percent of our children 

population—at least a quarter of a million children in this area.

Senator P astore. What will vou be doing?

Mr. L yon. We will do everything we can to enhance the fitness of 

these children for American citizenship—physically, mentally, and
120 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

mo rally—to assume their fitness to be bette r citizens of th is com munity and of the country.

Se na tor P astore. TTow will you do it ?

Mr. L yon. Up un til now we have, as I say, pr im arily d irected our 

ene rgies into the field of juvenile delinquency. Natur ally ou r work 

alr eady lias spilled over to a lim ited extent int o the field of you th 

fitness. The prese nta tion shows a str uc tural ch art which will divide 

the fun ctions of the Council itse lf, and each of the are a board s will 

have a para llel s tru ctu re, in the field of fam ily lif e, e duc atio n, religio us 

life , h ealth, an d recr eation.

Our job will be to stimu late and enco urage enlar ged pro gra ms in 

those various fields, so we can achieve the objective of total fitness.

Se na tor P astore. You have the church gro ups, you have the Boy 

Scouts, you have a lot of thing s. Ju st so tha t I can pu t this in prop er 

focus, will you please exp lain to me how this thing is going to work 

out ?

STA FF REQ UIR EM EN TS

Mr. L yon. Well, not only on our c ent ral Council level, bu t in each 

are a board level, we ha ve rep res ent atives of these various p riv ate and 

gov ernm ental org anizations.. Ou r chief request here is one fo r pe rsonnel. We ha ve had too many are a boards assigned to too few pr ofessional staff p ersonnel.

Th e essence o f o ur request here is to get five more staff peop le, who 

are know ledgeable in this broadened field of youth fitness—to have 

somebody who is, fo r example, knowledgeable in the he alt h field, in th e 

recrea tional field, a nd so forth, and to get less boards assi gned to each 

one of these staff workers , so they can do a more effective job in 

wo rking with the citizenry of each are a boa rd. In essence, th at is 

what we are seeking.

Th e staff we have has done an effective job in the lim ited bu t re ­

sponsible field of juv eni le delinquency. But now th at we are going 

into total fitness, not ju st body building , but menta l fitness, social 

fitness, and moral fitness as well, we w ant more people to work closer 

with the area boards, so they can do a more efficient and effective job 

in the variou s localities of the Distri ct of Columb ia. Tha t is the 

bulk of our request fo r an addit ion al $38,000. I might say, in suppo rt of it, tha t if we could keep 10 youths ou t of eith er correction al or 

healt h institut ion s for a year, this prog ram wou ld show a profit. 

PO SS IB LE DUP LI CATI ON OF FU N CTIO N S

Se na tor P astore. T realize th at. Tt would be wo rth 10 time s the 

amount of money you are asking. But the th in g th at confuses me 

a lit tle bi t is tha t here you hav e, for e xample, th e Metr opoli tan P olice 

boys clubs, and you have the chu rch groups. T wonde r if you would 

not g et a conflict tha t will lead t o confusion. Som etim es these people 

resent someone coming in, and telling them how to do th eir job.

Mr. L yon. T migh t say, sir, th at the converse is the sit uatio n here. 

Th ey alr ead y have welcomed the op po rtu nity to un ify and work 

shoulde r to shoulde r, so th at the re isn’t com petition and overlap , s o 

th at t he re are not two organiz ations comp eting.

Se na tor P astore. Do you th ink th at is a good thing?

Com missioner McLaug hlin. Yes. You see, i t came too lat e fo r us 

to put it in.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 121

Senator Pastore. You are in favor of it ?

Commissioner McLaughlin. Very much. As a matter of fact, I 

want to say this, that the Commissioners’ Youth Council is so outstanding th at the surrounding areas have asked us to explain how we 

ever did such a thing, so that they can organize tha t way in their own 

areas.

Commissioner Karrick. They would not have been asking tha t if 

it had not been for that metropolitan area organization.

IT EM UN BU DG ETED

Senator Pasture. Now, why wasn’t it in the budget? This is an 

unbudgeted item, not presented to the House. Explain tha t in the 

record.

Mr. Lyon. Yes, sir. The Commissioners’ Youth Fitness Conference, under the President’s program, was held here in February. This 

conference was attended by several hundred representatives.

I would like to also put into the record, if I may, a statement of 

the conference itself, which did not come to you from Senator Hennings.

Senator Pastore. We will not put this into the record, but we will 

refer to it by reference.

Mr. Lyon. 1 might say that there were present at this conference 

several hundred representatives of the various groups and organizations in the community tha t were interested in the youth problem. 

We had a full day workshop. There were workshop sessions, which 

considered all segments of fitness problem. I think they came up with 

a number of good recommendations.

Senator Pastore. Where did these people come from?

Mr. I jYON. From all over the District of Columbia. 1 can give you 

a rundown of who they were, if you wish.

Senator Pastore. No, I don’t care about this. This is not anybody 

that came from outside the District ?

Mr. Lyon. Not beyond the District line, no, sir. This is exclusively 

a local District of Columbia effort.

AG GR ESSIV E YOU TH F IT N E S S PR OG RA MS PL ANN ED

Afte r conferring the entire day, after workshops and the joint conference, they made certain recommendations, one of which was that 

there be in the District of Columbia a very militant, aggressive youth 

fitness program. The last recommendation was that this responsibility be lodged in the Commissioners’ Youth Council, so that there 

would not be a duplicate new organization set up which would confuse the public, and cost additional money to administer. We were 

a going concern. To answer specifically your question about delay, 

why our request for additional funds wasn't here sooner, we reduced 

to writing the recommendations of this conference. Commissioner 

McLaughlin will substantiate my representation that it was a matter of pure dollars and cents which prevented our getting this report 

reproduced sooner. We tried to get the conference report issued.

Finally we got paper, and the report will show that it was printed 

by the public schools. We reproduced it at Chamberlain Vocational 

High School. It was not until about a month ago or 3 weeks ago th at 

we were able to present it to the Board of Commissioners. Since then
122 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

we ha ve been tr yin g to ma ke up fo r lost tim e. W e do apolog ize fo r 

get ting he re so la te ; bu t it wa s really un av oida ble.

Sen at or P astore. Don ’t ap olog ize to me. I ju st wan t th e reco rd 

to show wh y we are co ns idering an un bu dg eted am ou nt.

W ell, t han k you very m uch .

M r. L yon. Tha nk you ve ry mu ch fo r the o ppor tu nity of ap pe ar in g, 

sir .

P ublic Schools

STATEMENTS OF DR. CARE F. HANSEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF 

SCHOOLS; LAWSON CANTRELL, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF 

SCHOOLS; JOHN M. RIECKS, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT IN 

CHARGE OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS; DR. RICHARD R. FOSTER, 

ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT IN CHARGE OF GENERAL RESEARCH AND STATISTICS; GEORGE E. S. REYNOLDS, BUSINESS 

ADMINISTRATOR; AND MISS KAY BACHMAYER. BUDGET 

ANALYST

RESTORATION REQUEST

Mr. F owler. Pub lic schools op er at in g e xpe nse s, 1958. were $37,450,- 

050. T he es tim ate fo r 1959 was $40,256,000 an d th e Ho us e allowa nc e 

w’as $39,758,000, which wa s a re du ctio n of $498,000. The am en dm en t 

requ ested is pa ge 7, lin e 7, strike ou t “$39,756,000” an d in se rt in lie u 

th er eo f “$40,176,000,” or an incre ase of $418,000 in ap pr op riat io ns .

I wi ll pr es en t Dr. Han se n, rece ntly ele cte d th e he ad of our pu blic 

schools, wh o will in trod uc e tho se he has br ou gh t w ith him.

(T he justificatio n fo llo ws:)

Operating E xpenses

Ap pro pri ation, 1958------------------------------------------------------------------$37,450,050

Es tim ate , 1959 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 40, 256, 000

Ho use allo wance , 1959 (re du cti on of $498,000)_________________ 39,7 58,000

amendment requested

Page 7, lin e 7, strike out “$39,758,000” and inse rt in lieu thereo f “$40,176,000", 

or an inc rea se of $418,000 in the ap prop ria tio n.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 123

Applic atio n of House reductions

Sta nda rd classification

Estimate

1958

Estimate

1959

Amount

recommended

by House

Increase (+ ) 

or decrease 

(—), bill compared w ith 

estim ate

Amoun t of 

restoration 

requested 

in Senate

Personal services....................................

Tra vel . ....... ...................... . ......... .

Transportation of th ings... ...............

$30,235,178 

10,630 

14,540 

61,048 

389,309 

34,500 

279,038

1,364,320 

1,178,737 

674,750 

3,208,000

$31,421,829 

21,140 

14,540 

61,398 

460,178 

34,500 

284,758

1,644,274

1,345,463 

891,190 

4.076,730

$31,025,551 

13,230 

14.540 

61.378 

449.082 

34,500 

284,758

1,616, 120 

1,295,628 

891,190 

4.072,023

-$396,278 

-7,91 0

+$367,675 

+7,910

Communication services..... ..................

Ren ts and utility services. .................

Prin ting and reprod uc tio n..................

-2 0

-11,096

Other contractual services

Services performed by other 

agencies -28,154

Supplies and m aterials........... ............... -49,835

Eq uipm en t..-.

+41,000

Gra nts, subsidies, and contr ibu tions...

Total estimate or app ropriation..

RECAPITULATION (BY ACTIVITIES)

General a dministration....................... .

Supervision and instru ction_________

Vocational education, George-Barden 

pro gram.. ..... .............. . ...................

-4,707 +1,415

' 37,450,050 40,256,000 39,758,000 -498,000 +418,000

$1,048,532 

26,643,662

408,666

5,321,490

1,332,700 

2,695,000

$1,078,236 

27,775,970

408,831

5,841,109

1,610,854

3,541,000

$1.073.532 

27,339.235

408,831

5,812,702

1,852,700 

3,541,000

-$4,704 

-436,735 +418,000

Operation of buildings and grounds 

and maintenance of equipm ent____

Repairs an d m aintenance of buildings 

and g ro u n d s. .__ _

-28,407

-28,154

Teachers’ retirement and an nuity fund

Total es timate or app ropriat ion.. ' 37,450,050 40,256,000 39,758,000 -498,000 +418,000

1

 Includes $204,000 transferred from personal services, wage-scale employees.

HO USE REPORT

“The committee considered it budget estimate of $40,256,000 for the operation 

of the public-school system and recommends an appropriation of $39,758,000. 

This is an increase of $2,511,950 above 1958 appropriations and a reduction of 

$498,000 in the estim ate.

“The committee has approved the following budget incre ase s:

Contribution to teac hers’ retirement and ann uity fund----------------------- $846, 000

Staffing, maintenance, and operation of new structur es______________ 203, 000

General administration________________________________________ 25, 000

Supervision and instructio n____________________________________ 612, 000

Operation of buildings and grounds and main tenance of equipment----- 400, 000

Repairs and main tenance of buildings and grounds-------------------------- 250, 000

“The majo r item of incre ase requested was $1,031,276 for supervision and instruction of which $507,023 was for increased costs resulting from increased enrollments, and $524,253 for increased costs resulting from improvement of services. The committee has approved the $507,000 request for costs resulting from 

increased enrollments, and $105,000 for the following items requested under the 

heading of costs resulting from improved and expanding ser vices:

13 remedial teache rs____________________________________________ $64, 350

1 clinical psychologist__________________________________________ 5, 400

2 psychiatric social workers____________________________________ 10. 400

1 p sy c h ia tr is t___________________________________________________________ 10, 320

Teachers college library book f und------------------------------------------------- 2, 500

Accreditation fees---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3, 000

Rental for tabulating equipment--------------------------------------------------- 6, 000

Civil service retirem ent fund-------------------------------------------------------- 3, 030

“Testimony was presented to the committee in supp ort of $237,600 for 48 

elementary-school teachers to reduce the present 32.8-to-l pupil-teacher ratio to 

32 to 1. The committee has denied this request based in part on the fac t th at 

eac h time the pupil-teacher ratio has been reduced the number of part-tim e 

elasses h as increased.
124 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

“In liseal year 1957 the Congress approved a request for 31 teachers and on 

May 2, 1957, there were 51 part-time classes. Last year the Congress approved 

a request for 68 teachers to reduce the ratio and on May 2, 1958, there were 163 

part-time classes. If the committee were to approve the budget request for the 

48 teachers, the anticipa ted number of part-time classes nex t year would be 321.

“While the 30-to-l ratio is the ideal goal at the moment, the committee is of 

the opinion that the endeavor to reduce the teacher load should not be at the 

expense of adequate pupil time in the classroom. The objective of the school 

system should be to educate the child and the committee does not believe this can 

be accomplished through part-time classes.

“Additional classrooms should be provided before there is a furth er reduction 

in the pupil-teacher ratio.

“The revised public-school construction budget included funds for acquisition 

only of 4 school sites. The committee, in an effort to speed up this vita l construction program, has included an additional $1,118,100 for these 4 particular 

projects. Of this unbudgeted amount $116,000 is for plans for 40 classrooms in 

1 new elementary school and 2 additions to existing schools, and $1,002,100 

is for construction of a 31-room elementary school in the far northea st are a where 

there are presently 26 part-time classes.

“Last year the committee was instrume ntal in implementing a broader welfare program which, in effect, was an effort aimed toward alleviating the plight 

of the hungry child in the Nation’s Capital. This year the committee is still 

concerned about the problem and directs that the District officials in cooperation with the Board of Education conduct a survey of the number of elementaryschool children in need of a hot-lunch program and who cannot afford such a 

lunch, the school facilitie s alre ady available or needed, and the probable cost 

of such a program. The results of the study should be reported to the committee at the beginning of the next session of congress.”

JU STIF IC A TIO N

The increase requested is as follows :

Supervision and instruction, $ltlX,OOQ.—Of this amount, $237,699 is necessary 

to provide 48 elementary schoolteachers needed to reduce the ratio to 32 to 1.

1. Although pa rt time may be reduced to some extent if these sala ries are 

not made available, the result of the deletion of this request will he to increase 

the sizes of classes which, coupled with part time, will adversely affect the 

efficiency of instruction.

It is important to point out that with the ratio in the neighborhood of 33.4 

on October 18, 1957, there were 1,559 classes in the elementary schools which 

exceeded 30 in number. Unless some advance is made in reducing pupil-teacher 

ratios the problem of oversize classes will continue. Efforts of the school system 

to improve achievement levels will be less effective tha n otherwise would be the 

case if the additional 48 teachers were added to the staff of the elementary 

schools. This s hort step toward the goal of 39 to 1 in the elem entary schools should 

not be delayed because of the possibility of an increase in part-time instruction.

2. During the school year 1958-59 it is expected th at 143 additional elementary classrooms will be added through the completion of construction now 

authorized.

Although the number of part-time classes will be high at the opening of the 

school term in September, as new classrooms are made available during the 

year, part-time instruction w ill be decreased and the teachers should be ava ilable to provide for a reduction in class size.

The best adm inistrative plan is to establish the classes with their teachers 

at the beginning of the year and then as new classrooms come into use teach ers 

and classes then on pa rt time may be assigned to the new space without any 

loss of efficiency in instruction.

3. The estimate of the number of part-time classes for 1958-59 is 321. However, through the use of adm inistrative procedures we can predict a significant 

reduction in the actual number of such classes after the opening of school in 

September. The exact figure on this is not now available. However, the point 

is tha t the extent of part time for tin* opening session of school can 1m* reduced 

and as new construction comes into use the number of part-time classes will be 

reduced.

There is no more impo rtant objective for the improvement of the school system 

tha n to reduce the elementary classes to the goal of 39 to 1. Unless each budget 

yea r makes some gain in this direction, the achievement of this purpose will
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS. 1959 125

lie too lon g de lay ed . In tli e mea ntim e, th e pu pi ls suffe r from th e loss of ed uc ation al ad va nt ag es , los ses wh ich may ne ve r be reco ve red as they move on th ro ug h 

th eir sc hoo l p ro gr am .

R es to ra tion of th e 48 t ea ch er s to redu ce t he pup il-tea ch er ra ti o to 32 to 1 du ri ng 

th e ne xt s cho ol te rm is m os t u rg en tly n eeded.

R es to ra tion of $52,800 fo r 3 mor e su pe rv isin g dir ec to rs an d 0 su pe rv isor s 

at the elem en tary sch ool lev el (to mak e a to ta l of 6 su pe rv isin g dir ec to rs an d 

12 su pe rv isor s) is no les s urg en t th an th e ne ed fo r ad ditio nal te ac he rs . Th ese 

sp ec ia lists in th e su pe rv isio n of in st ru ct io n co nt ri bute in es tim ab ly to th e inservice tr ain in g an d deve lopm en t of te ac he rs , espe cially or new te ac her s an d 

of thos e wh o ha ve been in serv ice but a sh o rt tim e. The im po rtan ce of th is 

service is em ph as ized by th e fa ct th a t in Ju ne 1958, th e D is tr ic t's ei em eu ta ry 

schools ha ve a to ta l of 594 te ac her s who are in ei th er th eir fi rs t or sec ond yea r of 

service in the sy stem —361 in th eir firs t year an d 233 in th eir sec ond yea r. In 

ad di tion to wor king w ith th es e ne wer te ac he rs , th e su pe rv isor s an d su pe rv is in g 

di re ct ors he lp to un ify an d co or di na te th e in st ru cti onal pr og ra m fo r al l te ac her s 

in th e 126 elem en ta ry sch ools of th e cit y. Mo vin g fro m bu ild ing to bu ild ing, 

th is sm all staf f of ex pe rts ca n prov ide in va lu ab le he lp to pri nci pal s as we ll as 

teac he rs. Be ca us e th e elem en ta ry sch ools do no t ha ve ass is ta n t princi pa ls or 

co un selors on th eir staffs, th er e is a g re at ne ed fo r su pe rv isor y he lp on a ci ty ­

wide ba sis. Und er pre se nt circ um stan ce s, th er ef or e, th e re qu es ted in cr ea se 

in th e staf f of su pe rv isor s an d su pe rv isin g dir ec to rs is es se ntial to th e im prov emen t of ele men tary -sch oo l in st ru ct io n th ro ug hou t th e sy ste m.

Th e five sch ool psyc ho logists re qu es ted are pri m ar ily tech ni cian s. T hei r 

ch ief re sp on sibi lity is th e an al ysi s an d in te rp re ta ti on of in di vid ual an d gr ou p 

ps yc ho metric te st s incl ud in g ed uc at io na l te st s an d m ea su re m en ts as we ll as 

psy cholog ica l te st s an d m ea su re m en ts. The se sch oo l psyc ho logists wi ll receive 

re po rts on ch ildr en ne ed ing help, mak e in di vid ual pu pil stud ie s, re port th e 

ou tco me of th es e stud ies, an d m ak e reco m m en da tio ns to th e psy ch ia tric tea m. 

Th ese school psyc ho logists , th er ef or e, are ur gen tly ne eded in or de r to pr ov ide 

one ph as e of th e wor k inv olv ed in th e ha ndling of thes e dis tu rb ed pu pi ls an d 

re st ora tion o f $26,666 is ur ge nt ly re qu es ted.

Th e ov erall te st in g pr og ra m, wh ich is so es se ntial a p a rt of th e sch ool op er atio n, is se riou sly curt ai le d wh en te st re su lts ca nn ot be re tu rn ed to th e sch oo ls 

an d te ac he rs in a re as on ab le tim e. Thi s de lay is c au se d pri m ar ily by th e lack of 

suf ficien t cler ical help. Th e te st in g pr og ra m is ra pi dly ex pa nd in g du e to th e 

in cr ea se in th e nu m be r of pu pi ls an d also to th e ne ed fo r as mu ch ob jective 

d ata as po ssible in ord er to ad eq ua te ly plan pu pil gr ow th in lin e w ith th eir ab ilitie s, in te re st s, an d ap titu des . It is re qu es te d th a t an am ou nt of $13,909 be 

re st or ed to pro vi de for 4 GS- 3 c lerk -typ ists.

R es to ra tion of $35,406 fo r ass is ta nt princ ip al s fo r 6 ju nio r high schools is re ­

qu ested. The ad ol es ce nt ag e is a difficult an d tr yin g pe riod in a ch ild’s life. 

It is th e tim e th a t ch ildr en fr eq ue nt ly fa ll in to a p att ern of bad be ha vior . Th e 

en ro llm en t in som e of th e sch oo ls fo r which th es e ass is ta nt pr in ci pa ls are re ­

qu ested ex ceed s 1,200 pu pil s. It is im po ssible fo r th e pr in ci pa l an d one ass is ta n t 

pr in ci pa l to pr ov ide ad eq uat e su pe rv ision an d pr op er ly ad m in is te r a ju nio r hig h 

school of th is size. R es to ra tion of th es e fu nds fo r a sec ond ass is ta n t pr in ci pa l 

is urg en tly requ es ted.

W es te rn Se nior H ig h School is th e on ly se ni or hi gh school w ith on ly one cle rk. 

Th e en ro llm en t is in cr ea sing , an d it is fo un d to be nex t to im po ssi ble fo r th e 

du ties of a la rg e se ni or high sch ool to be c arr ie d on w ith one clerk. Thi s cler k 

is ne ed ed to ass is t w ith re gis tr at io n, re qu isitio ns , teleph on e ca lls , co rre sp on de nc e, 

par e pu pi ls’ tr an sc ri p ts fo r college en tran ce , co rrespo nd en ce w ith pu pils wh o 

w ri te fo r th eir cr ed en tial s, an d th e m ultitude of oth er du ties in a la rg e high 

school mak e th e se rv ices of anoth er cler k in di sp en sa bl e if th e sch ool is to fu nctio n an d serv e it s pu rp os e pr op er ly. R es to ra tion of $3,381 is ne ec ss ar y to pr ovid e a GS-3 cler k- ty pi st.

Res to ra tion of $7,910 is re qu es ted to re im bu rs e 45 su pe rv isor y officers fo r us e 

of pr iv at el y ow ned au tom ob ile s fo r official tr av el . The re a re 173 scho ol bu ildi ng s 

in us e fo r teac hi ng pu rp os es an d it is ne ce ss ar y th a t th es e sch oo ls be se rv ed by 

su pe rv isor s if th e wor k is to be ca rr ie d on prop erly. At pr es en t th es e officers 

are us ing th eir own au tom ob ile s an d be ar in g all ne ce ss ar y ex pe ns e in conn ectio n 

w ith trav el. Th e natu re of th eir work re qu ires them to vis it th e var io us schools 

on a re gula r sche du le. It is no t eq ui ta bl e th at th es e em plo yees be comp ell ed to 

bea r th e ex pe ns e of th is trav el th at is re qu ired in per fo rm an ce of th eir duti es.
126 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

At the present time the per capita allowances for teach ing materials and 

textbooks for the various school levels are $4.60 for elementary and junior high 

schools, $5.35 for senior high schools, and $16.35 fo r vocational high schools.

These allowances are not adequate to provide sufficient quantities and varieties 

of ma terials and textbooks needed to meet the demands of the ever-expanding 

curriculum. In the field of science particularly, books p rinted 2 or 3 ye ars ago 

are out of date now. The development of and need for new types of teaching 

ma terials is continuous in the field of science, home economics, and shop.

Courses cannot be effectively tau ght without necessary teaching materials and 

up-to-date textbooks. It is not uncommon to find in our classrooms textbooks 

with copyright dates as far back as the late 1930’s and early 1940’s. Inso far 

as they are financially able, many pupils a,nd teachers make purchases of these 

essential teaching materials and textbooks from the ir own private funds. An 

increase of 40 cents per capita, or a total of $41,000, is needed in addition to 

prese ntly available funds in order that the public schools may more n early keep 

pace with expanding needs.

Application of funds.—The $418,000 requested will be applied as follow s:

48 class 18 elementary school teachers, at $4,950.

3 class 10 supervising directors, elementary schools, at $6,800.

6 class 17 supervisors, elementary schools, a t $5,400.

5 class 18 school psychologists, at $5,200.

6 class 15 junio r high school as sistant principals, at $5,900.

5 GS-3 clerk-typists, at $3,175.

Related items, $50,325.

Financial analysis

Ob jec t: Act iv ity 2

Personal services__________________________________________ $367, 675

Travel___________________________________________________ 7,910

Supplies and ma terials____________________________________ 41,000

Grants, subsidies, and contributions_________________________ 1, 415

To tal________________________________________________________ 418, 000

Genera l Stateme nt

Dr. Hansen. May I introduce the people I have brought along? 

Mr. Lawson Cantrell, Deputy Superintendent of Schools; Mr. John 

Riecks, Assistant Superintendent in Charge of Buildings and 

Grounds; Mr. George Reynolds, Business Administrator; Dr. Richard Foster, Assistant Superintendent in Charge of General Research 

and Statistics; and Miss Kay Bachmayer, budget analyst.

Senator P artore. Before you proceed, allow us to congratulate you 

on your appointment.

elem entary-schoo l tea chers

Dr. Hansen. Thank you. We are asking first for the restoration 

of $418,000—tha t is the total request—of which $237,600 is requested 

for 48 elementary-school teachers needed to reduce the ratio to 32 to 1.

The justification for this is simply this, tha t unless we continue the 

program for reducing class sizes we will continue with overcrowded 

classes in the elementary schools. On October 18, 1957, we had 1,559 

classes which exceeded 30 in number, all of these much too large to 

be taught effectively by the teachers, particularly with the types of 

problems we have to deal with.

TEAC HING PERSON NEL

Senator Pastors. Would you mind an interruption at this point ? 

Can you tell me how many teaching teachers we have in the public 

schools of the District ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 127

Dr. Hansen. Yes. People actually on teaching jobs?

Senator Pastore. Yes, actually to do teaching.

Dr. Hansen. It is something like 3,900. The figure here is 3,982.8. 

Senator P astore. Wha t is it ?

Dr. Hansen. 3,982.8. The 0.8 means tha t 1 teacher is giving 0.8 

of her time to classrooms.

TEACHER POS ITION VACA NCIES

Senator Pastore. Tell me how many vacancies you have in teaching 

teachers.

Dr. Hansen. As of the date of this report, May 15, we had 1 position held vacant in the junior high schools for temporary use fo r the 

assignment of an assistant prin cipal; we had 2 additional salaries assigned to that purpose; and 1 position held vacant to provide for an 

assistant director in the junior high schools. Then we have additional vacancies.

Senator Pastore. Is it fai r for me to assume, Dr. Hansen, tha t we 

are pretty well where we have a rather complete contingent of teaching teachers?

Dr. H ansen. Yes, sir; we do have.

Senator Pastore. Tha t is within the amount allowed.

Dr. Hansen. May I here add the figure of 29 positions vacant as 

of February 28, some of these held for savings, particularly in the 

senior high schools where we were able to reduce the teaching loads 

to some extent because of graduations in February.

But we do have all of the positions filled that we want to fill now.

REASONS FOR VACA NCIES

Senator Pastore. Why do you keep 29 positions vacant? I would 

like to get a little more on that. If this is hard to furnish at this 

time, I would hope tha t it would go into the record. What I am 

trying to do here is make an analogy between your situation and the 

Police Department to see if there is any analogy at all.

(The information requested follows:)

On a staff consisting of approxim ately 4,000 teachers, it is inescapable that 

there is going to be, at any given time, an irred ucible minimum number of 

vacancies occurring through normal turnover due to such factors as maternity 

leave, m ilita ry leave, education al leave, resignatio ns, and deaths.

While there may be an average minimum number of vacancies at any given 

time, the vacancies th at exist on one date are not the same vacancies that existed 

the week before or which may exist a week later. There is a certain lag involved in being able to fill positions due to leave accum ulations even though 

applicants may be available to fill such positions. It is our intention to strive 

to keep this lag to an absolute minimum in order to continuously keep as many 

teaching positions filled as possible.

TEMPO RARY TEA CHE RS

There, of course, we met with the circumstance that they can’t fill all 

their vacancies, for obvious reasons of qualification and what-haveyou. They want to find the desirable people to fill these positions in 

the Police Department, and they can’t always find them. Do you have 

any such problem here in the District with relation to your teachers?

27235— 58-
128 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Dr . H ansen. Yes, si r; we have a pro blem of this kind —th at we 

have to fill man y of ou r positions by em plo yin g teache rs who do no t 

meet the sta nd ards fo r certification in the District school system.

Senator P astore. How many on an average of such positions do you 

have?

Dr. H ansen. I show th at diagrama tic all y here. Th is figu re of 921 

ind icates the number o f tem po rar y teache rs th at we are em ploying as 

of thi s month, as ag ain st 3,092 p erman ent or prob ationa ry teac hers . 

Ac tua lly, we should have in the neighbo rhood of 1G5 tempo rar y positions h eld for peop le who are on lea ve or f or pe ople who are assig ned 

to tem porary p ositions in term s of th e b udget a pp ropr iatio ns fo r those 

positions.

TOTAL TEMPORARIES

Senator P astoke. H ow man y tem porar ies do you rea lly have?

Dr. H ansen. 921 tem po rary people.

Senator P astore. Me aning th at if you got more money, you would 

have to have more te mpo rar y teachers ?

Dr. H ansen. Yes, sir , th at would be the case fo r next year.

We have to mak e some qualifications in relat ion to the tem po rar y 

tea cher problem. Th e big ges t deficiency in the sit ua tio n is the t ra n ­

siency of the pers onnel. We are able to at tr ac t fo r the most part 

people who do ha ve prep aration or experience in t eaching who may be 

deficient in some resp ect or anoth er in terms of requirements fo r assignm ent to p erm anent status.

Our problem is th at the y come in fo r a year or two because this 

suits their personal convenience, and then the y leave us.

Th is year, fo r example, we had over 400 tem po rar y teachers, all 

levels, who were tea ching their first year in the c ity schools. So the 

po in t to be mad e is th is: th at we do at tr ac t fa irly com petent, tem ­

po rary people. We are benefited by the f ac t th at they are pre sen t in 

Wash ing ton , with th eir fam ilies, with th ei r husban ds, and are willing to come in and teach fo r us. We are able to man most of our 

classrooms ra th er ade qua tely , bu t we must, sometime soon, I think , 

thro ug h increased salaries or in recruit men t pro cedures, reduce the 

numb er of temporarie s.

How ever, I realize it would be shortsigh ted to hold up on the ap ­

pr op ria tio n of salaries fo r red uct ion in class loa ds because of the tem ­

po rary teach er s ituation. Th e pe nalty is too hig h i n te rm s of children.

AVERAGE CLASSROOM TEA CHE R VACANCIES

Senator P astore. Ho w many vacancies do you hav e, on t he ave rage , 

in th e school departm ent, in teachin g teac he rs?

Dr. H ansen. In term s of the cu rre nt va canc ies ?

Senator P astore. Yes. Month to m onth.

Dr. H anse n. We have 29 here, and I would suppose th at , gen erally, 

th at ran ges fro m th at po int on down. In the ne arly 4,000 p ositions, 

people leave, and we may h old a p osition open fo r other purposes, or 

we m ay find it nec essary to do some re orga niza tio n to, say, mak e better 

use of th at fund and assign the sa lary to some othe r pos ition. I t is 

not abn orm al at a ll in a sit ua tio n as large a s thi s to ha ve a numb er of

vacancies cu rre nt, m onth by mon th.

Se na tor P astore. Th e reason why I am askin g th at is th at we are 

talk in g here in terms of tea cher- to- pupil ratio. Then you say on an
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 129

ave rage you may have about 30 vacancies a t a ny time, w hich means t hat 

you w ould h ave the salar y of 30 teac her s t ha t you could utiliz e at any 

tim e to expand i n one direction or a nothe r.

Even if you chose to exp and , you could not do it ve ry much because 

you could not get the teache rs any way, because of th is turnov er you 

are talk ing about.

If we did raise this by the $237,000, why would the situation be 

alleviated?

Why would you be be tte r off? He re, on an average , you have 30 

vacancies, so we give yo u more m oney; you still hav e 30 vacanc ies, th at 

you can fill, which you do not.

Dr . H ansen. We ll, fo r instanc e, if I hav e a vacancy of a man in a 

senior high school, in a m athem atics depa rtm en t, which comes in Fe bru ary, it may be possible to reduce the numb er of teache rs in th at 

depa rtm en t because of the graduatio ns. So, I don’t fill th at salar y 

an d we allo w it to accum ulate fo r savings, some of th e sav ings needed 

to m ake up increm ents in salarie s, et cetera. So, we are de ali ng with 

fo ur fairly different levels o f the school system in which there is some 

of this inv olvement of ad minist rativ e kind alm ost con stantly.

We can not imagine, or presup pos e, rath er, th at, say, 30 vacancies 

we may have as of this date could be diverte d to the use of the eleme nta ry schools in September. To do th at w ould be de priving other 

levels of needed s alaries in S eptember. Ev en i f we did th at , we w ould 

still hav e cu rre ntl y, as a m atter of ad minist rativ e accident, if it is 

th at , a n um ber of v acancies each mo nth of the yea r. So, we n eed this 

addition al 48 as a net increase in orde r to reduce the tea cher load in 

the elem ent ary schools n ext y ear to the 32 to 1, an d with the expecta ­

tio n th at we will come back next year wi th an ad dit ion al request of 

130 tea che rs to br in g us to the goal of 30 to 1.

ADEQUAC Y OP CLASSBOOM S

Se nator P astore. An d you can do this wi tho ut ad ding classroom s?

Dr. H ansen. No, si r; we need classroom s, too. We are wo rking 

throug h th at on a pp ropr iatio ns fo r bu ilding s.

Senator P astore. We always get a mistaken notion when we speak 

of rat ios of 30 to 1. I t does no t mean th at every classroom will have 

no more than 30 pu pils to 1 teac her. It only mean s t ha t, in some in ­

stances, you will have 19 or 20, de pending on the course, and in oth er 

instance s you will have 36 or 38, depending upon the demands, and all 

the other sit uatio ns of your grades. Of course, there is a co nstan t pressure here to red uce the rat io of teacher to pupil. But th at does not necessaril y m ean th at each child in o ur pu bli c schools is go ing to ha ve the 

advanta ge of being no more t ha n 1 pu pil out of 30 p up ils in the classroom. Th at could va ry in one direction or the other. The thiim 

th at is distu rb ing me is t hi s; th at, inasmuc h as you do ca rry about 30 

vacancies at a tim e, I am wo ndering abo ut the pru den ce of merely, 

ju st on this the ory of 30 to 1, which is only a symbol, a s I see it, m ore’ 

th an an ything else, and to say th at we ou gh t to increase or restore 

th at amount disallow ed bv the House mer ely calls fo r more teachers, 

because you need to have more teache rs when you alr eady have 30 

vacancies.
130 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Dr. H ansen. I wou ld like very much , if possible, to show y ou th at 

we sho uld separa te the question of vacancies f rom the q uestion of o ur 

reques t fo r 48 add ition al salaries.

Se na tor P astore. But t hat is an academic thing , as you develop it.

Dr . H ansen. I t is not academic. I t is sim ply th is ; tha t, althou gh 

we m ay have 29 vacanc ies we reporte d as o f X d ate, we cannot con vert 

or divert those pos itions int o the elem entary schools next year.

Se nator P astore. H ow are you going to do it in any way wi thou t 

the classrooms ?

Tha t is the reason I say to you th at the two are tied tog eth er. Do 

you mean th at if we restore this $237,000, you are going to have 

eno ugh classroom space? You migh t have eno ugh teache rs if you 

ha d the fac ilities to tak e care of all of thes e problems th at you enume rated to me. But the fact of the matter is th at this is a doub le 

prob lem. Not o nly do you need the teachers, bu t you need the f ac ilities in order to p ut the teacher a nd the pup il in that fac ility.

One is ti ed up with the o the r. An sw eri ng one p art of the problem 

doesn’t answ er the othe r one, as well. Th e reason I am raising this 

is because the y alw ays cre ate this in conference. I am one of those 

who is a str ong believer in the development of our schools, o ur pu blic 

schools, to optimum efficiency.

PRACTICAL NEED FOR FU ND S

I hope you don’t con strue my obs erva tion s here in opp osition t o the 

objective you are tryi ng to accom plish. Bu t, af te r all, i t is money, it 

isn’t a grea t deal of money, we m ust say, th at has been cut ou t of the 

overall bud get. Th is same question came up last ye ar and I raised 

the same point. I said then “Does this necessa rily mean we are ge ttin g down to giving each pu pil in the Distri ct the advanta ge of 

ha ving 1 teach er to ev ery 30 pu pil s in the classroom ?” Tha t is not th e 

answer. I t is n’t so. You still will have 35 or 36 in 1 classroom. You 

will still have a no the r classro om with maybe only 25, depending upon 

wh at kind of a classroom it h appens to be and wh at the s ubject ha ppen s to be. I am actua lly t ry in g to get into the record m ore than the 

ratio . I am rea lly t ry in g to get into the record the pract ica l need fo r 

res torin g this money. I do hop e t hat you will give me s omething real 

strong.

Dr . H ansen. I will t ry to do th at.

Se nator P astore. I hope to get it. I am n ot gettin g it, Mr. Hanse n.

Dr. H ansen. I th in k I can. No. 1, as you say, the 30 to 1 ratio is 

an average , or 32 to 1 is an average. Ac tua lly , this las t October, we 

ha d 1,559 classes wi th o ver 30 pu pils in them . A t t hat time, the ra tio 

was 33.1.

SIZ E OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CLASSES

Se nator Bible. At this point , how m any classes d id you hav e wi th 

less t ha n 30 ?

Ho w m any classes did you hav e w ith less th an 30 ?

Dr . H ansen. W ith ou t checkin g acc ura tely on the figures we h ave, 

say , 1,950 classes altogeth er, of whi ch 1,559 were above 30. The remain de r were 30 or below. The ideal fvould be a max imum of 30. 

B ut the im po rta nt po int is this, th at when we move the ratio up, 

which is an a verage, even by 2 p oints, to 32 or 33, it means t ha t many
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 131

of the classes are excessively overloaded because of the fac t, as you 

hav e said, Senatoi* Pa sto re, we are no t un de r one bu ild ing all in 1 

class, and we don ’t j us t divid e th e chil dren by 30.

Th e significance, the n, of reducing , step by step, to a ra tio o f 30, is 

th at ultim ately we may get t he numb er of the excessive or larg e-size 

classes redu ced to a r ela tively sm all numb er o r perce nta ge of th e tota l.

But unless we move stage by stage in this dir ection, we are going 

to be c ontin uin g w ith overlo aded classrooms, combin ed w ith p art time, 

and I wan t to talk about th at as my second po int, if I m ay, i n ju st a 

moment. But the re duction o f t he ratio on th at is of pa ramou nt concern to the public-school system and all of us wo rking in it, and we 

believe th at any delay in the movem ent in th at directi on wou ld be a 

pos tponem ent o f th e necessary advanta ges fo r the childre n.

QUESTIO NED PLA CEM ENT OF ADDED TEA CHE RS

Se na tor P astore. Let ’s assum e th at the Com missioners fu rn ish to 

the school de pa rtm en t tom orrow 200 teache rs. You do no t th in k 

you could place them.

I)r. IIansen. Yes, we can.

Se na tor P astore. Wh ere would you place them ?

Dr. H ansen. I wa nt to be very fr an k about this. We would have 

to do th is at t he expense of inc rea sin g the numb er of pu pils on part 

tim e fo r a tempo rary period . But as between cho osin g part tim e, 

whi ch I hav e never defended, and wo uld n’t do it here, and ha ving 

overcrowded classes, with tea che rs w orkin g u nd er co nditions in whi ch 

the y can not lie master o f t he situ ati on , I would choose to compromise 

the advanta ge o f the s ma ller classes with par t tim e, tempo raril y, fo r 

the c hildren who h ave to be placed on part tim e in those overcrowded 

areas o f the city.

LARGEST ELE MENTA RY SCHOOL CLASS

Se nator P astore. May I in te rrup t you at th at po int , so we can ma ke 

it clearer ?

How lar ge is the lar ge st classroom any place in the Distri ct?

Dr . H ans en. In terms of space ?

Se na tor P astore. In terms of pup ils.

Dr . H anse n. I th in k we had a class o r two of 45.

Se nator P astore. Forty -five ?

Dr . H ans en. Yes, sir.

Se nator P astore. An d if you ha d a few more t eachers , d o y ou m ean 

you could bre ak th at i nto par t tim e of h av ing two classes a day, one 

in the morning and one in th e a fte rno on ?

Dr. H ansen. I wou ld like very muc h to do th at . Th is hap pened 

in a bu ild ing of nin e rooms, in which we ha d several classes in the 

forties. Now, if we ha d an addit ion al tea cher to pu t in th at 8-room 

build ing , I would say it would be much be tte r to p ut the first g rad e on 

pa rt time, and reduce the o versize classes at leas t to below 40, th an to 

con tinu e jam packing these c hildre n int o the classes to the p oint where 

tliev are n ot being educated.
132 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

BREAKDOWN OF CLASSES OVER 30

Se nator P astore. I know you cannot do it now, bu t I wish you 

could give us a breakdo wn o f the numb er of classroom s th at you have 

over 30, where they are, and how lar ge the y are.

(.The info rm ation req uested f oll ow s:)

Distr ibution of classes over 30 in elementary schools

Schools 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

Ada ms............................. ............ 1 2 1 2 2 1

Ba nc ro ft___ . _______________ 2 1 1 3 3 2 1

1

1 1

B ar na rd ___________ ___ ___ 1 1 4 3 4 2 1

Beers______. .. _________ 1 2 1 3 3 2

Bel l.____ __________ _ 3 1 1 1 1

Ben ni ng ____________________ 2 1 1 8 1 1 1

Birn py .............. ........................... 1 2 7 4 3 1

B la ir_______________________ 1 i 2 1 3

Blow _______________________ 3 1 1 1 2 1 1

Bowen, A ....................................... 2 2 2 3 2 1

Bowen, 8. J ____ ______ ____ 2 1 2 1 1

B re nt.......... .............. ............. 1 1 1 3 1

Brig htwoo d. . . . . . . . . __ .. 1 3 3 2 2 1 2 1

B ro ok la nd ........ ................ 1 5 3

Bru ce ____ _______ ______ 11

1

2 3

B ry an. . . . . . . . . . . . . _____ ____ 4 5 6 3 1

Buc ha na n__________________ 3 3 3 1 1 4 2

Bun ke r H ill________ _______ 2 2 3 6 3 2

Bur ro ug hs _________ __ ____ 2 2 4 2 3 3 1

Burrv ill e______ _ _____ . . . 1 1 3 8 5 1 2

Car ve r. . . . . . . . . . . ___________ 4 3 4 2 2 3

Cleve land ________________ 2 2 1 4 1 1 3

Congress Heigh ts____________ 2 3 1 1 2 4 3

Coo k, J. F __________________ 3 4 2 2 4

Cook e, H. D . ________ .. 1 4 9 3 2 2

Crum me ll plu s anne x.. ___ . I 2 10 2 2

Dav is ___ _ _ __ _ ______ .

Da vis a nn ex _______ _______

3 2

1

2

1

4

” i ‘

1 1 1

1

1

1

1 1

Dra pe r__________ __________ 4 8 6 3 i 2

E a to n ____________ ________ 3 1 2 1 2 1

Eck in gt on _____________ ____ 1 1 2 1

Edm on ds _____ ____________ 1 1 1 2 4 1

Em er y. ____________ ______ 1 1 1 4 2 3 3

Fai rb ro th er _________________ 1 1 3 2

F il lm o re .. ............. ....................... 1

Gag e.................................... ........... 1 3 1 5 2

Garfie ld______ ______ ________ 3 3 3 3 2 3 1 1

Ga rfield ann ex ___ ____ ____ 2 2

G ar ris on _____________ _____ 3 4 3 6

Gid di ng s___ _____ __________ 5 5 1 1 2 1

Greenle af___________________ 1 2 1 1

Grim ko _____ ______________ 3 2 5 6 5 1

H ard y_________ ________ _ 1 2

Harris on ___________________ 3 4 5 1 2 1

H ay es ______ _______________ 1 1 1 1 2 1 2

H ea rs t___________________ .. 1 1 2 1

H vde_______________________ 1

Ja ck so n_____________________ 2

Ja n n e y .. .............. .............. . ... 3 3 4 3

Keene ___________ __________ 2 9 1

Ken ilw or th ........ . . ................. 1 1 1

Ketcliam____________ _______ 2 3 3 1 1 1

K ey................................................ 1 1

K im ba ll....... .......... . ................. 2 3 3 2 3

Kim ba ll an nex...... .......... ............ 2 2

Kings man __________________ 4 2 1 4 5

1

4 2

Laf ay et te ....................................... 2 2 4 1 2 2 2

La ng do n. _________ ____ _ 1 1 3 5 2 1

Lan gs to n. ______ ________ . . . 1 2 3 1

LaSalle _________ ______ ____

Le nox............................................. 2 1 1

Log an ________________ ______ 1 5 3 11 3

Lo vejoy ___ . _____ __________ 2 2 4 9 2

Lu dl ow ___ _____ ____________ 5 1 1 2

M ad ison _______ ______ ______ 1 1 1 1 2 3

M an n.. _____ ________ ___ 3 3

M au ry .............. ............................ 2 1 4 3 1

M err itt____ _________________ 1 2 3 3 2 7 1

M onroe___ _________ . . . .. 1 4 5 1 2 3

M on tgom ery__ ____ ___ 5 2 4 1

M orga n__ __________________ 1 3 3 3 3 2 1

Mors e. .. . ................. . .. 2 2 2

M ot en ............... . .......................... 1 3 2 2 1
DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO RELATION'S, 1959 133

Di str ibu tio n of classes over 3 0 in elementary schools— Con tinu ed

Schools 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

M ot t 1 2 3 3 1 5 2

Mure h 1 2 1 2 1 5 2 3 1

Nalle 1 1 3 6 4 1 3 2

Noyes 1 5 2 2

Orr 1 2 1 1

Ovster 1 1 1 1

Pa rk View 6 1 2 4 1 2 1

Pa tte rson 6 7 7 1 1

Pa yn e 1 1 4 3 1 1 4 3 5

Pa yn e a nnex 1 8

Pe abody 2 2 3 3 1

Pe rry 2 1 2

Pet worth 5 1 3 1 2 1 1

Pierce 1 2 3 2 1 1

Powell 4 1 1

Ra ndle High land s 1 1 2 2 1

Ra ym ond 4 1 3 1 1 1

Richardson 1 2 2 5 10 11

River Terrace 1 1 3 1 1 2 3

Ru dolph 2 3 2 3

Seaton 1 1 2 1 1

Shadd 12 19 2

Shepherd 2 5 1 2 1

Sim mon s 2 6 5 4 2

Simon 6 11 3 1 1

Slowe 2 2 2 2

Smothers 1 1 2 2 2 6 6 1

Sta nton 2 2 4 2 1 1 1

Steven s 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1

Sto dder t 2 2 1

Su mn er 1 1 1 2 1 1

Sypha x 2 2 5 4 1 2 2

Ta ko ma 1 2 3 2

Ta ylor 1 2 3 3 1

Th om as 2 1 3 1 4 2 1 1

Th om son 4 3 1 3

Truesdell 1 2 4 4 1 1

Tur ne r 2 6 2 4 5 1

Ty ler 1 4 2 2 3 2 1 2 1

Va n Ness 4 3 4 7

W alker-J ones 1 10 8 2 1

We bb 1 2 2 1 3 1 1

West 1 3 2 3 2

Wheatley 4 4 2 6 2 2 2 1

W hitti er 2 7 2 1 4 1 1

W oodridge 2 4 1 3 1 1 1

Young 5 5 5 8 5 7 1 1

T o ta l. . . . __________ 140 202 236 232 247 184 139 101 49 20 3 3 1 2

PART-TIME CLA SSES

You do not have to take each one. I mean, you can strike averages. 

In other words, the argument you are making here tha t if you got 

in this the 30 to 1 ratio, what you actually have to do, because you 

lack the facilities now to utilize these teachers to full strength, you 

would have to get into a matter of policy of getting then into part 

time. That is a decision that has to be made.

Dr. Hansen. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Whether or not it is desirable to have, let us say, 

40 pupils in, let us say, 3 classrooms, you see, or to have, let us say, 

30 pupils in 4 classrooms, and do it on a part-time basis. That is your 

problem. But I think you have a policy question there more than 

you have a restoration of a figure.

Dr. Hansen. May I discuss the method of instruction in part-time 

classes just a moment? The children, in the first place, come to school 

somewhat longer. The day is extended for them in the morning and 

afternoon sessions so they are not using a full 2 ^ hours, but getting 

a full 3*A hours of instruction. Tha t is the morning. In the after-
134 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

noon the teacher will be working and coaching some individual students in tha t class who may need remedial help in reading or in 

mathematics. So through this process, it is possible to instruct the 

children in the fundamentals without extreme losses to them.

Senator Pastore. May I say this, Dr. Hansen, and the rest of you 

fine lad’es and gentlemen who are here, I have to attend the meeting of the full committee on the markup of the Health, Education, 

and Welfare appropriation bill tha t I mentioned this morning.

I don’t know how long it will take. If i t is inconvenient for anyone to come back tomorrow, I will be perfectly willing to come back 

late r in the afternoon, which I don’t think will be desirable because 

you have other things you, yourselves, would like to do.

If that be the case, I wonder if we cannot return at a quarter to 10 

tomorrow. Would th at be satisfactory ?

Dr. II 4nsen. Tha t would be fine.

Senator Pastore. We will recess, then, until a quarter to 10 tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 3:07 p. m., Tuesday June 17, 1958, the hearing 

recessed to reconvene the following morning, Wednesday, June 18, 

1958, at 9: 45 a. m.)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

W ED N ESD A Y , JU N E 18, 19 58

United States Senate,

Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,

Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met at 9:45 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room 

F-82, the Capitol, Senator John O. Pastore (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Pre sen t: Senator Pastore.

DIS TR ICT OF COLUMBIA 

Public Sch(X)U5

STATEMENT OF DR. CARL F. HANSEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF 

SCHOOLS

Restoration ok Teacher Positions

Senator Pastore. The committee will please come to order.

I am not too sure, Dr. Hansen, but I thought we left off here on 

the request for the restoration of $237,600 necessary to provide 48 

elementary school teachers; is tha t correct ?

Dr. H ansen. Tha t is correct.

Senator Pastore. I believe you have a table showing the permanent 

positions in the teacher’s salary act authorized through 1958, and including additional positions approved by the House. In addition, 

there is also a comparative table of allotments below the activity level 

for operating expenses. This information will be placed in the record 

at this point.

(The information referred to follows:)

135
P ub lic Schoo ls of th e D is tr ic t of C ol um bia

Perman ent positions in the Teachers' Salary Act

(Inclu des authorize d, 1958; approved b y House, 1959.)

Teachers

College

Laboratory schools Senior high schools Capitol Page School Voc ation­ al high school Jun ior high schools Elementary schools All levels Total Approved Restora­ tion re­ quested Approved Restora­ tion re­ quested Approved Restora­ tion re­ quested

Nonteaching: Administration 1.0

1.0

33.0

11.0

23.0

1.0

1.5

5.0

2.0

.5

55.0

1.5

13.5

96.0

44 

40 

i 2

1

> 1

4

2231

49.5

65.5 

205.0

18.0

53.2

4.0

27.0

31.0

Supervision 9 School officers . __ _____ __________ 5

6

2 1 6

7 librariansC o u n se lo rs 3.5

3 25.7

Itesearch assistants

Psychologists 5 Special

Total, nonteaching............ . ................................ 11 2 69.0 1 11.0 83.2 6 111.0 9 145 5 453.2

Teaching: R e g u la r cla sses ______ ___________________ 58 43

2

471.0 6 63.2

10.0

81.5

3 639. 9 

98.3 

128.6

4 1,850.0 168.0 48 3,179.1 289.3

284.2 

170.0

228.2

U n g ra d e d cl ass es i 11

I {on io e co n o m ic s a n d sh o p s 74.1

K in d e rg a rte n s 5 165.0 104.0 Itin erant and special 52.4 15.8 56.0

To tal, teaching _________ 58 50 597.5 6 170.5 922.8 2,287.0 48 11 4,150.8

Grand total . - _____ _____________ 69 52 666.5 7 181.5 1,006.0 6 2,398. 0 57 156 5 4,604.0

1 An assista nt prin cipal, counselor, and 11 teachers have been approved for the new Health School which is expanding its services to the secondary level. Of the 11 teachers, 4 are additio nal elementary teachers a nd 7 for the secondary level.

2 Does not include 1 position being held vac ant to provide for 1 junior high school assistant principal.

a Does no t inclu de 2 positions being held vacant to provide for 2 junior high school assistant principals.4 Does n ot include 26 positions which are being used as follows: 13 In the laboratory schools an d 13 for other classes on the elementary school level.

coC5

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 137

Allotm ents below the activity level

A ppro pri ation, 1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

H ou se

ac tion

In cr ea se

(+ ) or d ecrea se (—) 

H ou se 

ac ti o n co m ­

pare d w it h 

1959

es ti m at e

G en er al adm in is tr ati on:

Per so na l se rv ic es ...................... ......... ..................................

O th er exp en se s_____ ______ _____ ____ ____________

T o ta l, ge ne ra l a d m in is tr a ti o n ...... ...........................

Sup er vi si on an d in st ru cti on:

Per so nal se rv ices:

Tea ch er s an d off ice rs__________________ _______

C la ss ifie d........... ....................... ....... ..............................

S u b st it u te teac hin g s er vi ce ........................................

O th er pe rs on al s er vi ce s............ ......... ......... ...............

O th er in st ru cti onal co sts:

In str u cti o n al su pp lie s an d m ate ri al s......................

T ex tb ooks____ __________ ____________________

L ib ra ry bo ok s_______ : . .............................. ...........

M il k ............ . ....................................................................

E du cati o n of de af, m ute , an d b li n d ................... ..

O th er co sts (i nc lu di ng c iv il se rv ice re ti re m e n t) . 

T o ta l, su per vis io n an d in str u c ti o n .....................

V oc at io na l ed ucat io n, G eo rg e- B ar de n pr og ra m : 

D is tr ib u ti v e o cc upa tion s:

Per so nal serv ic es.. ____ _______ ______ ________

O th er ex pe ns es _______ ____ _____ _____________

T o ta l, d is tr ib u ti v e o cc upat io ns........ ...................

$971,785 

76,747

$997,650

80,5 86

$993,450 

80,0 82

-$ 4 ,2 0 0

-5 0 4

1,04 8,53 2 1,078,236 1,07 3,53 2 -4 ,7 0 4

23,3 39,1 34 

788,154 

400,220 

577,740

449,2 07 

311,1 29 

29,1G0 

208,074 

138,150 

402,694

26,643 ,662

21,024

1,788

22,8 12

24,314,354 

832,323 

409,680 

578,715

i 508,637 

311,129 

31,6 60 

218,739 

138,150 

432,583

23,961 ,419 

804,406 

409,680 

578,715

i 464,137 

311,129 

31,660 

218,739 

138,150 

421,200

-3 52,9 35

-2 7 ,9 1 7

-4 4 ,5 0 0

-1 1 ,3 8 3

27,775 ,970 27,3 39,2 35 -4 36, 735

21,024

1,788

21,024

1,788

22,8 12 22,812

H om e econ om ics:

Per so na l se rv ic es _____ ______________ ____ ____

O th er ex pe ns es ___________ _____ ___ _________ _

T o ta l, ho m e ec o n o m ic s.. ............. ............. ...........

T ra des a n d in d u str y :

Per so na l se rv ic es _______ ___________ _______ _

O th er ex pe ns es ..................................................... .........

T o ta l, tr ades an d in d u s tr y ................. ...............

P ra ct ic al nu rs in g:

Per so na l se rv ic es _________ ______ __________ _

O th er ex pe ns es ............ ........................................ .........

T o ta l, pra ct ic al n u rs in g ..........................................

T o ta l, vo ca tion al ed ucat io n, G eo rg e- Bar de n 

pr ogra m ....................................................................

83,7 13

1,463

83,8 68

1,473

83, .868 

1,473

85,1 76 85,341 85,341

261,7 98 

5,8 12

267,610

32,0 76 

992

33, 068

408,6 66

261,798

5,8 12

261,798

5,812

267,610 267,610

32,0 76 

992

32,0 76

992

33,068 33,0 68

408,831 408,831

O per at io n of buildi ng s an d gr ounds an d m ain te nan ce 

of eq uip m en t:

Per so na l se rv ic es ...................................................................

O th er o per at io na l co sts:

C om m unic ation s er vic es ............................................

E le ctr ic it y a n d ga s.............. ........................................

F u e l...................... ....................... ......... ..........................

Office an d cl as sroo m e q u ip m e n t_____ ________

Sh op s, sp ec ial clas sroo m an d ca fe te ria equip ­

m e n t_______ ______ ____ ___________ ______ _

O th er eq u ip m en t .. ................................. .....................

O th er cos ts (i nc lu di ng ci vi l s ervice re ti re m e n t) ..

T o ta l, oper at io n of buil din gs an d gr ou nd s

an d m ain te n an ce o f e q u ip m en t____________

R ep air s an d m ain te nan ce of b uil din gs an d g ro unds____

T eac her s’ r eti re m ent an d an n u it y fu n d _______________

T o ta l, oper at in g e x p en se s................ ................. ...........

3,75 9, 534

50,97 5 

379,2 89 

317,037 

180,861

121,600

32,0 00 

480,194

5,321, 490 

1,332, 700 

2,6 95, 000

37,450 ,050

3,890,341

51,325 

444,158 

407,364 

369,301

121,600

60,000

497,020

3,879,11 5

51,305 

433,062 

402,164 

369,301

121,600

60, (XX) 

496,155

-1 1 ,2 2 6

- s »

-1 1 ,0 9 6

-5 ,2 0 0

-8 6 5

5,841, 109 

1,610,854 

3,541, 000

5,812, 702 

1,582,7 00 

3,5 41, 000

-2 8 ,4 0 7

-28,1.54

40,256 ,000 39,758 .000 -4 98, (XX)

1

 In cr ea se in in st ru cti onal su pp lies an d m ate ri al s has be en in clu ded as "O b je ct 08 S up pl ie s a n d m a te ­

ri als ” ; h ow ev er , w he n sc ho ols rece iv e fu nds, th ey m ay us e th em for te xtb ooks or su pplies , hen ce so m e of 

th ese funds m ay be u se d a s t extb ooks an d a ppear a s “ O bj ec t 09 E q u ip m e n t. ”
13S DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Reduction oe P up il-Teacher R atio

Senator P astore. You may proceed, Dr . Han sen.

Dr. H ansen. Mr. Chairma n, may I sub mit two ad dit ion al documen ts for the record and p erh aps for discussion briefly th is mo rnin g? 

1 feel i t would lie worth while.

Se nator P astore. W ith ou t objection, we will insert those docu ­

men ts at th is point.

(The documents refe rre d to f ollow:)

Table showin g use of 48 sala ries to reduce pupil-teach er ratio

Na me of school

Num be r 

of positions 

assig ned

Expecte d

pupiltea cher

ratio

Na me of school

N um be r 

of positio ns 

assigne d

Expecte d

pupiltea che r

ratio

Ba ncrof t__________________ 1 32 Oyster.............. . ......................... 1 29

Bar na rd . _________________ 1 33 Pa rk View ___________ _____ 1 32

Brightwood _______________ 1 28 Pat te rs on .................................... 2 32

Bu nker H ill ................................ 1 34 Pay ne .......................................... 2 32

Congress H ei gh ts.. _ 1 32 P e rr y .. .. _________________ 2 26

Dra pe r......................................... 1 31 Ri ch ardson ................................. 2 34

Ea ton 1 31 Seato n____________________ 1 30

Ga rfi eld....................................... 2 30 Sh ep he rd..................................... 1 31

Gidding s__________________ 1 33 Sim on.......................................... 1 31

Grim ke ............ ..... ..................... 1 32 Sla ter ................................. ..... 1 32

H ea rs t____________________ 1 21) Sta nt on ....................................... 1 32

K e en e __________________ . 1 32 Stev en s._______ ___________ 1 32

Lan gd on ..................................... 1 30 Sy nh ax .................. ..................... 2 29

Le nox...................... . .................. 1 31 Tak om a....................................... 1 31

M an n_______ ____________ 1 30 Tr ue sd ell.................................... 1 33

Montgo me ry, S ____________ 1 32 Tyl er ............................................ 2 29

M orga n___________________ 2 32 Va n Ne ss______ ___________ 4 34

M ot en ....... ................. . .............. 1 34 W hi tti er ..................................... 1 32

M ur ch ......................................... 1 33
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 139

2. A revised schedule of part-time classes shows that the predicted number 

of part-time classes can be materially reduced by the use of nonclassroora 

space such as auditorium s, by the use of facilities in other buildings, and 

by the acquisition of new classrooms through completion of authorized construction during the school year 1958-59.

School Measures to reduce p art time

Pa rt time 

expected 

September 1958

New classrooms to be 

available in area

Pa rt time 

expected 

by close 

of term 

1959

Bancroft . ________ Aud itorium............... . ..........

Barnard ... .......do........ . . . .... ..................

Benning . ....... -........- 4 Kenilworth additio n______ None

Blair 6 6

Blow 4 Young a dd itio n. .................. None

Bry an. . 8 Bryan additio n........... . ........ None

Buch anan___ . _____ _ Auditoriu m............... ........... 8 ... ’.do........... ................ ........ None

Burroughs __ do................................... 2 2

Burrville.. _________ .......d o............. ....................... 2 Drew School......................... Nono

C arv er __ - .............. ___ do..................................... 0 Kenilworth add itio n............

Congress Heights __ ....... do................................ .. 0

H. D. Cooke ?-.-....... . ....... do............. ....................... 0

CrummeU.. . . ............... 8 8

D av is ............... ........... Auditorium................. . ........ 0

Edm onds . . __ 6 Kingsinan addition ............. None

Gage Use of Slater Sch ool............. 0

Garrison ................. 2 classes at Garnet-Pa tter- 0

Harrison. _________

son.

1 class to Oar net-P atters on.. 2 2

Hayes ....................... 6 6

Ken ilworth _________ 2 Kenilworth a dditio n______ None

Kingsman..................... Aud ito riu m.................. ...... 7 Kingsinan ad ditio n... .......... None

Logan ............... ........ __d o .............................. . 6 «

Lovejoy ___________ 4 4

Ludlow ....... .............. 4 4

,\1 adison 4 4

Manry .. ____ ____ rt 6

Monroe. ................. Aud itorium..... ..................... 0

Mo tt Use of Slater School.............. 0

N o y es.. ....................... 2 Noyes a dditio n..................... None

Peabod y................... 2 2

Pet worth........... .......... Aud ito riu m............ . ........... 0 0

Pierce .................... .. 6 «

Powell.......... ................ Aud itorium........................... 0 Health school conversion___

River Terrace............... 8 River Terrace addit ion ......... None

Shadd........................... Auditoriu m..... ................ .. 6 Drew School.......................... None

Smothe rs...................... ....... do.. . ............................ 4 _.. do.................................... None

Sumner....................... . 1 room at M agruder______ 0 0

Ta vlo r___ .. 4 4

Turner Auditorium and playroom . Moten addition .

Webb ........................... 4 4

West _________ ____ Aud itorium........................... Health school con version....

Wheatley.. .. . . .......d o ................................... 8 8

PART -TIM E CL AS SE S

Dr. Hansen. One of these has to do with the statement of policy of 

the Board of Education on part time. The question was rightly 

raised yesterday as to whether the Board does have a policy ana this 

is evidence that such is the case and I submit a table here which indicates the extent of the part time during the past 10 years or so.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement on Part Time

The policy of the Board of Education has been and continues to be to resort 

to part-time instruction when the number of pupils in any given school exceeds 

the capacity of the building to house them at one time.

This is illu strated by the fact that this school system has been forced to use 

part tim e for many years.

The table atta che d shows that part time has been required extensively for 

many years and must be resorted to when the enrollment exceeds the capacity.
140 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Num ber of part-time classes in the elementary day schools at the end of the first 6 weeks

in each year, 1945-46 through 195 7-58 1

N u m b er of N u m b e r of N u m b er of

Sc ho ol ye ar scho ols ha v- p art -t im e pupil s in

iu g p art -t im e cla sse s part -t im e

cla sse s classes

(1) (2) (3) (4)

1945-40.............................................. . ................................ ........................ 23 108 4,111

194 6- 47 ... _____ _____ _____________ _____ _________ _____ ____ 20 100 3,620

19-17-48______________ ______ _______ _____ ______ _________ _ 16 103 3,3 53

1948-49_____________________ ____ ______ ____ _______________ 16 81 2,611

1949-50_____________ ____ ____ _______ ______________________ 16 112 4,077

1950-51.......... ........... . ........... ...................................................................... 6 56 1,925

19 51 -52......................... ............................ ............. ................. ......... ......... 1 8 265

1952-53................... .................................... ................. ........... ..................... 2 6 232

19 53 -54..____ ______ __________ ____ _________________ _____ _ 1 8 326

195 4-55............... .......................................................... 2 20 755

1955-56............ . ......................................................

1956-57................ . ........... .......................................... 12 52 1,652

19 57 -5 8. .......................... ......... 35 161 5,446

1

 T h e figu re s sh ow n a re o f a d ate n ea re st to t h e e nd o f th e f irst 6 w ee ks o f s ch oo l.

LA CK OF SC HO OL FA C IL IT IE S

Se na tor P astore. Le t me see if I un de rst an d th is correctly. I 

th in k the position you tak e is th at you recognize the fa ct th at the re 

is a lack of school fac ilities, classroom fac ilities , b ut I thi nk you make 

the academic argume nt th at if we gran ted you enough teache rs in 

orde r to achieve this ratio th at we are spe aking about, whi le you 

wou ld have to increase the pa rt- tim e classes to 321 as ag ain st the 

existing nu mb er th at you have now, you feel th at wh en the classrooms 

became ava ilab le the sh ift wou ld be easier insofar as the pu pil himself or hers elf is concerned ?

Dr . H ansen. Tha t is t rue .

Se na tor P astore. Because of th at all you would have to do is just 

take the whole gro up wi thou t bre aking it up or changin g it and pu t 

it in a new classroom. I th ink th at is the argu men t you make.

Dr . Hansen. Tha t is tru e.

Se na tor P astore. Now, the position of the House is th is: They 

would no t like to see t hat happen. Th ey tak e the pos itio n th at they 

would pr efer to w’ait fo r the classrooms. I notice here th at the y 

have gran ted you some new positions in the public schools. Th ere 

is allowed, by the Com missioners, 264, and by the House, 189.

RE ST OR AT IO N OF 48 TE AC HER S

Now, I have been rea ding here [in dicatin g] on my way over. I 

re gr et too much th at we hav e been so busy lately th at maybe sometim e we do no t do all the rea ding th at we should, bu t I have been 

tryin g to pick it up as best I can, and I wou ld con strue fro m wh at 

presen tat ion has been made here in the justifi cation s th at here wre 

are academ ically speakin g abo ut this ratio , and , unless you keep 

plug ging fo r more an d more , you are going to lose your velocity. 

T hat m ay be a g ood arg um ent, from yo ur stand po int, bu t it is a ha rd 

one to p ut across correctly when you ge t into conference. I, m yself, 

hav e always fou nd this even when I was gover nor, th at ofttim es the 

president of the State un ivers ity would come in and it would a pp ear 

to me th at he was no t quite un de rst an ding all of my problems, th at
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 141

all he was interested in was his college; however, over the years I 

have found tha t I quite appreciate his enthusiasm, because if he ever 

had lessened his interest I do not think we would have had the fine 

institution tha t we have today; so, I compliment you for that.

The fact of the matter is that I hope we are not creating the impression that, unless we restore these 48 teachers which you are asking for, 

this whole school system goes to pot, which is not the case at all.

Dr. H ansen. We are not making that claim at all.

Senator Pastore. I think we ought to present a picture here to the 

people of the community that there are very generous allowances being 

made, both by the District, that is, through their Commissioners, and 

through the Congress of the United States. I mean we are only speaking here of 48 schoolteachers as against a total force of almost 4,000 

school teachers, and considering that when you have an average of 

about 30 vacancies which you cannot fill for one reason or another 

anyway. Now I think we are not too f ar apart. I want to create th at 

picture for the purposes of this hearing to show that there has been a 

tremendous amount of understanding on the pa rt of the Commissioners, who, fundamentally, are interested, of course, in this whole 

responsibility in relation to what has to be done in the District to 

promote the education and well-being of all our children. I think the 

Commissioners have done a fine job, and I think tha t the House itself, 

has gone quite far here in doing the right thing. I am not trying to 

shut you off on the 48 elementary schoolteachers, but I just wanted 

to get tha t into the record, and I will hear you now on further arguments that you have to make.

Dr. Hansen. Thank you very much. I would like to add to the 

record, too, that the action of the House in studying the school needs, 

and the action of the Commissioners, has been most sympathetic, and 

that our point in talking about the additional 48 teachers will be 

predicated upon a change in facts from the testimony presented in the 

House.

PART-TIME CLASSES

The record will show that, when I reported to the House District 

Committee, we expected to have 321 part-time classes next year if we 

received the total number of salaries. Also, it carried the qualification 

that we hoped, through administrative ways, to reduce the number of 

part-time classes materially. So, I am submitting for the record now 

a new set of figures on the expected part time for next fall. These are 

as firm in conviction as it is possible to be at this time.

So, the picture does change, and it is possible tha t if we had this 

information before the House Distric t Committee the reasons for the 

deletion of the 48 teachers might have been modified. We might have 

been able to justify this request. This is table 2, which I think you 

have there, Senator Pastore, which shows how we expect to be able 

to reduce part time for the forthcoming school year and, in doing this, 

we made an analysis of the total facilities of each school in which part 

time seems to be necessary. We applied the principle we should use 

every possible resource in that school, in terms of space f or classroom 

purposes. This we have done, heretofore, consistently. We did this 

when I was in charge of elementary schools. We followed the practice 

of using every possible resource in order to reduce par t time.
142 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

REVISED PLA N

So, we have made a school-by-school analysis. We have plans to 

bring into use the auditoriums of the several buildings in which auditoriums are available for use as classrooms. This is done by establishing movable partitions, separating the facility into 2 parts, the 

spaces being used then for 2 classes, and, as we take 2 classes into 

these auditoriums, we are relieving the part time by 4 classes in those 

particular buildings.

We also have found it possible to reconvert the use of the Slater 

Elementary School into classrooms for elementary pupils by tran sferring a program now going on in tha t school to the Armstrong 

School, which we have just vacated as a senior high school.

We have also found it possible to assign three sixth-grade classes 

to the junior high school, Garnet-Patterson, this being in line with 

what we have done in the past. As, for example, we have nine classes 

at Eastern High School, where we have surplus space in terms of 

high-school needs. We have G or 7 classes at the Sousa Ju nio r H igh 

School. So, upon a reconsideration of all of these factors, we have 

found we are able to reduce the number of part-time classes fo r next 

fall to 133, as against an estimated 321, if we get the 122 teachers 

requested.

Now, this we are planning to do whether we get the additional 48 

teachers or not, because we are all committed to the principle tha t 

children should be in their classes full time if it is a t all possible to 

arrange that.

Senator Pastore. Well, I submit you have a tremendous problem, 

and especially due to the fact tha t you get such a shift in population 

or a change of character of the community. This is much more precipitious here in the District than you would experience in any other 

community. In other words, there seems to be a drift away from the 

congested area into the suburbs and then you get into a school problem there. I suppose that here when a community changes or a vicinity changes in character you have the question of one area being 

overloaded and another area with maybe not quite enough pupils 

and yet they have to be educated and a teacher may have only a 

classroom of 25. Wha t can you do ? You cannot take children from 

one place to another as you would let’s say with a dozen of eggs, 

move them from one table to another. You cannot do that. You 

have a tremendous problem. I realize that. I am glad to see tha t 

you keep studying and restudying this. However, you know what 

our problem has been here. As I said yesterday, I would like to have 

strong justification for anything tha t we might do. I dare say, as 

I look at this, if our positions were reversed and you had the respon- 

• sibility of Pastore in relation to all of our problems in appropriations 

I think tha t you yourself would say, ‘‘Well, I do not think I was 

treated too badly.”

Dr. Hansen. I have said that and I want to repeat tha t the consideration of the school needs has been most commendable.

Now another aspect of this table of predictions of part time is thi s: 

that we have listed the new classrooms to be available in areas by the 

close of the next school year. Through buildings under construction, 

and the completion of these buildings, we expect to have an additional 

143 classrooms, and we have indicated in the chart here the areas in
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 143

which these classrooms will be coming into existence before the close 

of the next school term and the effect this will have on pa rt time in 

those areas.

So that by the end of the year 1959 we expect to be able to reduce 

part time from 133 classes, at the beginning of the term, to 72 at the 

end of the term. Thus, the picture is definitely improved over what 

it was last year when we were running 165 part-time classes.

ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL CLASS SIZE

Senator Pastore. 1 would be very much interested in this. I do 

not see how you can do this unless these figures have already been 

developed, bu t sometime, for the convenience of the committee, and it 

does not have to be before this business is considered, but I do wish in 

some practical way we could get some kind of figures or statistical 

data on just how large some of these classes are and where they are. 

Indicate it by groups. How many classrooms do we have, let’s say, 

with 30 to 32 pupils and how many do we have with 32 to 35, and how 

many do we have with 35 to 40, just to see what the situation is?

Dr. Hansen. Mr. Chairman, we have such a table based upon the 

current enrollment—that is, this last year’s enrollments which we submitted previously in the record.

(The information referred to appears on pp. 132-133.)

Senator Pasture. Ju st offhand, how much is the largest class ?

Dr. Hansen. I said 45 yesterday, but it turns out we had 1 last year 

with 46.

Senator Pastore. Th at was just one ?

Dr. H ansen. Yes.

Senator Pastore. Now do we have many in that category?

Dr. Hansen. No; I th ink only 2 or 3 in the range of 45 or above?

Senator Pastore. Forty-five or above?

Dr. Hansen. Yes. I want to check so as to be specific.

Senator Pastore. Where is the largest group, in what vicinity?

Dr. H ansen. The Hayes School is the area in which this large class 

occurred. This is an eight-room building in which the enrollments 

are running very tig ht all along the line and it was just decided, 

apparently in this case, to maintain a large class rathe r than set up a 

part-time class in this situation.

Senator Pasture. Where is the Ilayes School ?

Mr. Riecks. Fifth and K Streets NF.

Dr. Hansen. I am not sure that this is the righ t decision. Possibly, it would have been better to put. two classes on part time and 

reduce the level of classes in this building to, say, 36.

Senator Pastore. Well, you can think about it and consider the revision of the size of the class.

ASSIGNMEN T OF 48 TEACHERS

Dr. Hansen. We also have presented for your consideration, Mr. 

Chairman, a table which shows the way in which we would use the 48 

teachers. We have made a study of the class sizes or averages in each 

of the elementary schools and we have tentatively, at least, determined

10
144 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 19 59

the location of the additional teachers in order to reduce class sizes in 

particular schools and to come more close to the target of 30 to 1.

Now all of these placements are being made without increasing the 

part time by a single class. In other words, if we can get the 48 

teachers we can set up the Bancroft School with a ratio of 32, the 

Barnard School we can bring down to a ratio of 33; the Brightwood 

School to a ratio of 28, which is necessary there and desirable because 

this is a demonstration school. The teachers come into this school 

from all over the city to observe top-flight teachers in action.

We can reduce the Bunker Hill enrollment to a ratio of 34, and so 

on down the line.

Senator Pastore. Explain to me why you have to assign 1 teacher 

to reduce the ratio to 29 and yet in another school you assign only 

1 teacher and reduce it to 34 ?

Why do you not take 1 out of the other place and make them both 

32?

I mean we talk about ratios and why do we exert so much effort to 

cut 1 down to 29 when the best you are doing in another location is 

cutting down to 34 ? It is a little lopsided, is it not ?

Dr. Hansen. It would seem reasonable if we could say tha t all of 

these are 32 to 1, but there are other factors in each situation. Bunker 

Hill, for example, we could add one teacher without going on part 

time. At the Hearst School, which is a fairly small school, we were 

abel to reduce the ratio there from about 33 to 29 with the addition of 

1 teacher. This is one of the factors in school administration, as you 

know, which we have to contend with.

At the Richardson School we could place two teachers without going 

on part time, bringing the ratio to 34, which is a reasonable ratio if we 

keep within the range of 29 to 34 in our ratio. In the management of 

the total school program, we have all of these peculiar conditions in 

each of the buildings and I think we are doing pretty well.

Senator Pastore^ This does not represent all of the schools in the 

District ?

Dr. H ansen. No, sir.

Senator Pastore. There may be other schools in the District where 

your ratio is much better than this and then why could you not take a 

teacher from some other place and put her there in a more congested 

school ? I mean, has any study been made of that ?

Dr. H ansen. Yes; we do tha t every year. Whenever a school’s enrollment goes down, if we have a surplus teacher tha t person and 

salary can be transferred and always is transferre d into a school in 

which there is a growing enrollment.

I think this picture of class sizes is about representative. There is 

only 1 school which has a 25-to-l ratio—th at is, except for perhaps 1 

other very small school—the school where we have teachers instru cting other teachers in the business.

Senator Pastore. Well, I dare say this picture is not bad, which is 

a fine thing for the District. It shows that we do pay quite a bit of 

attention to our school problems.

COMPARISON OF CLASS SIZ E W IT H OTHER CIT IES

Now how do we measure up in comparison with other communities 

of like size?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 145

Dr. Hansen. In terms of neighborhood schools, the ratio tha t we 

ran last year, 33 to 1, was the highest of all the surrounding counties. 

With out having the record before me, I think Alexandria, for example, had a ratio of 28 to 1.

Senator Pastore. No. I mean another city of comparable size to 

the District?

I think what you said is quite understandable because you have all 

of this exodus of people to this outside community. Is it not a fact 

that where you have a shift into the suburbs from large congested 

areas you usually find that the picture in the suburbs insofar as the 

pupil-teacher ratio is concerned is usually much better. I mean that 

is the tendency. That is understandable, but I mean here, by comparison with another community the size of Washington, what is the 

school problem with relation to teacher-pupil ratio? In other words, 

do we measure up well or are we below the average?

Dr. Hansen. I could supply you with data on this somewhat later. 

One of the problems we have is using data already accumulated, 

which is accumulated on a different basis from our system.

Let me be very candid with you on this, Senator Pastore. Some 

of the urban centers, and I can cite Baltimore, for example, and 

Chicago, run very high pupil-teacher ratios, computed on the basis of 

the number of pupils in the grades from 1 to 6, divided by the number 

of teachers in those grades. New York City, on the other hand, 

runs ratios that are considerably under the standard tha t we are 

striving for. The pattern there is roughly 28 or 29 to 1 in the downtown schools.

Senator Pastore. Let’s take a city like San Francisco.

Dr. Hansen. I do not have the inform ation on that at hand, but 

we can get it.

The point I am making is this. When we make a comparison with 

urban centers in terms of teacher-pupil ratios, computed on the same 

basis as we compute ourselves, the 30-to-l ratio is a fairly favorable 

standard. I would add, however, tha t we make a mistake in comparing urban centers with urban centers because those situations with 

which we compare are bad in themselves.

Senator Pastore. That is right.

Dr. Hansen. Secondly, as the urban centers develop, they tend to 

put more money into schools and have more favorable ratios which, 

in itself, attracts more people into the areas where you have improved 

school facilities.

Senator Pastore. This all helps to serve as a guide; I was merely 

curious to know what the situation was, and you know that we have 

had certain problems in the past in this area and tha t there must 

be this constant striving to better the efficiency of our schools and 

I am very, very sympathetic toward it. The only trouble, even with 

me, I think every once in a while I have to be brought to a sense of 

practicality, too, in view of all the problems you have. However, 

I am very sympathetic and I want you to know th at I am. I must 

admit tha t looking at this whole thing, both from the standpoint of 

what the Commissioners recommended and what the House granted, 

they were very reasonable and they handled their responsibilities 

pretty well.
146 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROPRIATION S, 1959

Dr. Hansen. I think tha t is certainly right, in terms particularly 

of the estimates we made for part time for next ye ar; but upon our 

going further into this thing, as I have promised the committee I 

would do, if we find we can reduce the number of part-time classes 

we will do this, regardless, to a figure less than we have reduced it 

with the 48 teachers, and to reduce ratios without adding a single 

part-time class to the school system.

TEACHER VACANCIES

Senator Pastore. Have you thought a little bit about the observation I made yesterday with reference to recruitment? I do think 

we left that without any thorough understanding yesterday. I think 

you said that on an average there might be 30 teachers. I would 

like to have that discussed a little more.

Dr. Hansen. Yes. I would like to add a clarification to that. 

The 29 or 30 vacancies that we run currently are, for the most pa rt, 

the result of administrative situations at each of the 4 levels or even 

in the special services. For example, there are teachers who go on 

maternity leave who have built up a certain amount of leave which 

they can use. We cannot fill those positions except through the use 

of per diem teachers, because the teachers are still drawing their 

salaries.

In a number of other cases, we have salaries vacated today, and it 

may be necessary to wait 2 or 3 days to find a replacement, or a week 

or sometimes a month.

Senator Pastore. But it is money tha t you have available? I 

mean, you have an overall budget here and we do not tell you what 

teacher to hire in what school, whether it be mathematics, or physics, 

or English, or history, but we just give you a bulk amount that you 

use for personnel purposes. Now it makes very, very little difference, 

these details tha t you are bringing out in your overall pictu re; you 

still have enough money because on the average you have 30 vacancies 

with money tha t you are not paying because you do not have the 

teachers that could be used and to hire these teachers and keep this 

more or less at full strength. I mean it is there. I would hope th at 

you would give that some thought, too, because you may end up at 

the end of the year with the situation that because of some of these 

vacancies you have to hand in some of the money. There you are. 

You are asking for more money for more teachers when you end up 

with the situation that because you cannot recruit the full strength 

you have a little spare money at the end. I think you ought to give 

some thought to that.

Dr. Hansen. I shall.

Senator Pastore. There you are. You are asking for more money 

for 48 teachers when you are running, on an average, about 30 teacher 

vacancies. I say that maybe you are being a little overcautious about 

holding fast on this money. Maybe you ought to go out and get a 

new teacher. I hope your budget officer will give t hat a little consideration, because you have just a small difference here, with a staff of 

about 4,000 teachers, a difference of 48 teachers that you are asking 

for. and you still have on an average 30 vacancies. It strikes me that 

you ought to give this a little more study to see if maybe you cannot 

pick up part of your 48 in this little lag that we are talking about
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 147

Dr. H ansen. I am afraid th at this is not going to supply the needs 

that we are asking for here.

Senator Pastoke. It may not do it fully, but I think it is good for 

exploration.

Dr. Hansen. We need to be sure we are not bypassing any of our 

opportunities.

ESTIMATED SAVINGS

Senator Pastoke. What would be your estimated savings in personnel for this fiscal year ?

Dr. Hansen. I am not sure.

Mr. Reynolds. I expect it is around $75,000, Senator Pastore, but 

this is entirely savings from the classified end. On the teacher’s salary end, we would actually have a deficit of about $800,000 and tha t 

has been made up through savings in the classified end.

For instance, we had to freeze 40 custodial positions. So the overall savings in personnel altogether is about $75,000, but it is not from 

the Teacher’s Salary Act positions.

Senator P astore. Where did you say it is from ?

Mr. Reynolds. From the classified part, including the wage-board 

people and the custodial service.

Senator Pastore. All right, have we talked about th at sufficiently?

Dr. Hansen. Yes, sir, with one exception. I regret any implication that the vacancies, current and revolving vacancies, could be used 

in major part to supply the 48 teacher needs tha t we are requesting. 

I do want to assure you, also, we shall very carefully check on vacancies durin g the coming year.

Senator P astore. I do not want to leave tha t impression either, 

but I thought if that money were currently available to you tha t 

possibly you could utilize part of it to do some of this reshuffling that 

you are contemplating to keep down your part-time classes.

Dr. Hansen. We will repo rt on that to you.

GRADE PLACEMENT OF TH E 48 TEACHERS

Senator Pastore. Now I have a furthe r question here th at has been 

asked of me and I think it is quite important. Primarily, what elementary grades are involved in the extra teacher requests ?

Dr. Hansen. By grade placement level, et cetera ?

Senator P astore. I mean, where is your most immediate need ?

Dr. Hansen. We have listed the schools in which we would place the 

48, but it would be very difficult, practically impossible, to indicate 

the grade level in which these people would be placed.

Senator Pastore. Are these primary or elementary ?

Dr. Hansen. These are all elementary schools, kindergarden 

throu gh the sixth grade.

Senator P astore. I s that where your largest classes are ?

Dr. H ansen. This is where we would need most to make this, where 

we can make the reductions without establishing additional part-time 

classes. The 48 positions requested would be used primarily in the 

first 8 elementary school grades.

Senator P astore. Actually, if the picture at this time continues on, 

your responsibility will move up to the higher grades because t hat 

seems to be where the population problem is.
148 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS. 19 59

Dr. Hansen. Yes.

Senator P astore. Well, tha t is a healthy note for the Nation, too. 

We are having more babies.

Dr. H ansen. Before we leave this teacher situation, I would like to 

reemphasize a point you made, and that is that the school system is 

moving uphill slowly but surely in terms of improved services and in 

terms of improved achievement records, and I am very much convinced that unless we keep this machine going and we, step by step, 

move toward this ra tio of 30 to 1, we will reach a plateau and perhaps 

never get off of it or be placed perhaps on this plateau for years. My 

point would be, in summary, th at this is no time to apply the brakes 

to a machine moving up the hill.

Senator Pastore. Well, we haven’t applied the brakes. You have 

gotten most everything you wanted. I repeat again, out of 264 they 

have given you 189. You cannot say tha t is applying the brakes 

because you did not get everything you asked for, because who does?

Dr. Hansen. That is keeping in step with the increased population. 

Forty-eight teachers are needed to improve the service.

Shall I go to the other restoration requests ?

Senator P astore. Yes, because I want to take them item by item.

ELEM ENTARY SCHOOL SUP ERVIS ION

Dr. H ansen. We are asking for restoration of $52,800 for 3 supervising directors and 6 supervisors to be used at the elementary-school 

level. Our reason for coming back into your committee with this request is this, that as we are confronted with the teacher situation here 

involving the acquisition of up to 400 new teachers here in the elementary schools, we need the services of additional supervisors in order 

to induct them into the program, check their teaching procedures, 

and be sure that they are meeting our standards.

UNIFORM SCHOOL PROGRAM

Then, we are moving in another direction as rapidly as we can. 

That is directed to the point of making our school program uniform 

throughout the city so that we will establish something like the same 

standards throughout. The supervisors are the only people in the 

school system who work on a citywide basis in terms of supervision.

Senator Pastore. Did the House gra nt you any of these categories 

of personnel ?

Dr. Hansen. I think not.

Senator Pastore. You are asking for three more supervising directors. Did they grant you any supervising directors at all ?

Dr. H ansen. No. This was entirely removed.

Senator Pastore. You are asking for six supervisors at the elementary-school level. Did they grant you any supervisors at all ?

Dr. H ansen. No, sir.

TOTAL SUP ERVIS ING DIRECTORS

Senator Pastore. No. How many supervising directors do you 

have now ?

Dr. Hansen. At the present time we have nine.

Senator P astore. Nine.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 149

This would bring you to 12 if you obtained these 3 more?

Dr. Hansen. This would bring us to 18, because we are asking for 

a total of 9.

Senator P astore. Well, I was breaking it down. You are asking 

for three more supervising directors ?

Dr. H ansen. Yes.

Senator Pastore. Now how many supervising directors do you 

have ?

Dr. H ansen. Three.

Senator Pastore. Three. You are asking for 100 percent more.

Dr. H ansen. We are asking fo r six.

Senator Pastore. Let’s not go too fast. You already have 3 and 

you are asking for 3 more ?

Dr. H ansen. That is correct.

Senator Pastore. That is an increase of 100 percent.

Dr. Hansen. The possible explanation for that is this, in last year’s 

request it was determined tha t six "were needed at this category 

level. We received three and made the appointments on th at basis. 

We are convinced that we need a total of six at this level and this, in a 

sense, is a repo rt of last year’s request.

Senator Pastore. You mean you did not have such supervising directors before this last year ?

Dr. Hansen. That is correct. The year before we had only supervisors.

Senator Pastore. So you decided to have 6 supervising directors 

and they gave you 3 last year and this is a request for the balance of 

them?

Dr. Hansen. Tha t is correct.

Senator P astore. How have the three you received worked out?

Dr. H ansen. Extremely well.

Senator Pastore. Are they overloaded with work ?

Dr. Hansen. They are. They have to supervise the school system 

in which there will be, in 1959, about 75,000 pupils and nearly 1,900 

teachers.

Senator Pastore. All righ t, let’s get to the six supervisors. How 

many do you have now ?

Dr. Hansen. We have six.

Senator P astore. You have six and this is doubling it ?

Dr. Hansen. Yes.

Senator Pastore. And th at complies with the request you made last 

year?

Dr. Hansen. I believe so.

So we need a staff of 18 to do this job. T think it would lie interesting to note th at in 1945 there were 8 supervisors throughout the school 

system with a pupil population of 50,000. We are now asking for 10 

more, or 18, with a pupil population of approximately 74,000. Now, 

the number we are asking for is slightly in excess of the ratio. I mean 

as it was maintained in 1945. We are only about halfway there. We 

have, in addition to that, the problem of bringing our schools together 

on a uniform basis, putting s tandards in school by school, in the entire 

system, which we did not have in 1945.
150 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

DUTIE S OF A SUPERVISOR

Senator P astore. What does a supervisor do ?

Dr. H ansen. A supervisor plans demonstrations for teachers, visits 

them in the classrooms, helps them if they need help, stands as a helping teacher for teachers who need specific helps in their particular 

levels.

Senator Pasture. Why not have the principal do that ?

Dr. Hansen. The principal does a great deal of that, in fact, the 

major responsibility for supervision is with the principal, but a supervisory staff on a citywide basis is, in a sense, an overseer or a supervisor of the principal’s work, in a way, in that there is a check made of 

the competence of the teachers as they see them in relation to competent teachers in other parts of the city.

The point should be made that our elementary schools are unde rstaffed. We have no assistant principals, so that, unfortunately, the 

principal does not have the amount of time she should have for 

supervision.

Senator Pastore. Of course, I do not think you would walk into a 

Senator’s office and see any overstaffing and you can go to the Commissioner’s office and you will see the same thing. Of course, we are 

all trying to achieve optimum hiring that one would expect to carry out 

this responsibility, but I do not know if we can ever do it; tha t is, as 

a practical thing. I do not think we have enough placements; I do 

not think we have quite enough of anything, but the fact of the matter 

is that we have to achieve this balance sometimes and yet carry out 

an efficient program. I realize tha t maybe sometimes you do not have 

consistently the staffing of principals tha t you would like to have and 

it does become a tremendous responsibility; doesn’t it?

Dr. Hansen. Yes.

This, I think, you will agree w ith : tha t the school system, if it can 

give the youngsters in the first, second, third, and fourth grades a 

good start, will not only save money in the long run but we will make 

better citizens out of them.

QUESTION ED NEED FOR ADDED SUPERVISO RS

Senator Pastore. That may be, but I question sometimes the situation where we would have a supervisor coming in for a couple of 

hours to check on a young teacher’s performance, a young girl who 

might get all frustrated and get all excited about being watched. I 

wonder sometimes if you could have proper qualifications for an individual by just spot-checking them. I know tha t some people become 

dumbfounded with excitement sometimes. I would rather think you 

would have to have somebody there all of the time watching a teacher, 

such as a principal. I always felt a principal was much better qualified to judge the qualifications of a teacher because he works with 

her every day.

There are a lot of little things that a teacher would do during her 

working hours that, would really bring out the right character and 

the value of the teacher.

Tf we take a supervisor who just walks in one afternoon and who 

maybe is in a hurry to get someplace else and who just looks at the
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 151

teacher and she, the teacher, in turn, becomes frustrated and all excited over that fact, whether tha t supervisor who is ju st looking over 

the teacher for half an hour or an hour, can say tha t she is a good 

teacher or not. I don’t think tha t is true any more than you could 

have someone come on to the floor of the Senate and in one afternoon 

judge a Senator. It may be his big moment at the time, but we Senators also have moments t hat are less impressive. I question that it 

will help.

Dr. Hansen. Tha t is a mighty good educational practice and philosophy you are stating here. Actually, we are of the opinion in the 

school system that a supervisor is helping a teacher rather than somebody who is there to browbeat the teacher.

Senator Pastore. I imagine tha t is right. However, it is even the 

practice of Congressmen who might go to X country for half an 

hour and come back here and make a big speech about what is wrong 

with the country. Where they get all the information in half a day 

or half an hour I do not know, but they seem to get it.

All rig ht, we will come to the next item now.

SCHOOL PSYCHO LOGISTS

Dr. Hansen. The next request is a request for restoration of five 

school psychologists.

Senator P astore. How many of those do we have?

Dr. Hansen. I have some very good tables if I can find them. We 

now have 19.

Senator Pastore. Nineteen, and this would give you 24?

Dr. Hansen. This would give us 24 and this is our goal in terms of 

psychological service. I am trying to give a picture of the goals we 

want and this is a picture in terms of school psychologists. If we get 

the five people we will achieve our goal in terms of tha t service.

Senator P astore. Tell me a little bit about it. After a psychologist 

determines some of these aspects that he is looking for in a pupil, 

then what becomes of the pupil? Fir st, tell me, what does the psychologist do in this program that solves the problem after he finds 

these pupils ?

Dr. Hansen. There are several things. One, the psychologist confers with the principal of the school in which the child is placed and 

throu gh their team approach they can determine what is best in the 

program for the child.

Of course, they bring into the classroom suggestions for the teachers as to how to handle the problem case. This is a very important 

type of service. The teacher may not be able to correct the condition which is discovered by the psychologist immediately, but she 

is aware of the problem, its origin, its background, and she has some 

help from the psychologist as to how to work with that child in the 

classroom ?

Senator P astore. I s there a certain need of knowing?

Dr. Hansen. There is a certain need of knowing. Having consulted 

the expert, the teacher can see the problem from the point of view 

of the psychologist. This, I think, is tremendously valuable in terms 

of the needs of children who are in trouble. We do not promise complete correction of the problems. Some of them need very little. We 

are sure, from our own experience now, if the teachers have these
152 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

helps, some progress can be made in saving these children and keeping them ont of the courts and out of the hands of the police.

WORKLOAD

Senator Pastore. Are the 19 that you now have overloaded with 

work ?

Dr. Hansen. They are.

Senator Pastore. What cases do they have? Do they systematically have to take care of a child or does the child have to get into 

trouble and then be sent to these psychologists ?

Dr. Hansen. They handle the cases referred to them by the principal, cases brought to their attention by the principal after they 

have been referred to him, and they are referred to the Department 

of Pupil Appraisal for clinical analysis.

Senator Pastore. What sort of backlog do you now have that makes 

you request these additions?

Dr. Hansen. I think there is a considerable backlog, but I do not 

have the figures at hand. I will have to get that for you. I know 

there is a lag in time, Senator Pastore, with reference to these clinical 

cases, the time we get the report back. I know tha t from my own 

personal experience. We send a request in and there is a certain time 

lag before we get it back.

(The information requested follows:)

As of May 6, 1958, the backlog of cases br ou gh t to the at tent io n of the Depa rtm en t of P upil Ap pra isal, Study, and At ten danc e was 1,367.

RESTORATION OF CLERKS FOR PU PI L AP PR AISAL DEP ARTM ENT

Senator P astore. All ri gh t; what is the next item ?

Dr. Hansen. The next item is a request for four clerks for assignment to the Department of Pupil Appraisal. This, perhaps, is as 

important as any request and they are needed for making the summaries. This sum is small, but the problem is that we get held up in 

the preparation of the reports on testing, even clinical reports, because we do not have the clerical services, and in order to meet that 

need we reach over and use professional staff time for it.

Senator Pastore. Well, I am somewhat impressed with this one 

because sometimes you take the services of a valuable person who gets 

a high salary and you hold him up only because he has no one to take 

the notes. This one here impresses me, not because of its value, but 

what it is doing to the high-salaried people who have to hang around 

and wait for typists in order to get a repo rt out. Tha t could be even 

more wasteful than even hiring an extra girl who sometimes maybe 

does not even work full time.

TOTAL CL ER K-TY PIST EMPLO YEES

Now, how many such clerk-typists do you have ?

Dr. Hansen. In this Department?

Senator Pastore. Yes, in this Department. If you cannot give it 

now, I wish you would give me something a little more detailed on 

this because this has always been a matter of interest to me.

Dr. Hansen. We will send a repo rt up to you on this point.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 153

Senator Pastore. In other words, I would want to know just how 

much this is slowing up the work of these high-salaried people because 

they do not have a girl to run off a note for them. That is Quite 

important.

Dr. Hansen. Thank you, sir. We will supply that.

(The information requested follows:)

At the present time, six clerks are assigned to thi s Departm ent, as follow s:

Group testing program______________________________________________ 2

General ofliee w ork_________________________________________________ 2

File cler k_________________________________________________________ 1

Typist of case rep orts______________________________________________ 1

JU NIO R HIG H SCHOOL AS SIST AN T PR INCIPA LS

Senator P astore. In other words, I would not w ant a psychologist 

to be making a telephone call tha t a clerk could do and take up his 

time and he could be talking to a pupil.

All right; you know what we want.

Now, we come to the assistan principals.

Dr. H ansen. This is a request fo r six junior high school principals.

Senator Pastore. You already have one assistant. This would be 

a second assistant ?

Dr. H ansen. This would be a second assistant for schools that have 

enrollments of over 800. We believe tha t this additional service is 

necessary because of the necessity of maintaining the strictest kind of 

order and control in these buildings. The assistant principal has, 

primarily, the responsibility of maintaining discipline.

We know how im portant i t is to the school system and the city as a 

whole to have a well-ordered, well-mannered school program. We 

feel that this additional six would help in those schools which are now 

understaffed.

Senator P astore. All rig ht; now, we will take your next itemCLERK-T YPIST FOR WESTE RN SENIOR H IG H SCHOOL

Dr. Hansen. The next item is a request for one clerk-typist for 

Western High School. This school has increased in enrollment to the 

point now where two clerks are necessary. The standard in all of 

our other high schools has been two clerks.

Senator Pastore. Do you have a backlog of work being done by 

high-salaried people because they do not have a clerk to do it ?

Dr. Hansen. That is pa rt of the problem. The other is we had to 

let some of the management details go in this school. Then we had 

to scout around and find somebody who would give us some help in 

this area.

INCR EASE IN ENR OLL MENT AT WESTERN

Senator P astore. Now, I notice in these figures on Western tha t 

your enrollment has gone up ?

Dr. Hansen. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. What accounts for that ? I would not ask a question like this if this were in Providence, but I do not know where 

Western High School is. Tha t may sound like a silly question to 

you, but I had to get it on the record.
154 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

Dr. Hansen. Western is in the Georgetown area. This seems to be 

due to some increase in the numbers of high-school movements within this boundary and, in addition, when we merged the school system 

in 1954 all of the children in that area now come to Western, whereas 

prio r to that time the Negro students went to Cardozo. So, we do have 

this buildup.

Senator Pastore. There would be more work there, and you would 

expect more work in the future for this kind of clerk-typist?

Dr. Hansen. That is correct.

Senator P astore. Well, I merely wanted to get an answer to that.

AUTOMO BILE ALL OW ANC E FOR SUPERVISO RS

Now, your next item is the restoration of $7,910 requested to reimburse 45 supervisory officers for use of privately owned automobiles 

for official travel.

Dr. Hansen. Yes. This is an effort to do justice to the 45 super" 

visory officers who are traveling throughout the city in connection 

with our work without any travel reimbursement. This is a longstanding need. Actually, it is an inequity, in terms of salary levels, 

because these people, as a part of their job, have to move from building 

to building, yet they get no compensation for it. Now, some of us do. 

The staff officers have received the usual 7 cents per mile, and so have 

certain other groups.

Senator P astore. Then why do these people not get paid for it?

Dr. Hansen. We have not been successful in persuading the people responsible for the budgets that this is an inequity.

Senator Pastore. When you say “people” do you mean the House 

group or the Commissioners ?

Dr. Hansen. Well, 1 do not like to complain, and 1 am too uninformed to be too specific about it.

Senator P astore. 1 do not mean for you to be critical. I just want 

you to be factual. We understand. We are not trying to criticize 

anyone. We are just trying to get the facts. Now, you say there are 

people in the school department using their own automobiles for 

school business and they get paid for it, but these people do not ?

Dr. H ansen. Tha t is correct.

Senator Pastore. And they use their own automobiles?

Dr. Hansen. That is right. This includes supervisors, for example, and heads of departments.

Senator Pastore. Would they be paid at the same rate, let’s say, 

that other people are being paid ?

Dr. Hansen. I understand so; 7 or 8 cents a mile.

Senator P astore. All rig ht ; what is the next item ?

INST RU CT IO NA L SU PPL IE S AN D TEXTBOO KS

Dr. Hansen. The next item is a request for restoration of the ad ditional funds needed to build up our allocations for textbooks and 

supplies by 37.5 percent, a total of $41,000. This increase, I think, 

seems small, perhaps trivial, but, to me, as a practitioner in the field, 

it is one of the serious things.

Senator Pastore. That is a little academic. The argument is academic. Let me ask you this question so tha t we can get at the root
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 155

of this: Were there any supplies of books or textbooks tha t you 

wanted to buy during this fiscal year that you could not buy because 

you did not have the money ?

Dr. Hansen. Yes, sir. I would say unqualifiedly so.

Senator Pastore. How much ?

Dr. Hansen. I couldn’t say, offhand. Tha t would be difficult to 

pinpoint.

Senator Pastore. Well, this is very, very important because the 

way it developed and it is a good argument and I am not critica l 

of you, but it is an academic argument. You say here tha t no one 

can dispute this; tha t courses cannot be effectively taught without 

materials and up-to-date textbooks; tha t it is not uncommon to find 

classroom textbooks with copyright dates as far back as the early 

1930’s and 1940’s. Now tha t is probably bigger than the $41,000, if 

tha t is the case. That needs some investigation.

Dr. Hansen. This is pa rt of it, and there may be some administrative problems related to this, but we have been criticized just recently.

Senator Pastore. What is the appropriation ?

Mr. Reynolds. $760,000.

Senator Pastore. $760,000. What we are talking about here is 

only $41,000. We do not wTant to create the impression here th at we 

do not have textbooks in the District. This is only $41,000 out of 

$760,000.

Dr. H ansen. Yes.

Senator P astore. Inso far as they are financially able, many pupils 

and teachers may purchase these essential teaching materials and textbooks from their own private funds. I would like to know a little 

bit more about that if i t is true ?

Is that a cliche or is it a fact? I mean we do not w ant to leave the 

impression with the taxpayers in this District of Columbia tha t the 

teachers have to go out and buy their own books. If tha t is so, I 

would like to have it spelled out.

Dr. Hansen. May I say this on th at point, Mr. Chairman, tha t we 

know, from surveys th at we have made in the past, the teachers spend 

as much as $50 a year for supplies, and materials, and books, well, 

even some want books which their children use, out of their own 

pockets.

Senator P astore. I realize that. Tha t comes from a sense of dedication. I mean, even if we gave you $2 million, I still imagine a 

teacher would like to have a book tha t is not being supplied and would 

go out to buy it. I do that myself. I buy a lot of things around here 

tha t the Government does not pay me for, but I like to have them 

and I think you would do that, too.

I thin k everybody does that. That is a sense of dedication tha t 

publicly spirited citizens have.

Dr. Hansen. Tha t is not quite what I said. I know of one teacher 

tha t bought a set of workbooks for her children.

Senator Pastore. Because the school did not furnish them ?

Dr. H ansen. They had no money available in the school allocations 

for the particular thing. This is a problem involving a shortage 

tha t seems small.

Mr. Reynolds. We allot the money to the schools and they determine what they are going to buy with their money and they are the
156 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

ones who determ ine wh at the s plit sha ll be between the textbooks an d 

supplie s. They have to live withi n the all otm ent made to them, bu t 

specifically what they orde r fro m th at all otm ent is th ei r responsi bility 

and th at is screened by the edu cation al officers w hen it comes to the 

processing.

Se na tor P astore. You do no t make any exc eptions at all? You 

mak e an allo tme nt and you are so inflexible th at you do no t change it 

even if a schoolteache r came up and said, “I need th is book, ot he rwise I cannot do the job,” or “I need 30 books,” you would tell that 

person to go and bu y th em him self ?

BA SI S OF ALL OT MEN T FU N D S

Mr. Reynolds. No. The allotm ent is based upo n school enrollment 

and it increases or decreases each ye ar on the basis of the enrollment 

and we have a small reserve of th at $760,000 o f ap prox im ate ly $50,- 

000 to meet emergency n eeds and p rice increases.

Se nator P astore. I t ou gh t to come in a supplem ental if th at hap ­

pens. I do no t think the schoolteacher ou gh t to be placed in a po sitio n th at because of an allotm ent th at was made she had to go out 

an d buy textbooks herself. Th at is a ho rri ble situatio n. I never 

he ard of it before. If it hap pen ed, I hop e it is a very exc eptionally 

isol ated case. Le t’s no t leave the impressio n wi th the taxp ay ers of 

th is D ist ric t th at our p oor teache rs have to go ou t and buy textbooks. 

Tha t is e xtremely i solated ?

Dr. H ansen. I t is perha ps an isolated case, bu t it does ha ppen. 

AYe do know from the surv eys we have made th at tea che rs do spend 

money for supplie s which ought to be furnishe d by the schools.

Senator P astore. 'Well, do you think the $41,000 will elimi nate th at 

once and f or all ?

Dr. H ansen. I t will be a step in th at direction .

Senator P astore. Th e record will show at th is point a lette r fro m 

Mr. George Rey nolds, the Business Adm in istrat or of the public 

school system on ap prop ria tio ns fo r textbo oks and sup plie s, also a 

table on the pe r pu pil allo tment of fund s fo r such purpo ses ove r the 

period 1949 to 1958, an d the estimate fo r 1959.

(Th e data referred to follow s:)

P ublic Schools of th e District of Columbia,

Office of Bus ines s Administration,

'Washington, D. C., June 20, 1958.

Mr. Walter L. Fowler,

Budget Officer, D istrict Building.

Dear Mr. Fowler: Since 1949 there has been a contin uing effort to increas e 

the per capita allotment for elementary schools to keep pace with risin g supply 

and textbook costs. Prior to fiscal 1957, there were no specific app ropriations 

for supplying new schools, and increases in appropriation for textbooks and 

supplies during this period were primarily applied toward providing these 

items for new schools an d for increased enrollments.

However, in 1949, the per capita allotment for supplies and textbooks for 

elementary schools was increased from $2.90 to $4. This amount was increased 

to $4.25 in 1951 and to $4.60 in 1958. Fun ds have been requested in the 1959 

budget to raise this allotment to $5 which we believe is justified by increased 

prices, partic ula rly for books and supplies in special subject are as such as 

shops, the exact sciences, physical education, and social sciences.

Allotments are made to the individual schools early each sprin g on the basis 

of the previous October’s peak enrollments. It would be desirable to compute 

allotm ents on the basis of projected average daily memberships, but we are not 

in a position to do this since we are not able to project average daily member-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 157

ship by schools. We do project memberships for the school system as a whole, 

but we cannot pinpoint projected increases to individual schools.

We allot the total amount of the appropriation for supplies and textbooks with 

the exception of approximately thirty-five to fifty thousand dollars each year. 

This amount is held in reserve to meet genuine emergency needs th at may result 

from an extreme and unanticipated enrollment increase in a few schools, and 

to meet prices that may be in excess of those listed in our supply schedule and 

charged to the schools.

Prior to 1958, there was an amount of $2,000 allotted for the specific purpose 

of curriculum printing. In the 1958 budget, we obtained an additional amount 

of $9,000 for this purpose so that we were able to increase the total allotment 

to $11,000. This amount enabled us this year to reprint several courses of 

study including elementary school science, physical education, and business 

education.

Printings of newly revised, not reprints, courses of study cost us about $5,500 

for the larger courses of study, such as science and English, and about half 

that amount for smaller courses of study. We feel that this program ought to 

be stepped up and we included a request for an additional $9,000 for this purpose in our initial preparation of the 1959 budget approved by the Board of 

Education. To meet more pressing needs, this item was eliminated in the revision of the 1959 requests submitted to the Commissioner, and we plan to 

include it in our 1960 budget estimates.

An amount of approximately $2,000 is allotted each year for supplies for 

our summer schools. In the summer of 1957, there was added to the elementary 

summer school program a special remedial reading program and the regular 

summer school supply allotment was not sufficient to provide for this special 

program. Consequently, the Board of Education approved a student fee of 

$2 to provide the materials needed. There has developed a real demand for 

this remedial reading program and because we believed it should be supported 

entirely from public funds, we included an item of $5,000 in our initial 1959 

budget estimates. This item was dropped from the revised requests submitted 

by the Board of Education to the Commissioners and will be included in the 

1960 estimates.

Very sincerely yours,

George E. S. Reynolds, Business Administrator.

Bases used in preparing per pupil allotments for textbooks and supplies an d materials

Regular elementary classes_____________ ________

Laboratory schools................ ..................... -........... .....

Shut-in p upils_________________ _________ _____

Americanization school......... .................. .....................

Crippled children____________________ ______ _

Occupational classes................... . ..................... -.........

Sight conservation................................ . .......................

1949 1950 1951 1958 P ro po sed

1959

$2 .9 0 $4 .0 0 $4 .2 5 $4 .6 0 $5 .00

3.5 0 4.0 0 4.2 5 5.0 0 5.40

3.0 0 4.0 0 4. 25 4 .6 0 5. (Ml

2. 25 4.0 0 4. 25 4.6 0 5.00

5.0 0 6.0 0 6. 00 10.00 10. 00

4.0 0 5.0 0 6.0 0 6.3 5 

10.00

6.75

10.00

Senator P astore. Does that complete your statement ? 

Dr. H ansen. Yes, sir.

D. c. teac he rs college

Senator Pastore. All right, what is the present situation in the 

Teachers College?

Dr. Hansen. The Board of Education approved a plan to conform 

as closely as possible to the requirements of the accreditation committee for removal of the threa t to accreditation. Secondly, the 

Board has instructed the administrative staff to develop a plan for 

expansion and change and modification of the college. This plan 

will be presented to the Board sometime within the next year and 

then the Board will be in a position to determine the direction in 

which the schools should go.
158 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Se na tor P astore. Doctor, this was yo ur first experience, before 

me at least, with th is subcommittee and I wa nt to co ng ratulat e you 

fo r the fine presentat ion you mad e an d I hop e th at we have pro ­

voke d the thinking of each of us and I do hop e th at in the fu tu re 

we ge t along as well as we di d this year.

Dr. H anse n. Th an k you, S ena tor.

Se na tor P astore. Yo ur predecessor was a good fri en d of mine. 

I met him first on the Dist ric t Com mittee. He was a fine educato r 

and I hope he is doing very, very well where ver he happ ens to be 

and I know you are a w orthy successor.

Dr. H ansen. May I say th at he has alw ays spoken high ly of you. 

Th is is som ething of a person al asid e and being here with you has 

been most intere sting and rew ard ing . I ap preciate the qu ali ty of 

the questions th at you asked and fu lly rea lize -what was behin d 

them.

Se na tor P astore. Ve ry well.

We th an k you a gain fo r your fine pres entation .

(Co mplete summ ary of me mbersh ips ap pe ars on pp . 350-356.)

Department of Vocational Rehabilitation

STATEMENT OF NORMAN W. PIERSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

AM EN DM EN T RE QU ES TE D

Mr. F owler. Th e next item, on page 29 of th e justifi cation s, the 

De partm ent of Voc atio nal Re habilitati on , the ap prop riation fo r 1958 

was $208,500 and the estima te fo r 1959 was $260,000. Th e House 

allowed $215,000, a reduct ion of $45,000.

Th e ame ndm ent req uested is on page 11, line 4, strik e out “$215,000” 

and ins ert in lieu there of “$224,800”, an increase of $9,800 in the 

ap prop ria tio n. Th e witness will be Mr. No rm an W. Pie rso n, the 

As sis tan t Direc tor of the De pa rtm en t of Vocational Re ha bilitation .

(The justifi cation foll ows:)

Department of Vocational Rehabilitation

OP ER AT ING EX PEN SE S

Ap propriatio n, 1958--------------------------------------------------------------------- $208,500

Estim ate , 1959__________________________________________________ 2G0, 000

Hou se allowan ce, 1959 (re ducti on of $45,000)_____________________ 215,000

amendment requested

Page 11, line 4, strike out “$215,000” an d in se rt in lieu thereo f “$224,800”, 

or an increase of $9,800 in the app ropriat ion .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Application of House reductions

159

S ta n d ard cl as sifica tion E sti m ate ,

1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

Per so na l se rv ic es _____________________ . . . $84,2 86 

1,284 

898 

5,60 6 

292 

18,876 

1,456 

13,190 

1,462 

81,150

$103,161 

1,934

1,133 

21,571 

292 

19,266

1,456 

14,120

3,212 

93,85 5

T ra v e l___________ ______ __________ ____

C om m unic ati on ser vic es ________________ _

R en ts an d u ti li ty s er vic es .................................

P ri n ti n g a n d r ep ro d u cti o n ...............................

O th er co ntr actu al se rv ic es ________________

Se rv ices p er fo rm ed b y o th er ag enci es ...

Sup pl ie s an d m ate ri als _______ ___________

E q u ip m e n t. . ______ ____ _ ____ _____

G ra n ts , su bs id ie s, an d c o n tr ib u ti o n s______

T o ta l esti m ate o r a p p ro p ri ati o n ____ 208,500 260,0 00

A m ount

re co m ­

m en ded

by H ou se

In cr ea se

(+ ) or d ecr ea se (—), 

bill c om ­

p are d w it h 

es ti m at e

A m o u n t of 

re st o ra ti o n 

re q u est ed 

in Sen at e

$77,321 

1,284 

898

-$ 25, 840

-6 5 0

+$ 9, 80 0

-2 3 5

11,571 -1 0,0 00

292

18.876 -3 9 0

1,456

13,190 -9 3 0

1, 462 -1 ,7 5 0

88,650 -5 ,2 0 5

215,000 -4 5,0 00 + 9,8 00

Recapitulation (by activities')

S ta n d ard cl as sifica tion E sti m ate ,

1958

E st im ate ,

1959

A m ount

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

In cr ea se

( + ) or d ecre as e (—), 

bill co m ­

par ed w ith 

est im ate

A m o u n t of 

re st ora tion 

re quest ed 

in Sen at e

A d m in is tr ati o n __________ ____________ $23.6 98 $29,906 $29,906 V oca tiona l g u id a n ce........... . .........................

Cas e se rv ic es ............................ ........... ............. 68,248 92, 340 7(X 340 -$ 22 ,0 00 soo 93' 054 99' 754 99' 754 V en din g sta n d p ro g ra m ___________ ______ 15,000 15,000 15; 000 R eh ab il it ati o n of m en ta ll y i l l ____ _____ 8, .500 23,0 00 -2 3,0 00

T o ta l est im at e or a p p ro p ri ati o n _____ 208,500 260,000 215,000 -4 5,0 00 + 9 , 8C0

HO USE REPORT

The committee recommends an appropriation of $215,000 for this Department, 

a reduction of $45,000 in the budget estimate and an increase of $6,500 above 

the 1958 appropriation . Included in the committee reduction is a voluntary 

withdrawal of $23,000 for a specially designed rehabilitation project for the 

mentally ill at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital. The proposed project was disapproved 

by the Fed eral Office of Vocational Rehabilita tion on May 20, 1958. In addition, 

the committee recommends the abolishment of the Vocational Evaluation Unit.

JU ST IF IC ATI ON

The increase requested is as follows:

Vocational guidance, $9,800.—The action of the House Appropriations Committee abolished the Vocational Eva luation Unit. The unit has, in the past, 

been a valuable pa rt of the dep artm ental operations, and its name is somewhat 

a misnomer in term s of its purposes in that it does much more than evaluations 

per se. The more important a re :

1. The unit provides a facility for integratin g and bringing into closer interplay all of the services of the department in a n effort to determ ine the applicant’s 

feasibility before costly expe nditures are un de rta ke n;

2. The unit also performs a continuous survey of the community and secures 

a firsthand knowledge of actual job requ irem ents and employment possibilities, 

thereby providing the dep artm ent with a “systematic and concentrated resea rch 

for employment opportunities” ;

3. Continuous review of and search for better training facilities.

From an evaluation viewpoint the primary value of the unit provided the 

departm ent the opportunity of perfo rming its own evaluatio ns of work tolerance tests, aptitudes, etc., but as some of thi s service can be secured, in part, 

from other sources it can be concluded it is not the best solution but is possible.
160 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

This is not the case in terms of the continuous surveying of the community, 

and the department would be vitally affected by the loss of th is service.

The survey of the community brings to the departm ent a firsthand knowledge 

of the job requirements, personal needs, employment opportunities, and an 

understanding of employer problems, all of which are used in planning dep artmental operations. Too, the survey also provides the setting in which we can 

concentrate on the opportunities as well as to promote an und erstanding of the 

problems of the physically handicapped.

Included in the types of information which the survey brings to the department are answers to questions such a s:

1. Which are the most effective training schools in the are a as viewed by the 

employer?

2. Are there any jobs with personnel shortages which handicapped persons 

could be traine d to fill?

3. What are the conditions under which an employer is most likely to employ 

a handicapped individual?

4. What direct services are necessary to enable the handicapped person to 

qualify and successfully perform any given job?

5. What jobs can he created for the selective placement of the severely handicapped?

6. What are the possibilities of placing clien ts according to sex and race 

in any given occupation?

The answers to the foregoing questions and other information gath ered by 

the survey provide for more realistic program plan ning in that it brings into 

being a greater interplay of services in the Depa rtment. Too, i t promotes more 

realistic prep aration and placement of qualified clients into job openings, 

thereby avoiding delay, duplication of services, and costly errors resulting from 

unsuccessful placements.

Promotion of employment opportunities and successful placem ents is the 

measuring device for determining the success or failur e of all of the departmental operations, and it is respectfully requested that the funds be restored 

to allow the Departm ent to carry on this pa rt of the service which was performed by the Evaluation Unit.

Application of funds.—The $9,800 will be used to retain the necessary personnel to carry out the foregoing services. The personnel are a s follows :

1 GS-11 arts and crafts specialist

1 GS-4 secretary-stenographer

Analysis by activities : Personal services, activ ity 2, $9,800.

General Statement

Mr. Pierson. Mr. Chairman, this is my first appearance before 

this distinguished committee and we would like to thank you for the 

opportunity of appearing relative to our request for the restoration.

Due to my inexperience in testifying before the committee, we have 

prepared a general statement which I would like permission to read.

Senator Pastore. II ow long is it?

Mr. P ierson. It is a very short statement, sir, and it will only take 

about a minute or two.

Senator P astore. All right, proceed.

Mr. Pierson. During the few short years the Department of Vocational Rehabilitation has been a District agency, it has strived to 

improve the services to the disabled residents of our community. We 

have made some improvement; and, to name a few, they are as follows :

More counselors were added and we reached and served more 

people.

Our dollar allotment for case sendees was increased whereby we 

could provide a wider variety of services.

Exp ert medical consultative services were secured.

A specialized job-placement clinic was created and it aided in the 

placement of our clients.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 161

A Vocational Evaluation Unit was created to pinpoint the work potential of the disabled client by observing him in a work situation, 

thereby providing us with firsthand knowledge of the job area in 

which the client could best function.

While these did much to aid us in our total rehabilitationu efforts, 

they were not the final answers and did not solve many o f the problems of getting the clients placed. Early in March we took a crucial 

second look at our procedures for providing employment opportunities for our clients.

We found that to be successful in placing many types of the handicapped workers it was necessary to seek outside help in locating jobs, 

especially for those clients whose disabilities make the search for 

gainful work difficult to find, if not impossible. In this end we were 

fortunate enough to be able to develop a relationship whereby local 

radio and television stations devoted a series of spot announcements 

specifically designed to attr act employers who may be able to aid us 

and employ these difficult placement cases.

IMPROVING EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES

We explored ways of maintaining and improving employment 

opportunities. In the early stages of exploration we mailed questionnaires to employers but this did not prove satisfactory. Only 

2 percent of the employers replied to our questionnaire. Sampling 

the industry in an effort to determine the reasons the employers did 

not answer, we found the replies fell into two groups:

(1) Employers were afraid it was an effort to get our foot in the 

door and they would be pressured to employ a handicapped person.

(2) They could give no reason for not replying and said they 

merely laid the correspondence aside and forgot about it.

Senator Pastore. May I interrupt you at this point and ask you 

what kind of handicapped people are these? Is it physically handicapped ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir, physically handicapped, people whom we 

are attempting to rehabilitate.

Senator Pastore. Was this at St, Elizabeths?

Mr. Pierson. No, sir. The St. Elizabeths project was a reduction 

voluntarily taken in the budget due to the fact it was not approved 

for a special Federal grant,

Senator Pastore. All of this then concerns itself with physically 

handicapped ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir.

There may be some mental cases involved in it, obviously, but the 

project you are referring to specifically, sir, if I may go on, refers 

to a special demonstration project which we were going to set up.

Senator Pastore. I am not being critical because I am very, very 

much interested in this work as well as with these people who have 

been sick with mental diseases, too. I was merely wondering if it 

dealt with that, This is mostly with physically handicapped?

Mr. Pierson. By and l arge ; yes.

The mental project to which you referred was especially designed 

for St.* Elizabeths Hospital. We do, in our regular program, have 

emotional cases and cases of a mental nature. There will continue
162 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

to be certa in disabi lities of a me nta lly ha nd ica pped na ture in our 

re gu la r p rog ram .

Se nator P astore. Al l rig ht, proceed.

PERSONAL CONTACTS WIT H EMPLOYERS

Mr. Pierson. As the samp lin g ind icated , the use of the mail in 

ter ms of appro achin g emp loyers was a failu re. We did lea rn, however, du rin g the p ersona l con tacts wi th the employers we w ere able to 

develop th eir i nte rests a nd were able to discuss a wide rang e o f m utu al 

problems an d needs.

Fr om thi s experience, we deve loped a survey technique. A sam ­

pling o f the technique pro duced startling results .

We found we were ge tti ng a firsth and kno wle dge of act ual job 

requirements an d' th e con ditions un de r which an emplo yer was most 

likely to hir e a handica pped person. We also foun d the surv ey pr ovid ed an excellent cha nne l fo r dis sem ina ting inform ation rega rd ing 

ou r agency, and it showed the emp loyers beyond a d ou bt th at we were 

objective in our appro ach and were only inter ested in tryi ng to pr ovide the max imum job opp ortun ities f or our clien ts while, at th e same 

time , pr ovidi ng the emp loyer w ith the best available labo r.

EVALUATION UN IT

The survey was so successful t hat we ex panded th e fun ctions of the 

Ev aluatio n U ni t to include the surve y an d th is allowed the local agency, 

fo r the firs t time, to pe rfo rm a con tinuou s sys tem atic and concentrat ed rese arch fo r emp loyment op po rtu nitie s. I t has added tr emend ously to ou r co mm unity p restige.

The Hou se com mittee has reco mmended the Ev alua tio n U ni t be 

abolished. We hav e no t att em pted to ana lyz e the reasons fo r the 

House recommen dation, wi tho ut first atte m pt in g to det erm ine wh at 

effect the reco mm end atio n will hav e on the fu tu re opera tions of our 

Depar tment .

We will no t be able to pe rfo rm ou r own evalu ations whe reby we 

can get the fulle st benefit fro m th e interp lay of all of the services of 

the agency. However, the com munity does offer some op po rtu nitie s 

fo r e val uat ion and we feel wi th careful superv ision and close coo peration it is possible we can ca rry ou t th is p ro gram to a lim ite d degree.

Not so wi th the surv ey. Th is service is no t ava ilab le to the exten t 

it can be used to mee t ou r prog ram needs. Prom oting emplo yment 

opportu nit ies an d successfu l placem ents are t he m eas uring device for 

determinin g th e success or failu re of ou r prog ram .

We feel th at w ith resto ratio n of the staff fo r the surv ey, t he g uide ­

lines f or a successful p rogram w ill hav e been well placed in increased 

emp hasis upon the impro vem ent of rel ati onships with employers—in 

recogn ition th at physically ha nd ica pp ed persons should alw ays have 

an op po rtu nity to work—a nd in the firm foun datio n th at we now 

have a more com plete and a more worka ble program . On th is base 

we feel we can bu ild fo r th e future, in wh at may be a young bu t 

vigo rous tra di tio n of service. .

Mr. Ch air ma n, we solicit the su pp or t of yo ur com mittee m this 

ende avor.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 163

NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES

Senator Pasture. How many people do you have in this Deoart- ment ?

Mr. P ierson. We had a budget of 49. In the House request it was

52 and with the House action we will have 42.

Senator Pasture. Forty-two people?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir, the total number of positions.

Senator Pasture. I s this work tha t is being done being done by

regular employees now ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir; by positions on our staff.

Senator P asture. What if the amount is not restored ?

Mr. Pierson. It will require a reduction in force.

Senator P asture. And you will have to let someone go ?

Mr. P ierson. Yes, sir; in the event we cannot absorb them in other

activities of the Department.

Senator Pasture. Wh at is this you are going to do ?

Mr. P ierson. I said, if they cannot be absorbed in some other function that we have in the Department or in the event those jobs are 

filled, obviously we will have to go through a reduction-in-force.

VACANCIES

Senator Pasture. Have you any vacancies there now ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir, 3; 2 are in the clerical area—1 clerk-stenographer and 1 general clerk. The other is a counseling position which 

has just become vacant. We are in the process now, through the 

District of Columbia Personnel Office, of recruiting for the clerkstenographer, so we have two vacancies, a clerk and a counselor.

Senator P asture. A counselor ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir.

Senator P asture. And do you need tha t counselor ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes. The positions we hope to discuss at this moment,

are the positions in the Evaluation U nit. Not in the regular program, 

where they are engaged in counseling and guidance.

EVALUATION UNI T FUNCTIO NS

Senator P asture. What does the Evaluation Unit do ? Give us a better picture. What does this mean to the efficiency of your department 

or to its efficacy, if we did not restore this to the Evaluation Unit?

Mr. P ierson. The Evaluation Unit was set up to simulate working 

conditions-----

Senator Pasture. When you say “unit” you mean that one man 

does this job?

Mr. Pierson. There are four positions-----

Senator Pasture. It says you need one GS-11, arts and crafts 

specialist.

Mr. Pierson. He is the supervisor of the Evaluation Unit, which 

is a special function in our Department-----

Senator P asture. Now what are you doing there ?

Mr. Pierson. We try to simulate working conditions and try to 

duplicate the work of a partic ular job so we can evaluate the clients 

to find out whether or not they can perform a particula r duty or 

perform certain jobs before we refe r them to employers.
164 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Senator P astore. Do you mean to tell me that if you do not hire the 

extra person, these 42 people who work in your department will not 

talk to a man to find out whether he can do—what he can do and 

what he cannot do ?

TOLERANCE TEST

Mr. Pierson. This is an actual tolerance test, whether they can 

work 8 hours a day-----

Senator Pastore. What kind of test is that ?

Mr. Pierson. Work tolerance. It is to find out whether or notthey can stand the pressure of working for 4 to G to 8 hours a da y; also 

to determine whether they can adjust due to their disability. Can 

they operate a bandsaw and so on, that sort of thing-----

Senator P astore. How can they find that out in your office?

Mr. P ierson. That is in our Evaluation Unit where we have a machine shop. For instance we have a lathe, a power bandsaw, and we 

have electrical equipment, things of th at nature, for work evaluations, 

to find out whether they can do those things.

Senator Pastore. I see. You have all of this equipment ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. If a man comes in and says, “Well, I think I can 

run a lathe,” do you take him out to a room to see if he can ?

Mr. P ierson. If he is referred to us and if we cannot, through our 

counseling and guidance and that sort of thing, determine whether 

or not he can do the work, we then refer him to the center to find 

tha t out.

Senator Pastore. If you do not get this job, will that mean that if 

you cannot get someone else on your staff to do the work you will 

have to close down this equipment ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir. The unit will have to be closed down.

Senator P astore. How big is this ? Where is it located ?

Mr. P ierson. Well, we formerly operated at the District of Columbia General Hospital, but had to move out of the District of Columbia General Hospital location due to the fact they needed the space 

to provide for long-term convalescence care for their patients. We 

asked the Commissioner for permission to find another place to relocate it. There was no District space available and the Administrative Service office rented a building at 808 12th Street NW. into 

which we moved the equipment. Due to a process of renovating the 

building, the unit is not actually set up. The equipment is in the 

building. The building is there and it has been rented.

SOURCE OF REFERRALS

Senator Pastore. How do these people come to you, in the first 

place ?

Mr. P ierson. It can be by referral from community agencies. Hospitals also refer them as well as health and welfare and so on-----

Senator Pastore. Well, I think we have a unit like this back home 

but we do not have these practical tests tha t you have before refe rring them to the employer. For instance, suppose I come into you, 

or a person comes to you, a physically handicapped person and says, 

“All my life I worked at a loom and still think I can do the work,” 

so you connect him with an employer and this person finds he can
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 165

do the work in spite of the handicap, so why should we not leave it 

up to the employer and the employee to determine that ? Why should 

you begin to test it ?

Mr. Pierson. That is very possible. In those instances, sir, where 

we think we can determine it without the testing, tha t will be done 

and we have had many, many cases where we have actually referred 

them directly to the employer and asked him whether or not he could 

use the person or whether or not another person could be used.

The ones we are more concerned about are those that come from 

laboring areas and now that they are in the Washington area, having 

to adapt them to the Washington economy is quite a problem.

Senator Pastore. Xow, what does the stenographer have to do with 

this?

Mr. Pierson. Tha t will be a person who will handle all the paper 

volume in terms of what the survey will produce.

Senator Pastore. Well, could you not get one of the other stenographers to do this ?

Mr. Pierson. We are rath er limited in terms of clerical help.

CASELOAD

Senator Pastore. Let’s assume a person comes in to have this test. 

This is quite a long drawn-out thing, is it not?

How many cases a day do you process in this unit ?

Mr. Pierson. We had an average caseload of about 30 during the 

time it was open.

Senator Pastore. In 1 day ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir, 30 persons unde r test.

Senator P astore. You mean tha t 1 tests 30 people as to whether or 

not they can run a buzz saw ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, sir. Thirty people were in the evaluation unit 

in the District of Columbia General Hospital when it was in operation.

Senator Pastore. And it worked out well ?

Mr. P ierson. Well, it did not work out as well as it would have if 

we had had more staff for the unit, but he did, through picking out 

the better clients and using them as leaders and group leaders.

Senator Pastore. Did the House go into this thoroughly?

Mr. P ierson. Yes, sir; they asked several questions about it.

Senator Pastore. I would like to see it. I would like to see that to 

determine its value.

Mr. Pierson. It is not set up now.

Senator P astore. It is not ?

Mr. P ierson. No, sir. As I said, it is in the building. The equipment is moved. We have rented the building. The building is undergoing renovation.

EFFECT OF HO US E ACTIOIT

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the instructions of the House 

committee, this unit, as such, will be abolished. We have already 

served notice on the lessor of the building tha t the lease would not be 

renewed beyond the end of this month.

Mr. Pierson. The point I was trying to bring out, if I may, was 

tha t we were not asking for restoration of the unit per se but rather 

are asking for restoration of a function which was being performed 

by the unit. Surveying the community, going out to the “grass-
166 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

ro ots”, ta lk in g with the e mployers, disc ussing our problems th at sort 

of th ing. We have obtained excellent rel ati on sh ips with the emplo yers in th at area. Th e positions for th at po rti on is wha t we are 

askin g to be restored.

PU BL IC REL ATIONS

Se na tor P astore. You hav e no one, wi thin the 42 peop le alread y 

there , th at can absorb this function ?

Mr. Pierson. We have no one oth er th an the counselors. They 

are ca rry ing a heavy caseload and are q uite involve d in counseling.

Thi s is act ually a con cen trated effort. Me eting and sitti ng down 

with employers and talking abo ut the problem, to tr y to determ ine 

wha t are as we can actua lly place thes e peo ple an d wh at areas the 

employers would conside r hi ring h andic apped pers ons to work.

Se nator P astore. Would you say t his is public rela tio ns ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, si r; very definitely. I t has a twofold pur pose 

thou gh —it brings back to us a bette r kno wle dge of wh at actua lly 

exists in the co mmunity which we feel, on a pr og ram-plann ing basis, 

wou ld aid us co nsiderab ly.

NEED FOR PRIVAT E SECRETARY

Senator Pastore. W ill this man need a pr ivate sec retary ju st to 

keep notes f or him ?

Mr. Pierson. We ll, he w ill need a sec retary in orde r t hat af te r the 

surv eys are com pleted, clerical assistance will be needed to cros sind ex them . Also to pro vid e list s and so rt out certa in sta tis tic al in ­

for ma tion, made appoint me nts , ma ilin gs, and clerical fun ctions of 

th at sort. We hav e, cu rre ntl y, a staffing ratio of 1 clerk to every 2 

people, but they are in th e cou nseling area.

Ove r and bey ond those, the only clerical positions we pro vid e are 

two oth er ste nogra phers , one for the Di rector and one fo r the As ­

sis tant Direc tor.

Se nator P astore. Th e only th in g I wa nt to say, I do not say it in 

any sense of crit icism, because I th in k this is a w onderful activ ity a nd 

we h ave to do e ve rything we possibly can to employ our handica pped 

persons, but I know when I was back in my State as the chief execu ­

tiv e we did con duc t some very exte nsiv e cam pai gns in order to convinc e the employers th at th ese peop le were actua lly very much ph ys ­

ica lly able to do a lot of this work and ju st because a person has to 

wor k on c rutche s it does n ot mean he canno t use h is h ands with a sense 

of precision and we realize th at sometimes just because th at kind of 

person comes to an office th ere is th at ba rrie r th at the y will not hire 

them because of th e handic ap.

Th ere does have to be a lot of public rel ati ons in th is sort of th ing . 

I do h ope t hat sometimes we do no t get too fan cy abou t some o f these 

things an d des troy t he whole substan ce of the prog ram itself.

Bu t you say th at the activity you are tal kin g1

 abou t is essential ?

Mr. Pierson. Yes, th at po rtion of what was fo rm erly perfo rm ed by 

the Vocational Ev alua tio n Uni t, th at o f surv eys of the c ommunity is 

essential and we are a sking rest ora tion. Not the complete un it pe r se.

Se nator P astore. Do you want to sav an ything on th at , Com missioner?

Mr. K arrick. No, sir. li e pre sen ted it very well.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 167

Senator Pastore. I want to make this crystal clear. This is not to 

run a machine or anything at all like that. This is to go out in the 

field and try to talk to these employers and say, “Look, this is a 

program. This is what we are tryi ng to do. We are trying to get 

these people who have ability.”

Mr. P ierson. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. “We want you to give these disabled people a 

chance to work without any disadvantage to you. Do not be scared 

if a person comes in, God forbid, with 1 leg or 1 arm or on crutches.”

This is public relations. This is to sell the program.

Mr. Pierson. It is that, yes, but it is also to bring back to us in 

the program what actually exists in the community so it will aid in 

program planning.

Senator Pastore. You use a lot of fancy language here and sometimes people do not understand it.

Mr. Pierson. I am sorry, sir.

Senator P astore. I do not mean you.

Mr. Fowler. I was going to say the Director of Vocational Rehabilitation recently resigned from the District. Mr. Pierson is acting 

as the Director.

Mr. Karrick. He is going out to handle the whole program.

Senator Pastore. I do not care in what capacity he comes.

Mr. Fowler. The next item is the courts.

J uvenile Court

STATEMENT OF MRS. FRAN CINE TEMKO, LEGAL AND EXECUTIVE

ASSISTANT, JUV ENILE COURT, ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN LARKIN,

DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL WORK; MISS HILDA REAGLE, CLERK OF

THE COURT; AND MRS. LEAH FRIEDMAN, THE MANAGEMENT

ASSISTANT

AM END M EN T RE QU ES TE D

Mr. Fowler. The appropriation for the courts is $4,607,000 for 

1958. The estimate for 1959 is $4,987,000. The House reduction was 

$34,000. The amendment requested is page 11, line 12, strike out 

“$4,958,000” and insert in lieu thereof “$4,972,000,” or an increase of 

$19,000 in the appropriation.

(The justification follows:)

COU RTS

Ope ra ti ng E x pe n ses

Ap pro pri ation, 1958_____________________________________________$4, 607, 600

Es tim ate , 1959________________________________________________ 4, 987, 000

Ho use allowan ce, 1959 (re du cti on of $34,000)____________________ 4,9 53,00 0

A M END M EN T RE QU ES TE D

Pa ge 11, line 12, strike ou t “$4,953,000” and inse rt in lieu the reo f “$4,972,000,” 

or an inc rea se of $19,000 in the app ropriat ion.
168 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Application of House reductions

St an da rd classification Es tim ate,

1958

Es tim at e,

1959

Amou nt

rec om ­

men de d

by H ouse

Increa se

(+ ) or de ­

crease (—), 

bill com ­

pa red with 

estim ate

Amou nt of 

resto ration 

request ed 

in Senate

Perso nal services ___ . . - _____________ $1, 633.830 $1,838, 738 $1,838, 738

Tr av el . ........... . . _ ................... 8,785 10, 783 9,827 —$956 +$956

Co mm unica tion se rvice s. .. . ...... .......... 31, 591 33' 091 31, 591 -1 ,5 00 +1,50 0

Ren ts and u til ity serv ices _____ _________ 1,850 1,850 1,850

Pr in ting and rep ro duct io n...................- - 22, 760 25,635 24,135 —1, 500 +1 500

Othe r contractua l s ervices. . . . . 2, 718,218 2,855', 584 2,852,884 —2, 700 +2,70 0

Serv ices perform ed by oth er agencies. 39,193 30,193 22^ 193 -8 ,0 00

Supplies an d materials________- _____ 19,605 22, 705 21, 705 -1 ,0 00 +1,00 0

Eq ui pm en t . ___ . . _____ . _________ 29,801 56,648 35,304 -2 1, 344 +11, 344

Gr an ts, sub sidies, and co nt rib ut io ns .. . . . 10i; 967 111, 773 114, 773 +3,00 0

To tal e sti ma te or ap pr op ria tio n......... 4,607, 600 4,987,000 4,953,000 -34,0 00 +19,000

Recapitulation (by activities)

Stan da rd classification Es tim ate,

1958

Es tim ate,

1959

Am ou nt

rec om ­

men de d

by Ho use

Inc rea se

(+ ) or decrease (—), 

bill com ­

pa red with 

estim ate

Amou nt of 

resto ratio n 

req ue ste d 

in S enate

Ju ve nile co urt . . . __ . . . . . . . . . . . $490,900 $632,000 $595,000 -$3 7,0 00 +$19.000

Mun ici pa l court . . . . . . __ 1,315, 200 1,415', 000 1, 415+00

Municipal court of a pp eals__ ____ ____. 149,800 154,000 157,000 +3,00 0

District of C olu mb ia tax c ou rt__________ 33,100 35', 000 35,000

Un ite d State s c ou rts ____ ______________ 2, 618,600 2,751,000 2, 751', 000

To tal esti ma te or a pp ro pr iatio n___ 4,607,600 4,987,000 4,953,000 -34,00 0 +19,000

H O U SE REPORT

For the operation of the courts of the District of Columbia $4,953,000 is 

recommended. This is a net reduction of $34,000 in the budget estimates but 

an increase of $345,400 above the 1958 appropriation. The allocation of fund s 

to each activity is as follows :

Juvenile cou rt_______________________________________________ $595, 000

Municipal court______________________________________________ 1,415,000

Municipal court of appeals____________________________________ 157,000

District of Columbia tax cou rt_________________________________ 35, 000

United States courts_________________________________________ 2, 751, 000

The committee has allowed $75,000 for personnel and other costs for the 

second judge of the juvenile court. The legislation authorizing the add itional 

judge is now in the conference stage but in the event the legislation is not 

enacted the fund s recommended should be held in reserve and returned to the 

Treasury.

JU S T IF IC A T IO N S

The increases requested are as follows :

JtwentZe court, $19,000.—We are requestin g th at $19,000 of the $37,000 cut 

from our fiscal year 1959 budget by the House Appropriations Committee be 

restored by the Senate Appropriations Committee. These funds are urgently 

needed to pay for increased costs of communication services, printing, supplies 

and materials and trav el ; to take care of equipping new employees with desks, 

cha irs and office sup plies; and to provide business machines and equipment 

needed to proceed with reorganization projects urgently needed to enable the 

court to give the community the type of service it should expect from this 

court.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 169

Financial analysis

Ob ject:

Trave l_____________________________________________________ $956

Communication services______________________________________ 1, 500

Printing and reproduction ____________________________________ 1, 500

Other contractual services___________________________________ 2, 700

Supplies and ma terials______________________________________ 1, 0 0 0 Equipment__________________________________________________ 11, 344

Total____________________________________________________ 19,000

General Statement

Mr. Fowler. The appeal is from the juvenile court only. Mrs. 

Francine Temko is the legal and executive assistant and she has 

brought a number of people with her whom she may want to introduce.

Mrs. Temko. I would like to introduce Mr. John Larkin, who is 

the director of social work of the juvenile court, Miss Hilda Reagle, 

who is clerk of the court, and Mrs. Leah Friedman, who is the management assistant.

I have with me a letter to you from the judge explaining his unavoidable absence today and stating his position with respect to the 

court’s budget request, which I would like to submit for the record.

Mr. F owler. I think I should say tha t the judge is out of the city.

Mrs. Temko. Tha t is right. He is at a conference in Fort Lauderdale at this time. He made this commitment last December.

Senator Pastore. You have said enough.

PR EP AR ED statement

Mrs. Temko. The chairman of the Juvenile Court Advisory Committee, Mrs. Henry Grattan Doyle, had hoped to be here today. She 

came down yesterday. Since she could not be here today, she has 

given me a copy of a statement which she prepared. On her behalf, I 

would like permission to have it placed in the record.

Senator Pastore. All right.

(The statements referred to fo llow :)

J une 18, 1958. Hon. J ohn O. P astore,

Chairman, Subcommittee on District Government Appropriations,

Senate Appropriations Committee fo r the District of Columbia,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator Pastore. I wish to express to you and the other Senators on 

your subcomm ittee my regret at being unable to appear personally before you in 

support of the budget request of the juvenile cou rt of the Distric t of Columbia 

for fiscal year 1959.

Last December I agreed to atte nd the 21st Annual Conference of the National 

Council of Juvenile Court Judges at F or t Lauderdale, Fla., from Jun e 15 through 

Jun e 19. I am both a member of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges 

and on the council’s committee on uniform statistics on juvenile delinquency. As
170 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

the sole juvenile court judge in the Nation’s Capital. I considered my attendance at the deliberations of this imp orta nt national body of judges a necessity.

With the helpful cooperation of Chief Judge Bolitha J. Laws of the United 

Sta tes District Court and Chief Judge Leonard J. Walsh of the municipal court 

of the District of Columbia, a judge of the municipal court has been assigned to 

sit in my place on the juvenile court bench during my absence so th at the 

business of this court may continue with out interruption.

When I learned on Ju ne 10 of the scheduled hearing before your subcommittee 

on Jun e 17, I felt that I was committed to the National Council of Juvenile 

Court Judges beyond recall. Therefore, I have asked Mrs. Temko, my legal and 

executive assistant, to appear before your subcommittee today to sta te my position with regard to the budget request of the juvenile court for fiscal year 1959. 

I have also asked three other key members of my staff (Mr. Larkin, the director 

of social work, Miss Reagle, clerk of court, and Mrs. Friedman, management 

assis tan t) to assist Mrs. Temko in answering any questions you may have about 

specific items, or to explain any of the operations of the c ourt which fall with in 

his or her responsibility.

The appropriations for the juvenile court for fiscal yea r 1959 are included with 

other courts of the District of Columbia on page 7 of the r epo rt of the Appropriations Committee of the House of Representatives. This section of the repo rt 

show’s t ha t the House committee approved an increase of .$345,400 above the 1958 

appropriation for all courts. This amonut was $34,000 below the budget tota l 

aomunts requested for all courts. Nevertheless, the budget requ ests of the juvenile court of the District of Columbia was cut by $37,000. The explana tion is 

th at all other courts in the District of Columbia got exactly wh at they asked for, 

with 1 court receiving $3,000 more than requested. I am very distressed that 

such an important law enforcement arm of the community as the juvenile court 

has been required by the House of Representatives to absorb the entire budget 

cut for courts in the Distric t of Columbia.

My staff and I have again examined our budget needs in ligh t of the report of 

the House of Representatives. We feel satisfied th at the $75,000 which the 

House of Representatives has allocated for personnel and oth er court costs for 

the second judge of the juvenile court will be sufficient for our needs. We also 

feel th at wre can accept a cut of $10,000 in the amount requested for purchase of 

equipment. We are asking that you restore $19,000 to our appropriations as 

being urgently needed for essential services in the juvenile court.

I hope that the state ments and explanations of Mrs. Temko and the other 

members of my staff will provide you and your subcommittee with full justification to restore the $19,000 to our budget and grant us $614,000 in appropriations 

for fiscal year 1959. If there is any furth er information or explanation which 

you desire, I shall be most happy to present it in writing or in person upon my 

return.

Sincerely yours,

Orman W. Ket ch am .

Stat eme nt of Mrs. H enr y Grattan Doyle, Cha ir man of th e J uv en ile Court

Advisory Com mittee

My name is Mrs. Henry Grattan Doyle. I am appearing here today as chair ­

man of the Juvenile Court Advisory Committee, a group of 15 interested individuals represen tative of community and professional organizatio ns. This committee has been actively functioning as a liaison betw7een the juvenile court and 

the community, and, as such, has advised the judge of the juvenile court on 

many aspects of broad policy. Among the members of the Committee, who 

serve, of course, withou t compensation, are persons w’ho have had long and 

devoted service in the delinquency, social work, and correctional fields and w’ho 

are acutely aware of the problems facing both the juvenile court and the community in these areas.

On behalf of the Advisory Committee. I wish to urge the restoration by your 

committee of the vitally needed funds which have been eliminated from the 

juvenile court budget as approved by the House committee. Although the sum 

which has been cut is small, it can have importance to the court and to the 

community fa r outweighing the amount of money involved. It is my und erstand ing tha t unless at least $19,000 of the reduction is restored, the juvenile 

court w’ill be seriously hampered in performing its day-to-day functions and 

in putting into effect its plans for establishing a statistical unit. As one long
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 171

inte rested in juvenile problems and as a member of the Commissioners’ Youth 

Council, I feel that the estab lishm ent of such a unit in the court is long overdue. 

It is only by more adequate compilation and exam ination of statistica l data that 

the court and the community can intelligently wage an overall campaign to 

prevent juvenile delinquency.

In addition to the delinquency problem, the District of Columbia faces a 

serious challenge in coping with problems of dependent children, illegitimacy, 

and an incre asing number of persons requ iring public assistance. Although the 

juvenile court cannot solve these problems singlehanded, these are community 

problems, the solution of which requires the active participation of the court. 

Through the cou rt’s jurisdiction in cases involving illegitim ate children and 

in cases involving willful nonsupport of wives and minor children in des titu te 

circum stances, the court atte mpts to provide economic support for such children 

and at the same time to relieve the community of the financial burden of supporting these families.

From my intimate observations of the functioning of the court as Chairman 

of the Advisory Committee, I can assure you that you have in the court an 

alert, hardworking, and informed organization. It is doing a good job. It would 

be most unfortun ate if it were prevented from performing even more valuable 

service to our community because of inadequa te funds. I respectfully urge 

you to restore to the juvenile court appropriation the funds requested.

Gen er al Sta te m ent

Mrs. Temko. Mr. Chairman, the juvenile court requested from the 

House Appropriations Committee an overall appropriation of 

$632,000. $83,000 of this amount represented a supplemental request 

contingent upon final passage of legislation providing for an additional judge for the juvenile court.

We received an overall decrease of $37,000; $8,000 of this was specifically allocated to the $83,000 supplemental request for personnel 

and other costs in connection with the appointment of a second judge, 

leaving an amount of $75,000 for these purposes.

The remaining $29,000 of our decrease represents a cut from our 

basic budget request of $549,000. Of the total decrease of $37,000, 

we hope to be able to absorb the $8,000 cut in our supplemental request 

and $10,000 of the decrease in our basic budget request. We respectfully request restoration of $19,000, however, which we feel is urgently 

needed for two main purposes: first, to pay for additional services to 

handle the increased workload of the court, $7,656; and, second, for 

necessary equipment and furnishings, $11,344.

In connection with the first request, although we feel tha t the 

$75,000 allowed by the House to provide personnel and other costs in 

connection with the second judge will be sufficient for our needs, I 

want to point out t hat the only “other costs” included in our supplemental request were amounts needed to provide and furnish additional 

judge’s chambers and an additional courtroom, and to provide equipment, such as desks, chairs, and other furnishings for the additional 

personnel requested.

All other costs in connection with the appointment of a second 

judge, such as travel, communication, jury fees, supplies and materials, were included in our basic budget request.

These costs will, of necessity, increase upon the appointment of a 

second judge.

RESTORATION OF $ 1 9,0 00 REQUESTED

Senator Pastore. Is this the $19,000 tha t is for that ?

Mrs. Temko. $7,656 of the $19,000 is for that. Our request is 

divided into two main categories.
172 DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

Senator Pastore. Is th at broken down anyplace here?

Mrs. Temko. I do not believe so. I can tell you briefly what it is 

and I can break it down for you. It includes items such as jury 

fees, supplies and materials, communications. Even this past year, 

with a complement of 80 to 85 employees, we ran short in several of 

these categories, such as telephone service, and supplies, and materials.

Senator Pastore. Do I understand you correctly tha t the $75,000 

does not include any part of the services ?

Mrs. Temko. Not of these general services.

Senator P astore. For the second judge ?

Mrs. Temko. Tha t is right. The only “other costs” included for 

the second judge were amounts needed to provide and furnish additional chambers and an additional courtroom for the second judge, 

and to provide furnishings for the additional personnel requested. 

There was a rather large item, I believe $30,000, included for building renovation. We have at present only one courtroom. This was 

to build another courtroom and judge’s chambers, to furnish those 

chambers and the courtroom.

Senator P astore. With regard to his desk, you mean you would not 

have a desk for him ?

Mrs. Temko. It includes those furnishings for his chambers and 

for the courtroom and for the additional personnel requested in tha t 

supplemental budget request.

But the general overall service costs to the agency were not included 

in that request.

In other words, if there are two judges sitting, there are going to 

be more jury cases. As it was, we came out with only $20 left over 

in jury fees last year.

HOUSE ALLOWANCE

Senator Pastore. Mr. Merrick has called my attention to the fact 

tha t the estimate for 1958 was $490,900. The estimate of 1959, 

$632,000. But they did allow you in the House $595,000 which is 

$105,000 more than in 1958.

Mrs. Temko. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think you can see the picture 

better if you break tha t $632,000 into 2 requests. One, $83,000 for 

the second judge; two, $549,000 for the basic court budget. We had to 

split it up this way because, as you know, even now, legislation authorizing a second judge has not passed. The conferees are to meet 

on June 26.

TRAVEL FUN DS

Senator Pastore. Now you have $956 for travel. Wha t kind of 

travel are you talking about?

Mrs. Temko. Tha t includes meetings and conventions. It includes 

all travel allowances for our probation officers who do a tremendous 

amount of in-town travel. They do receive automobile allowances 

for this.

Senator Pastore. Are you putting on new probation officers?

Mrs. Temko. We certainly hope so, yes.

Senator P astore. With the new judge ?

Mrs. Temko. Yes.

Senator Pastore. lia s th at been allowed ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 173

Mrs. Temko. Not in this budget request; no. But we are even now 

not up to our full complement of probation officers.

Senator Pastore. The tilings you are raising are being raised 

well. You do not go ahead in doubling up judges without doubling 

up your whole organization. I am wondering if this should not 

wait to see what happens. These are not fixed costs.

Mrs. Temko. I can tell you of some items th at are not estimates.

COMMUNICATIO N SERVICES

Senator P asture. You take communications service.

Mrs. Temko. We now have a switchboard with one switchboard 

operator. We have had a staff during this past year of between 

80 and 85 employees. We have only one switchboard operator. When 

she goes out to lunch, we have to assign a clearical employee from 

the clerk’s office to relieve this switchboard operator.

Sometimes even a deputy clerk must relieve on the switchboard. 

On tha t switchboard, we have nine outgoing lines. For an agency 

such as ours, which must have constant communication with other 

Government agencies, the board is pressed beyond capacity. I know 

myself I have had to wait 5 or 10 minutes for a line, which I think 

is rank inefficiency.

We have 11 incoming lines. The rest are outgoing. I talked with 

our switchboard operator about this yesterday. We have also had a 

telephone traffic survey made by the telephone company. They have 

recommended at least one more switchboard operator and increased 

switchboard facilities. This is a great need.

This is in tha t communication item. We went way over on our 

telephone expenses last year.

The other item that we were very close on was supplies and materials. It is not included in the second judge request. These are 

all in our basic budget request. I am not denying that we would 

need a bigger switchboard even if we did not get a second judge, but 

with a second judge, we are going to need increased switchboard facilities just that much more.

We also have received approval by the House committee of funds 

to provide for 14 additional positions, so we will be operating with 

a larger staff this coming year.

Eig ht of these positions are contingent upon the appointment of 

a second judge.

HO USE OUTS

Senator Pastore. Did the House allow you in your budget an 

amount over the amount tha t was appropriated for* 1958 for travel, 

services, communications ?

Mrs. Temko. No. Exactly the same amount. Eet me be frank, 

Senator Pastore. Wha t we received from the House committee was 

an overall decrease with no specific allocations made. The only manner in which this decrease was allocated at all was, of the $37,000 

decrease, we know that $8,000 must come out of the supplemental 

budget request relating to the second judge.

With respect to the remaining $29,000, there is not any indication 

as to where those cuts were made. So this, in a sense, is an election 

on our part, because we were told tha t we had to be specific.
174 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

In review ing our budget, which we felt was ra th er tigh t to star t 

with, it was ha rd to figure out just where we could accept the cuts.

These rep res ent wh at are to us the least im po rtan t items. We 

wou ld ra th er cut some of these items th an cut pers onnel. Bu t th at 

is not to say th at we can affo rd to cut these item s either, if you fo llow me.

CAS E BACKLOG

Senator P astore. Yes, I do. Could you give us some sta tistics on 

yo ur caseload, cases pending J an ua ry 1. 1958, cases pending May 31, 

1958?

Mi*s. T emko. I will. I want to say first what our present back log 

is in connection wi th my arg um ent th at , with the appoint me nt of a 

second judge, the cou rt will be conducting m ore hearings. Of course, 

this is no t necessarily so. The ap po int me nt of a second jud ge does 

no t mean th at we are going to have more delinquency com pla ints or 

more depen den t children coming befor e th e cou rt.

We are op era tin g un de r a backlog, tho ugh. Ju ry tria ls are ru nning 4 months beh ind, so th at , with the ap po int me nt of a second 

judge, the re will be more ju ry cases and we will be kee ping a cu rre nt 

calend ar.

Adu lt court tria ls an d juv enile co urt tria ls ru n abo ut 2 mo nth s 

behind. In othe r w ords, a tr ia l requested tod ay w ould be set fo r e arly 

Augus t.

Senator P astore. Let me see if I un de rstand you correctly. Do I 

un derst and you to say th at wi th the exception of the $29,000 th ere is 

an amoun t of $8,000?

Mrs. Temko. T hat is rig ht.

Senator P astore. Th e autho riz ati on fo r the second judge. So fa r 

as these routi ne expenses are conc erned, you were not increased over 

the 1958 budget, were you ?

PR INTING

Mrs . Temko. No, wi th the qualifications th at I hav e alr eady pu t 

into the rec ord.

In other words, these were n ot specific cuts. But the way o ur b ud ­

get now stands, if we keep the personnel, then ev ery thi ng else is cut 

except one item which I was going to get to in my second catego ry. 

In other words, we wou ld be receiving no increases in any of these 

item s: tra vel, c ommunica tion, p rin tin g.

I wo uld like to ta lk fo r a minute about the p rin tin g.

Some of the p lan s th at we now hav e in the juvenile court are these. 

The juv enile co urt h as not had a vailable any copy of its act. We have 

people com ing to the cou rt in v ari ous capacities, r epres entative s of the 

De pa rtm en t of Pu blic Welfare , rep res entative s of the Bo ard o f E ducation, rep res entative s of the vario us Police De partm ents, mem bers 

of ou r Ju ve nile Co urt Ad visory Com mittee, who have asked to see a 

copy of the act. We can not give th at to them . We can show them 

the District Code.

Se nator P astore. Can they n ot look it u p in the code ?

Mrs. Temko. Th is is a very difficult th in g fo r peop le com ing to the 

cou rt. You c ann ot say “W ell, her e is the D istri ct Code. Si t down and 

read it.”
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 175

Other agencies do have copie s of th ei r leg islation which the y can 

hand out. Th is is one of the things th at we feel is very im po rtan t 

to accomplish. Th is is inc lud ed in pr intin g. We are wo rking on 

th at now.

PRINTING OF RULES AND REGULATIONS

An othe r item th at will be included in print in g is a set o f rules and 

reg ula tio ns fo r the cou rt, a ma nual of legal pra ctices and procedures. 

Th is is a court of law. I t is ha rd to realize it sometimes because we 

do n ot h ave thes e th ings available.

Se na tor P astore. You need i t for attorn eys .

Mrs. Temko. Ex actly . So th at increases con siderably the pr in ting 

figure.

I did no t specifically give you the figures on caseloads, bu t if you 

wa nt them I can subm it them to you.

Se nator P astore. Fin e.

(The in form ation referre d to fol low s:)

Supplemental statement

To tal cases filed durin g Ja nuar y 1958-------------------------------------------- 268

Ju ve nile_______________________________________________________________164

A dult _________________________________________________________________104

To tal cas es filed du rin g May 1958------------------------------------------------- 281

Ju ve nile_______________________________________________________________157

A dult _________________________________________________________________124

Note.—Th e inform ation req ues ted was st at is tics re latin g to cases pen din g on Jan. 1, 

1058, and cases pen ding on May 31, 1958. With the co ur t’s present ina dequate meth od of 

compilin g statistic s, we are unable to supply th e specific inform ation requested. We tr ust 

th at this inform ation will be of some help.

NEED FOR STATISTICAL EQUIPMENT

Mrs. Temko. Th e second item , $11,344, is need ed fo r the pur cha se 

or ren tal of equipm ent and furnishing s.

Senator P astore. Like wh at ?

Mrs. Temko. P art of it is fo r sta tis tic al equ ipm ent. We are prob ­

ably the only age ncy in th e comm unity wh ich deals with juv enile delinquency, depend ency, an d oth er social problems, th at has no way of 

kno win g, e ith er f or its own pur poses or f or comm unity purposes, wh at 

we are doi ng or wh ere we are going.

Th ere are no figures on recidivism, no figures to show, fo r exam ple, 

how many mem bers of one fam ily are known to us at the co urt for 

different reasons.

We have both ad ul t juris diction an d juv eni le jur isd iction . The 

ad ult juris dic tio n include s cases involv ing non support.

Se nator P astore. Would this re quire a machine ?

Mrs. Temko. We hope to g et t ab ul at in g mac hines so th at we will be 

able to make out cards on every case com ing to the court in order to 

know, but some so rt of system of cro ss-reference, w hat we have.

CROSS-INDEX SYSTEM

I am no t a sta tis tic ian myself b ut I th in k I can see the gen era l purpose of a cross-index. In other words, you migh t hav e a child who 

27235— 58------12
176 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

is known to us as a juvenile delinquent, another child in the same family known as a dependent child. The child’s father may be under 

the court’s jurisdiction in a paternity or nonsupport case. We can 

have, for instance, 2 or 3 probation officers working with the same 

family group.

How efficient this is we do not know. We do not know statistically 

how often this situation arises.

Senator Pastore. We do not have this in other courts.

Mrs. Temko. I believe we do. Judg e Ketcham has seen such equipment in other juvenile courts. Perha ps we do not have in the other 

courts, but we do in the juvenile courts, which I think is somewhat 

different, Senator.

Senator P astore. I do not think we have one in Rhode Island. We 

have quite a juvenile court there.

Mrs. Temko. Judg e Ketcham did make trips and visits to at least 

eight other juvenile courts in this country and every one of them 

had such equipment available.

Senator Pastore. I am not saying it is not necessary but it would 

be quite an innovation.

Mrs. Temko. I think we are one of the few juvenile courts which 

does not have it.

Senator Pastore. I would appreciate information on that matter.

(The information requested follows:)

In a recent study of statistical operations and intake procedures of juvenile 

courts in New York, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Wilmington, Cleveland, Toledo, and 

Philadelphia, it was found tha t all these courts use tabulating equipment to 

process statistical data. Each of these courts has established a statistical and 

research unit within the court. Some have their own tabulating machine units 

and are producing valuable data in a relatively short time. Others send copies 

of their source intake documents to other public agencies for processing. 

Those courts which do not have their own quipment indicated their dissatisfaction with the use of outside services in tha t they are forced to wait for as 

long as a month for the return of summary data to be used in analyzing court 

activities.

sta ti st ic a l an d res ea rc h u n it

Mrs. Temko. In addition, the restoration request includes other 

items in this $11,344.

Senator Pastore. Tha t is the bulk of your whole request really, is 

it not ? These other items are small.

Mrs. Temko. They are small financially, but we need them to 

operate.

Senator P astore. On your restoration the big item is $11,344.

Mrs. Temko. I want to explain that.

Senator Pastore. I am wondering if this is something new. It 

might be desirable.

Mrs. Temko. Mr. Chairman, it is not new. For at least 10 years 

now, community groups have been urgin g the creation within the 

juvenile court of a statistical and research unit. I have found correspondence in our files going back to 1948 urging this very thin g for 

several reasons.

One, for the court’s own purposes, to evaluate its own work, to 

direct its own work; and, secondly, for community purposes. So 

many of our problems are community problems. We work with 

other agencies. We really cannot do an effective job in the campaign
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 177

against juvenile delinquency or dependency unless we have the facts 

before us.

Senator Pastore. May I ask a question at this point? Has this 

matter ever been discussed with you, Mr. Fowler?

RECOMMENDATION OF COMMISSION ERS

Mr. F owler. It has been discussed with the Commissioners. They 

recommended the reinstatement of the item.

Senator Pastore. I do not mean that. I mean the statistical machine th at we are talking about, the hiring of an IB M to make all of 

these cross-references. It strikes me tha t this should be an important 

matter of policy.

If it is a desirable thing, more of us ought to know something about 

it, and not have you people come up here on a restoration request.

Mr. Lowe. I have not been in close contact with the matter in recent 

weeks, but we do have one of the management men working with the 

judge of the juvenile court on this mechanization or automation 

problem.

While, as I say, I cannot address myself to it in detail at this point, 

it is being checked to be sure that it is both desirable and economical. 

The Commissioners have endorsed the basic request, and we feel th at 

as it is developed that it will be done on a sound and economical basis.

Senator Pastore. I do not want to create the impression to this 

young lady tha t we are opposed to this modernization. It has some 

very far-reaching values. It strikes me th at it should not come up on 

an item of restoration.

SURVEY OF OPERATIO NS

Mrs. Temko. It was in our original budget request and, as a matter 

of fact, a representative of the District of Columbia management office 

was assigned to the juvenile court for several months and undertook a 

survey of our operations. This was one of the recommendations that 

he made.

It was recommended by a representative of the District Management 

Office.

May I make th at figure a little clearer? Our original request for 

an increase in this equipment category was much larger. It was 

$23,587, of which amount the House committee did allow $2,243.

We were also fortunate in being able to defray an additional $10,000 

as a result of a very recent transfer of funds, so tha t this $11,344 is 

what is left of our original requested increase.

Senator Pastore. Do you think tha t what the House allowed you 

will be enough to get this thing off the ground ?

Mrs. Temko. I believe the rental of 1 machine is $3,000 a year.

Senator P astore. How much did they allow you ?

Mrs. Temko. $2,243, which we arrived at through t hat system that 

I explained to you.

Senator Pastore. You mean you cannot hire 1 machine without 

$3,000?

Mrs. Temko. The simplest type of machine costs $3,000 a year, and 

then you need a key punch hookup which costs another $800. You 

also have to buy your cards.
178 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

This will be a very simple statistical setup. It would not be involved or fancy.

TOTAL COST OF OPERATION

Senator Pastore. Wha t is going to be the overall cost of this 

operation ?

Mrs. Temko. The statistical operation would cost somewhere between $4,000 and $5,000 a year, I believe.

Senator P astore. And they have allowed you what ?

Mrs. Temko. $2,243.

OTHER ITEM S OF EQ UIPM EN T

There are other items in this figure. The main item is for statis tical equipment. The others are to provide furnishings for additional 

personnel, fluorescent lighting to make it possible for the court to use 

interior space for offices. We do have a lot of interior space tha t is 

not being used for anything but dead storage now, which we will be 

able to use for offices if we have sufficient lighting.

PREPARED STA TEM ENT

Mr. Fowler. Mr. Chairman, would you permit us to file a supplemental statement on this ?

Senator Pastore. I wish you would. It is getting quite intricate 

and complicated. It requires some serious thought. I am very grateful to you for presenting it.

Mrs. Temko. Thank you.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Government of th e D istrict of Columbia,

Department of General Administra tion,

Office of th e Director, 

Was/un^fow, D. C., J un e 19,1958.

Supplemental Statement in Support of Senate Restoration Request of

J uvenile Court

The juvenile court is requesting restora tion of $19,000, which is urgently 

needed for two main purpo ses: First, to pay for additio nal services to handle 

the increased workload of the court, $7,656; second, for the purchase or rental 

of necessary equipment and furnishings, $11,344.

The juvenile court’s original budget request included an increase of $23,587 

for new equipment. Of this amount, the House Appropriations Committee 

allowed only $2,243, b ut the court has been able to defray a n additional $10,000 

of the original request through a recent tra ns fer of funds. This still leaves a 

balance of $11,344 in the equipm ent category, approximate ly half of which is 

required to enable the court to procure tab ula ting equipm ent to compile acc urate 

and current sta tistical data. The following justification for this item appeared 

in the original budget prese ntation :

‘•The court has been limited in the compiling of statistics to only juvenile 

delinquency cases, while other types, such as cases to estab lish the paternity of 

children born out of wedlock, cases involving nonsupport of minor children, 

violations of compulsory education laws, adu lts charged with contributing to the 

delinquency of a minor, and many rela ted questions deserve statistical consideration if the court is to be able to determine how the problem is to be handled, 

legally as well as socially. This should be available on a day-to-day basis so 

that all inform ation available may bea r on the handling of delinquency and family relationship problems in this community * *

The juvenile court is requesting statistical equipment for two main purpo ses : 

to enable it to evaluate and dire ct its own work and to enable it to furnish 

regular, comprehensive repo rts of its work to other interested agencies in the
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 179

community. In an agency such as the juvenile court, which combines the legal 

elements of a court with the social elements of a welfare agency, the availa bility 

of curre nt and accu rate sta tistical information is virtually indispensab le to 

the effectiveness of its operations. The equipment requested will be used on a 

day-to-day operational basis. As soon as intake data (natu re of offense, characteris tics of the person, family composition, recidivism, agencies which have 

had contact with the person and other pertinent facts) are entered on statistical report forms, cards will be punched and collated with ear lier information 

available on the family or child. The court will thu s know immediately whether 

any other family member is prese ntly on probation to the court, whethe r other 

agencies have or have not had contact with the person or family involved, and 

the natur e and handling of previous charges. This will perm it more informed 

and economical handling of court cases by the judge and by the social service 

staff. The factors contributing to desertion, illegitimacy, and juvenile delin ­

quency are many and varied and these problems are themselves often int errelated. In order for the court to consolidate its efforts in atta cking these problems, it must first compile and consolidate all the information available to it 

w’hich re lates to these problems.

Actually, the problems of juvenile delinquency and dependency are community ones. These problems cannot be effectively atta cked unless all interested 

agencies in the District, such as the Child Welfare Division and the Public 

Assistance Division of the Department of Public Welfare, the Youth Aid Division of the Metropolitan Police, and the Depa rtment of Public Health work 

together in these area s. The juvenile cou rt has established and main taine d 

close working relationships with these groups within the past year. It has 

found itse lf constantly hampered, however, in discussing and atte mpting to solve 

mutual problems, by the fact that it is the only one of these agencies that does 

not have adequate sta tistical data available. If this community is interested 

in the long-range goal of preventing delinquency and dependency, more information must be obtained and correla ted to enable the court and other intereste d 

agencies to determine and isolate the basic, underlying causes of these problems.

The cost of providing ins titu tional care for dependent or delinquent children 

is high, rang ing from $2,500 to $3,000 a year. The cost of providing public 

assistance for des titu te families is equally high and the overall cost to the 

District is constantly increasing as a result of the ever-increasing rate of illegitimacy in the District. Providing the juvenile court with a statistical and 

research un it to enable the court to tak e its pa rt in a community campaign to 

combat delinquency and dependency would thus be sound financial policy as well 

as social wisdom. The significance of the work th at such a unit would perform, 

and the res ultant saving to the community in preventin g these problems, would 

fa r outweigh the ann ual cost of this project.

It should be pointed out, further, th at the legislation authorizing an additional judge for the juvenile court, as amended by the Senate, provides that 

the court shall submit to the Attorney General of the United States and to the 

preside nt of the Board of Commissioners of the Distric t of Columbia qua rterly 

reports of the work of the court in both juvenile and adult cases. Unless the 

court is provided with funds with which to rent high-speed tabulating equipment to enable it to compile accurate and curre nt statistical information in all 

juvenile court cases, both juvenile and adult, it will be extremely difficult, if 

not impossible, for the court to furnish these reports.

Statistical forms, tabulating equipment, and related supplies will cost approximately $5,000 annu ally. The court has investiga ted the possibility of contracting 

for tabulating service from service companies or of using the District government equipment. Because of the need for processing inform ation daily, the 

confidential nature of the work of the cou rt and the fac t that the District 

government equipm ent is utilized to capacity and is available only after regular 

working hours, they have concluded and we concur that ren tal of equipment 

by the co urt is the soundest approach.

The other major items included in the equipment category are the cost of installing a more up-to-date legal record system and the cost of furnishings, such 

as desks, chairs, lamps, etc., for new personnel. As state d in the cou rt’s original 

budget presentation, it is essential that administrative changes consistent with 

modern business practices be made in order to meet the ever-increasing work ­

load of the court. In line with this aim. the other large item included in the 

$11,344 is approximate ly $3,500 requested to provide a new legal record and filing system. At present, docket entries are han dwritten on docket jac kets and
180 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

again on large sheets for the perm anent docket records. This information is 

then typed several times in various form ats for necessary distribution within 

the court. Office equipment in the form of a visible index system (cabinets, 

docket books, and rela ted equipment and supplies) by means of which entries 

can be typed once and reproduced for distribu tion is urge ntly needed to modernize th e court docket system.

Sch uy ler Lowe,

Director of General Administration.

caseload

Senator P astore. Give me your caseload.

Mrs. Temko. This is July 1, 1957, through March 31, 1958: Total 

juvenile court hearings, 5,436; total juvenile cases filed, 1,413. This 

is for a 9-month period.

Total adult court hearings, 4,868; total adult cases filed, 713.

Senator P astore. What is your backlog ?

Mrs. Temko. The backlog I can give you only on a time basis. I 

could submit it to you. I did check yesterday before we came down 

here. As fa r as trials are concerned, we are running approximately 2 

months behind in both adult and juvenile court trials and 4 months 

behind in jury trials.

SU PP OR T CA SE S

Senator Pastore. Do these support cases come before your court?

Mrs. Temko. We have concurrent jurisdiction with the United 

States district court. I think that, as a practical matter, most of 

them come to us. Ours is a much simpler procedure. These are 

criminal nonsupport actions involving willful nonsupport of legitimate family members le ft in destitute circumstances.

Most of them involve individuals who are on public assistance. We 

are pretty much limited to that type of case.

Senator P astore. They refer them to you ?

Mrs. Temko. They either come to us directly or are referred to us 

by the Public Assistance Division of the Department of Public Welfare. I believe it is a condition precedent to eligibility for public 

assistance to come to the court and file an action. Where we recover 

money under court support orders, tha t money is paid into the District treasury to reimburse the public assistance program.

So we are all trying to work together in this field.

We also have exclusive jurisdiction in paternity cases.

Senator Pastore. Are you an attorney yourself ?

Mrs. Temko. Yes.

Senator P astore. You talk like one.

Mrs. Temko. Thank you, sir.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very, very much. I congratulate you. 

You made a fine presentation. This is a very important function. It 

involves recovery of money, recovery of young people, unsupported 

families, and I think we ought to give as good cooperation as we possibly can.

I think we ought to get this lined up about the machine.

Mrs. T 'emko. Sir, is there anything fu rther you want submitted for 

the record ?

Senator Pastore. No.

Mrs. Temko. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Lowe. We will have our management people send you the 

information.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 181

Senator Pastore. The argument is made here tha t a little more 

than $2,000 is involved and it takes $3,000 to hire a machine. If 

you are not going to have enough money you might as well take 

the $2,000 out.

P ublic Health

STATEMENT OF DR. FRED ERICK C. HEATH. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF

THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEA LTH ; ACCOMPANIED BY

WILL IAM E. BOWMAN. JR., EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AND DR.

JOSEPH FAZEKAS

A M END M EN T RE QU ES TE D

Mr. Fowler. The next, item, Mr. Chairman, is the Department 

of Public Health.

With regard to the Department of Public Health, starting on 

page 35 of the justification, the appropriation for 1958 was $28,- 

229,300. The estimate for 1959 is $31,376,000. The House allowed 

$30,505,000, a reduction of $871,000.

The amendment requested is on page 13, line 12, strike out “$30,- 

505,000” and insert in lieu thereof “$31,280,000.”

Dr. Frederick C. Heath is the Deputy Director of the Department and Mr. William Bowman, Jr., is the executive officer. They 

will justify the items.

(The justification follows:)

D EPA RTM EN T OF PU BLIC H EA LTH

Ope rati ng E x pe n ses

Ap pro priation, 1958___________________________________________$28, 229, 300

Estim ate , 195!)________________________________________________ 31,376, 000

House allo wan ce, 1959 (re du cti on of $871,000)_________________ 30,505,000

A M END M EN T RE QU ES TE D

Page 13, line 12, strike out ‘‘$30,505,000’’ an d in se rt in lieu thereo f “$31,- 

280,000’’, or a n inc rea se of $775,000 in the approp ria tio n.

Application of House reductions

S ta n d a rd clas sifica tion

Per so nal se rv ic es........... . ............. ....... ............. .

T ra v el....................................... ...............................

T ra n sp o rt ati o n of t h i n g s............ ......... ...........

C om m unic ati on s e rv ic e s..................................

R en ts a n d u ti li ty se rv ic es.................. ........... ..

P ri n ti n g an d re p ro d u cti o n ................................

O th er co n tr actu al se rv ic es ________________

Se rv ices pe rf orm ed b y o th er ag enci es ,.

Supplies an d m a te ria ls ,____ _____ ____ _

E q u ip m e n t..................... ......... ......... : .................

G ra n ts , s ub si di es , a nd c o n tr ib u ti o n s... .........

S u b to ta l............................... ......... .............

D ed u ct ch ar ge s for q u art ers an d su bsi st an ce............... ......................... .......................

T ota l est im at e or a p p ro p ri ati o n .........

E sti m ate ,

1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

In cr ea se

(+ ) or d ecre ase (—), 

bill co m ­

par ed w it h 

es tim at e

A m o u n t of 

re st ora tion 

re ques te d 

in Se na te

$11,751 ,255 

74,327 

838 

59,993 

140,578 

19,115 

13,4 99,5 75 

55,574

2,0 34. 152 

182,093 

699,600

$13,351,16 9 

68,703 

838 

66,4 68 

160,198 

19,215 

13,959, 521 

401,8 74 

2,380,95 9 

467,8 93 

799,962

$12.624 .999 

74,327 

838 

64,352 

153, 248 

19,215 

14,056,725 

395,374

2,32 4,82 9 

307,893 

784,000

-$72 6, 17 0 

+5, 62 4

+$ 626,4 60 

-5 ,6 2 4

-2 ,1 1 6 

-6 ,9 5 0

+ 1,850 

+ 6,9 50

+9 7, 20 4 

-6 ,5 0 0

-5 6,1 30

-1 60 ,0 00

-1 5,9 62

-8 1,2 04

+41 ,7 00

+14 4,00 0

+40 ,8 68

28,517 ,100

300,8 00

31,67 6,8 00

300,8 00

30,8 05,8 00

300,800

-8 71, 000 +7 75 ,000

' 28 ,216,300 31, 376 ,00 0 30,505 ,000 -8 71, 000 +77 5,00 0

1

 In cl udes $56,000 tr ansf er re d from “ Per so nal se rv ic es , wag e-sc ale em plo ye es ,” an d ex cl ud es $69,000 co m ­

p ara ti v e t ra nsf er to o th er ac co unts .
182 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 19 59

Recapitulation {by activities)

E sti m ate , E st im ate , 

1958 1959

A m ount

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

In cr ea se

(+ ) or d ecre as e (—), 

bill c om ­

p ar ed w it h

es ti m at e

A m ount of 

re st ora ti on 

re ques te d 

in Se na te

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

A d m in is tr ati o n . . .........................................

Disea se c ontr ol__________ ________ ___

M ate rn al an d c hi ld h ea lt h ____________

P ublic-h ea lt h n urs in g__________ _____

Lab or at ories an d ph ar m ac ie s......... .........

D en ta l h ealt h ________________________

Foo d an d pu bl ic -h ea lth e ng in ee ring ___

D . C . G en eral H osp it al _______ _______

G le nn D al e H o sp it al. .................................

M ed ic al ch ar itie s...................................... .

F re ed m en ’s H osp it al ........... ....... ...............

St. E liza bet hs H osp it al_________ _____

D og po un d.

T o ta l es tim at e or a p p ro p ri ati o n ..........

$780,214 

706,370 

640,9 08 

769,360 

244,680 

288,768 

533,734 

8,002,054 

3,00 3,9 12 

1,484,800 

3.-9,500 

11,40 2,000

28,216,300

$982,841 

729,589 

670,048 

831,364 

245,051 

288, 768 

543,4 34 

10,256,054 

3,00 8,55 1 

1, 588,800 

394,5 00 

11,788,000 

49,0 00

31,3 76, 000

$914,512 

793,610 

649,195 

761,225 

245,051 

288,768 

533,874 

9,4 03,91 4 

3,008,551 

1,652, 800 

416,500 

11,788,000 

49,000

—$68,329

+6 4,02 1 

-2 0,8 53 

-7 0,1 39

-9 ,5 6 0 

-8 52 ,1 40

+64 ,000

+2 2, 00 0

30,505 ,00 0 -8 71 ,0 00

+$ 40 ,000

-9 0,0 00 

+2 0, 85 3 

+5 6, 14 7

+74 8,00 0

+7 75 ,000

HOUSE REPORT

“The committee recommends an appropriation of $30,505,000 for this Depar tment. This is a reduction of $871,000 in the estimate s, but a net increase of 

$2,316,000 above 1058 appropriations after deduction of tra ns fer of funds, etc. 

The budget increases approved by the committee are as follows :

Reallocations__________________________________________________ $24,000

Health services (excluding hospitals) :

Mental-health program_____________________________________ 85, 000

Operation and maintenance of buildings, and replacement of equipment for public-health activities___________________________ 75, 000

Improvement of services____________________________________ 130, 000

District of Columbia General Ho spi tal:

Annualization of positions and other objects___________________ 241, 000

Equipment replacement, plant main tenance and repa ir_________ 350, 000

Improvement of services____________________________________ 800,000

Medical ch ar iti es ______________________________________________ 168, 000

Freedmen’s H ospital____________________________________________ 57, 000

St. Elizabeths Hospital_________________________________________ 386, 000

“The tota l amount allowed for health services is $290,000 above 1958 funds 

and should materially enhance the public-health program of the District. Of 

the tota l increase requested of $436,950, the committee has denied $26,000 to set 

up a central unit for the mental-health program inasmuch as there should be 

personnel already available within the Department for thi s purpose. Fun ds 

in the amount of $40,000 were requested for operation and protection of the 

Northwest Clinic. The clinic was established and has been in operation since 

fiscal year 1957 without specific budgetary provision. The committee can see 

no reason to appropriate funds 2 years later for an improved operation. In 

connection with th e request for funds for improvement of services the committee 

has denied $12,600 for the central inta ke unit, $28,300 requested for the Biostatistics and Health Education Division, and $9,500 for the water-pollution 

program.

“The committee has allowed a total increase of $1,391,000 for the Distric t 

of Columbia General Hospital, which will provide a total allocation of $9,393,000 

for operation expenses in fiscal 1959. Two major increases were requested for 

the hospital. The first increase was for $596,500 for equipment replacement 

and plan t main tenance and repair. The committee has approved $350,000 on a 

recu rring basis, r athe r than a crash program of $240,000 for 3 years and $356,000 

on a recu rring basis as proposed in the budget. The second m ajor increase was 

$1,254,240 for improvement of services, for which the committee recommends 

$800,000 to provide $560,000 for additional personnel and $240,000 for supplies 

and materials such as linens, fuel oil, provisions, drugs, and medical and hospital 

supplies.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 183

“In connection with the two preceding requests for fund s for hea lth services 

and D istrict of Columbia General Hospital, the committee requested an analysis 

of the budget increases attrib uta ble to its survey report of the Health Department las t year. The Department submitted information indicating th at $1,614,556 

of the budget increase was so identifiable. The committee has approved $1,- 

681,000 for these 2 activities, or an incre ase of approximate ly $66,000.

“In addition, the committee wishes to reemphasize the comment contained 

in volume I of the Steinle report, as follow s:

“ ‘The total money spent by the District of Columbia government on health 

and hosp ital programs appears to be adequ ate. The re is a gre at need, however, 

for changes in allocation funds, program emphasis and basic concepts.’

“The committee has increased the per diem rat e of payment to private hospital s par ticipating in the medical cha ritie s program of medical care of indigent 

residents of the District of Columbia from $18.65 as proposed in the budget to 

$20 per day and has included fund s to finance this increased rate of payment. 

The committee suggests that the proper District officials take immediate steps 

to prev ent the curtailment of this program in the last qu art er of future fiscal 

yea rs thro ugh the establish ment of better adm inistrative procedures.

“The committee has approved the tra nsfer of the dog pound from the Police 

Dep artm ent a nd assumes th at the very m inor increase in fund s n ecessary above 

the $49,000 transfer red can be absorbed within the tota l appropriation provided 

for th e D epartment.”

JU S T IF IC A T IO N S

The increases requested are as follow s:

(7 ) Ringwo rm control program, $28,000

Restoration of $28,000 is requested in order to continue the ringworm control 

program as experience has indicated th at a continuing program of ringworm 

control is essential. Operation of this clinic shows th at there is such a large 

number of cases among children th at it app ears very evident th at in order to 

control the spread of ringworm it will be necessary to continue this program. 

These funds were appropriated in fiscal yea r 1957 to extend the ringworm clinic 

to a full-time basis. The House Committee on Appropriations pointed out that 

“this is an emergency program to combat wh at appears to be an epidemic and 

expects a corresponding reduction in the estimates as soon as the problem is 

under control.” We do not believe th at we will be able to completely eliminate 

the problem withou t a continuing control program. This program involves the 

daily full-time operation of the ringworm clinic as the focal point of the progr am ; contin uing case-finding activities; followup of known case s; laboratory 

study of findings; education; and treatment.

During fiscal year 1957 as here tofore all children with suspected ringworm 

of the scalp were routinely referre d to the ringworm clinic and close to 1,000 

cases of ringworm were found in this g roup of children. In addition, during the 

school year procedures were institu ted for systema tically screening children in 

the schools with Wood's Lamps. Some 37,000 child ren in 54 schools were 

screened, and 600 cases of suspected ringworm were uncovered of which 283 

were diagnosed as active cases of ringworm of the scalp. Again through active 

followup sibling contacts of known cases of ringworm, some 490 preschool children were found with ringworm. The clinic activities in 1957 are summarized 

below in table form and are compared with the 1956 activities.
184 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

1956

N u m b er

T o ta l cases 

su sp ec t an d 

actu al

A ctu al cases 

of ringw orm

A d m is s io n s ....... .................................... . ............ . ............. 2,603 

844

2,217 

D is charg es. . ....................................... . . 458

V is it s_______ ____________ _____ ______ _ . . - - - - - __ - 7,77 0

1957

T o ta l cases 

susp ect an d 

ac tu al

A ct ual cas es 

of ri ngw or m

N u m b er

A dm is si ons. __ . ___ . . _____________ __________________ 5,000 

3,18 5

3,524 

D is ch ar ge s........ ...... ............................................................ __ _ 1,593 V is its. .7.......................................................... ................. ........................... 11,874

From this table the effect of the intensified clinic activity is apparen t. In 

1957 with close followup over 45 percent of the cases of ringworm adm itted 

to the clinic were discharged, whereas in 1956 only 20 percen t were discharged.

Application of funds.—The amount of $28,000 is requested on a continuing 

basis to provide for 5 positions and medical supplies. The present number of 

employees in those classes in which positions are requested, the number requested, and the tota l number that will be available in this program are as 

follows:

Tj-pe of p os iti on N u m b er

re ques te d

N u m b er

av ai la ble

T o ta l

D er m at olo gis t..................... . . _____________ .. 1 11 1

P u b li c H ealt h n u rs e .. - ...... ......... ............................ 2 1

 2 2

C le rk ___________________ _____________________ 1 l l 1

M ed ic al a id ____ . . ________ _______________________ 1 1 1 1

D o ________ ____ ____ 0 2 2

1

 N onr ec urr in g.

Financial analysis

O bj ec t

M ate rn al 

an d ch ild 

h ealt h

P u b li c

hea lt h

nurs in g

T o ta l

Per so na l se rv ic es ____ _____ __ $16, 655 

2,29 5

$9,050 $25, 705 

2,295 Su pp lie s an d m ate ri als ________ _____ _ .

T o ta l________________ . 18,950 9,050 28.0 00

(2) Operation and protection of the Northwest Central Clinic, $40,000

In fiscal year 1957 it was necessary to reestablish health services th at had

formerly been housed in the Polk School Building at Seventh and P Streets 

NW. an d the Tuberculosis Clinic at 469 C Street NW., in the Northwest Central 

Clinic building at 1323 Upshur Street NW. This was necessary because the 

larger of the two buildings, in which these services were located has been razed 

for use of the public schools. The cost of operatin g the Northwest Central 

Clinic building is higher than operating the Polk Health Center since it is a 

larger building and houses more services. The Tuberculosis Clinic, formerly at 

469 C Street NW., was operated and protected by the Buildings and Grounds 

Departmen t. Because the C Street location is now operated for ano ther department, it was not possible to tra nsfer the funds for the operation of the Northwest Central Clinic.

The amount needed to operate the Northwest Central Clinic is $58,620. The 

annual operation costs of operating the Polk Health Center was $17,720, so t ha t
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 185

ail additional amount of $40,000 is needed for the operation of the Northwest 

Central Clinic. Because of the time element it was not possible to request a 

budget increase for the increased cost of this operation prior to the 1959 budget. 

However, in order to oi>erate this building it has been necessary to use funds 

needed in other areas, in some cases the freezing of positions, in order to cover 

the additional cost. It is important tha t the amount of $40,000 be restored in 

order for the health services from which funds were necessarily diverted be 

maintained at their prior level.

Application of funds.—Of the amount of $40,000 requested for the operation 

and protection of the Northwest Central Clinic, the amount of $30,047 is requested for personal services for 10 positions and $9,953 is requested for telephones, gas, electricity, fuel, other supplies, and civil service retirement fund. 

The present number of employees in those classes in which positions are requested, tlie number requested, and the total number tha t will he available are 

as follows:

Type of position Num ber

requested

Num ber

available

Tota l

Enginee r___ ___ _____ ____- _____ __________ -- - 3 3

Laborer . _ .... ................... -...........................- 5 5 10

Telephone operator ................... . ............................ ................ 2 2

Financial analysis

Object: Ad mi nis tra tio n

Personal services________________________________________ $30, 047

Communications_________________________________________ 1, 550

Rents and ut ili tie s____________________________________________ 6, 450

Grants, subsidies, and contributions____________________________ 1, 953

Total_________________________________________________ 40, 000

(3) Convalescence and rehabilitation of narcotic addicts, District of Columbia

General Hospital, $61,000

Public Law 764, 84th Congress, approved July 24, 1956, states tha t effective 

July 1, 1958, the District of Columbia must provide care and treatment of narcotic addicts. Plans have been developed for caring for these patients at 

District of Columbia General Hospital. It is anticipated that a unit of the old 

psychiatric building, renovated on a temporary basis, will be available by the 

first of July to house some of these narcotic patients and alcoholic patients. 

It is planned to keep the narcotic addicts in the new psychiatric building until 

they are ready for rehabilitation and then move them in the old psychiatric 

building along with some of the alcoholics for their rehabilitation.

It is requested that the amount of $61,000 be restored in order to staff and 

operate the unit in which 50 narcotic addict and alcoholic patients will be 

treated. In terms of patient day cost this increase would result in a rate of 

approximately $8 per patient day if the 50 beds are fully utilized. This ra te compares favorably with the rate paid the Public Health Service hospital at Lexington, Ky. Of the 27 positions requested, 10 positions will provide hospital attendants on an around-the-clock basis and the remaining 17 will provide professional, clerical, and housekeeping services required for this unit.

Application of funds.—The amount of funds required to staff and operate a 

unit for the convalescence and rehabilitation of narcotics was calculated as 

follows:

Personal services (27 positions)_______________________________ $105,277

Other objects______________________________________________ 45, 743

T o ta l____________________________________________________ 151, 020

Less funds available in 1958 for care of narcotic patients at Lexington, K y_________________________________________________ 90, 000

T o ta l____________________________________________________ 61, 020
186 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

The present number of employees in those classes in which positions are requested, the number requested, and the total number that will be available in 

this program are as follow s:

T y p e o f p os iti on N u m b er

re ques te d

N u m b er

av ailab le

T ota l

M ed ic al o ffic e rs.___ _ __________ _____________ _____ 2 2

P sy c h o lo g is t__________________ ____ _ . ............................ 1 1

Socia l w or ke r . . ............................... . . . . . . ___ 2 2

P hysi ca l th era p is t ...... ......... ..... . __ __ __ 1 1

O cc up at io nal th era p is t____________ ______ . . . ____ 1 1

D ie ti ti a n .. . . __________________________ _ . __ 1 1

A d m it ti ng c le rk ............ . . . ___________ ________ ____ ___ 1 1

Cle rk -s te no gr ap he r ______ _______ __________ _______ 1 1

H osp it al att e n d a n ts ____ . _. ___ _____ ________ 10 10 R es id ent p hysi ci an ____ . - - - - - - __ __ . . _ ._ . 1 1

H ous ek ee per ________ . - ____ . __ 1 1

C le an er s___ . ................ - . . . 2 2

Food se rv er s.............. ........... ............................... ........ . . . . 3 3

T o ta l............ ......... ......... ........... ..................... ......................... 27 27

Financial analysis

Obj ec t

D is tr ic t of 

C olu m bia 

G en er al 

H osp it al

D isea se co ntrol

T ota l

Per so na l se rv ic es _________ ________________________________

T r a v e l____________________________________ _______________

$105, 277 -$ 752

-8 ,0 0 0

$104, 525 

-8 ,0 0 0

C o m m u n ic ati o n s._____ _________ ____ ______ _ ______ . . . 150 150

R en ts a nd u ti li ti es___________________________ ______________ 500 500

O th er contr ac tu al se rv ices ____ ______ -8 1,2 04

-4 4

-8 1 , 204 

38, 206 

6,82 3

Sup pl ie s an d m ate ri al s____ _____________ _______ ___________

G ra nts , su bs id ies, a n d co n tr ib u ti o n s_________ ________ _____

38,2 50 

6,82 3

T o ta l________________________ ________________________ 151,000 -9 0,0 00 61,000

(4) Equipment replacement, basic improvements, D. C. General Ho spital,

$14i,000

The amount of $596,500 was requested by the Department for equipment replacement, plant maintenance, and rep air for fiscal year 1959. This request 

consisted of two pa rts: (1) a request for $240,000 to provide funds for equipment and repairs for basic improvements as pa rt of a 3-year program ; and (2) 

$356,500 to provide fund s on a recu rring basis for equipment, maintenance, and 

repairs to maintain basic standard s. Of the tota l amount, the House approved 

$350,000 to mainta in basic stan dards. Restoration of $144,000 is requested for 

replacement of equipm ent as pa rt of the 3-year improvement program. The 

increase of $89,000 for equipment approved by the House as pa rt of the $350,000 

to establish an ann ual base will not be sufficient to take care of th e retrogression 

that has occurred in the past 5 years in the replacement of equipment. Unless 

the worn and obsolete equipm ent can be replaced the improvements from more 

adeq uate maintenance will be lost. It is anticipated that if a catch-up program 

in the replacement of equipment can be established, it will then be possible to 

mainta in equipment s tan dards th at are considered acceptable.

A detailed study was made of the urgent need for more adequate equipment 

and structur al upkeep of the D. C. General Hospital. For this study all pertinent records available at the hospital and applicable standa rds and indices 

currently utilized and recognized as sound by, the United States Bureau of the 

Budget, the United States Public Health Service, the Veterans’ Administration, 

the American Hospital Association, and the United States Bureau of Labor 

Statistics were utilized. Estimates of recurring annual fund s needed for the 

replacement of equipm ent and for routine str uctur al main tenance and repairs 

which should be carried out by hospital personnel were developed. The request 

for 1959 was based on this study.

Application of funds.—Restoration of $144,000 is requested to provide funds 

for the purchase of equipment for basic improvements as part of a 3-year equipment replacement program.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 187

Financial analysis

District o f Columbia

General Hospital

Object: Equipment__________________________________________ 144,000

(5) Improvement of services, personnel, D. C. General Hospital, $1/53,000

A report on District of Columbia General Hospital made by the House Appropriations Committee in January 1957 pointed out deficiencies that exist at that 

hospital. Many of these deficiencies were due to lack of funds. That report 

pointed out the inadequacies as to repairs, protection to buildings, furnishings, 

equipment, and the critical needs of personnel in many areas. The budget request for 1959 for D. C. General Hospital was based on meeting and correcting 

the stated deficiencies. The portion of this budget request for improvement of 

services relating to personnel amounted to $1,013,090 to cover the cost of 270 

additional positions. Of this amount the House approved $560,000 that will 

cover the cost of 162 positions which are a portion of those positions tha t are 

directly related to the items contained in the House report as staff needs at 

D. C. General Hospital. This request is for restoration of 108 positions amounting to $453,000. All of these positions are urgently needed for the nursing service and the treatment and diagnostic services.

At present medical services are inadequately staffed with nursing personnel 

and nurses are required to perform many nonprofessional duties. This request 

recognizes the difficulty of obtaining graduate nurses but proposes to provide 

more graduate nursing time for patients by providing nursing assistants who 

can improve patient care if closely supervised by graduate nurses.

Further the shortage of staff is general in the 10 subservices of the treatment 

service extending to resident physicians, interns, social workers, technicians 

of various types and clerical assistance. In order to provide prompt, competent 

diagnosis and treatment of patients, and to manage the physician training program, the additional personnel will provide the needed interns to meet the 

required standards of the American Medical Association for training program 

appr oval; will provide staff for the cardio-pulmonary laboratory maintained as 

an integral part of the pulmonary disease service but now supported entirely 

by outside grants ; will provide funds for a work program fo r patients for better 

rehabilitation measures; will provide assistance for the central heart sta tio n; 

will provide professional help in urology and otolaryncology and better supervision of physicians and students in training in medicine; will provide technical 

personnel to the anesthesiology service for round-the-clock anesthesia care of 

patients undergoing surgery ; will provide additional physicians to the obstretrics 

and gynecology service for round-the-clock service for over 500 births monthly; 

will provide 2 psychiatric teams to round out the psychiatric program; will 

provide X-ray clerks for round-the-clock X-ray diagnostic service for all emergency patients in the admitting and emergncy service; will provide staff for 

the dental service to care for the large volume of patients requiring major oral 

surgery, and to open a dental service for the pediatrics clinic; will provide social 

service needed in the pediatrics, obstetrics, and medicine services, and strengthen 

the social service departm ent: provide assistance to the pharmacy where the 

filling of prescriptions has increased 20 percent in 1957 over 1956; and provide 

clerical assistance in many of these areas.

Many necessary laboratory tests have not been performed on children because 

of the lack of a pediatric chemistry division; patients’ diagnoses have been 

delayed thereby delaying prompt treatment because of the backlog of work in 

the histopathology and bacteriology divisions; and autopsies have not been performed within a reasonable period of time in accordance with the requirements 

of the American Medical Association. Additional personnel will relieve this 

situation.

Partial treatment or no treatment is the rule in many cases in the Physical 

Medicine and Rehabilitation Service because it cannot adequately carry its 

patient load. Additional personnel will provide training for handicapped patients designed to shorten their hospital stay and instruct them in useful and 

gainful occupations on discharge from the hospital.

Patients have had to wait their turn for long periods before they could be 

cared for in the Outpatient Service. Additional personnel will experlite the 

diagnosis and treatment of patients in this service.

Application of funds.—Of the amount of $453,000 requested, $423,555 is re-
188 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS. 1959

present number of employees in those classes in which positions are requested, 

the number requested, and the total number th at will be available are as follow s:

Ty pe of p osition , Num be r 

, request ed

Num be r

av ailable

To tal

Nursing education :

Clerk -stenograp her_______________ _______ __________ _

Clerk -re ceptionist..................... .............................-....................

Nur sing Service:

As sis tan t Direc tor of N ur sing ...................................................

Nurs ing a ssistant—. ............................................. .................

X-ray Service:

Clerk -ty pist_________ ____ ____ ___________ __________

File c lerk...... ................... .............................................................

X-ray a tt e n d a n t.........................................................................

Tre at m en t Service (Office of th e Chief of Staff): In te rn ............

Pu lm on ary Disease Service:

Ca rdi o-p ulm onary te ch nicia n........ .................................. .........

Clerk-ty pist...................................................................................

Re sid ent ph ysici an......................................................................

Medicine Service:

C le rk -t ypis t. ..____________________ _____ ____ _____ _

Resid ent ph ys icia n. ....................................................................

Sur gery Service:

Medical officer.............................. ...............................................

Se cre tary............... ....................... .............. . ................................

Re sid ent p hy sic ian____________ ___ ______ . ___________

Ane sthesiology Service:

Ane sthe siology technolog ist----------------------- -----------------

Anesth esia a i d e ------- ------------------------------------ ----------

Ob stetrics and Gynecology Service:

Medic al officer_____ ________________________ _________

Cl erk- typist----------------------------- ---------- ---------------------

Resid ent phys ici an ______ ___________ _________________

Pedia trics Service: Cle rk -ty pi st_________________ _________

Ps yc hiatric Service:

Medic al officer............. ............................................ ....................

Psycholo gist............. .......................... ............ ............................

Psychia tri c social work er_______ ____ __________________

Secre tary------------------------------------------ -----------------------

Adm itting an d Em erg enc y Service: X-ra y clerk____________

Den tal Service:

Oral h yg ienist____________ _____ _____________ ________

De ntal in te rn ............ ...................................................................

Ph armac y Dep artm en t:

Ph armac ist........... ............ ............................................................

Ph armac y he lper................................... ............ .......... ..............

Social Service Dep artm en t:

Social w o rk er. .. ............... ............................................................

Secre tary........ . ................. ............................................................

La bo ratory Service:

La bo ratory t e c h n ic ia n .. .. .................................... ....................

Cl erk- typist................. .................................................................

Resid ent p hy sician ....................................................... ..............

Ja nit or. ............ ..............................................................................

Phy sical Me dic ine and Re ha bil ita tio n:

Medic al officer____________________ ____________ ______

Man ua l arts in stru ctor ................................................................

Physica l th er ap is t......................................................... ..............

Speech th er ap is t............................. ................... .........................

Cl erk- typist........ ............ ................................. ...........................

Out-P atient Service:

Medic al officer...............................................................................

Po di at rist.................................... ........ . ..............„ ............ .........

Cl erk -re cepti onist ..................................... ............ .....................

1

1

1

31

1

2

6

5

2

1

1

3

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

2

1

3

1

2

1

1

3

1

7

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

5

> 185

3

1

37

2

20

2

1

22

2

7

11

4

7

2

4

7

12

1

29

2

6

2

12

2

2

2

6

i 216

4

3

6

42

2

1

3

3

22

3

2

24

1

1

3

1

9

2

13

5 

2 

8

3

1

4

5 

8

15

2

36

4

8

1

3

1

13

1

1

3

1

2

1

Inc lud es 22 positio ns app rove d by th e Ho use Su bc om mittee on Appropriat ions.

Financial analysis

District of Columbia, Object: General Hospital

Personal services__________________________________________ $423, 555

Grants, subsidies, and contributions_________________________ 29, 445

Total__________________________________________________ 453, 000

(6*) Improvement o f services, public health, $^9,000

The House Appropriations Subcommittee approved increases amounting to

$2,316,000. This increase was distributed to 10 defined a rea s to increase services 

and improve th ese areas. In addition, an amount of $49,000 was transf err ed with 

the functions of the dog pound from the Police Departm ent to the Departm ent
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 189

of Public Health. The total of the above amounts is a net increase of $2,365,000 

over our 1958 appropriation. The House report and House bill contained a 

tota l appropriation figure of $30,505,000 which is a net increase of $2,316,000 

over the 1958 appropriation . This is a decrease of $49,000, a decrease obviously 

not intended in view of the statem ents on the application of funds as discussed 

in the House committee report. This decrease has made it necessary for us 

to reduce the $130,000 increase approved by the committee for improvement of 

services in public health, 1 of the 10 defined areas. It is requested that the 

amount of $49,000 be restored so that we will have the full amount of $130,000 

as was approved by the House Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Application of funds.— Of the $49,000 the amount of $42,628 is requested for 

personal services and $6,372 for other objects to improve services in public 

health nursing and materna l and child health.

Financial analysis

O bj ec t

M ate rn al 

an d ch ild 

healt h

P u b li c

h ealt h

nurs in g

T o ta l

Per so nal se rv ic es.....................................

T ra v el.................... ....................... - ...........

C om m unic ations ........ ................. .

Suppl ie s an d m ate ri als _____________

G ra nts , su bsi die s an d co ntr ib uti ons.

T o ta l .................................................................................................

$1,903

1,903

$40, 725 

2,376 

150 

1,199 

2,647

$42,628 

2,376 

150 

1,199 

2,647

47,0 97 49,000

District of Columbia Department of Pub lic Health allotments below the activity level

A p p ro p ri ati o n , 1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

H ou se ac tio n

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ec reas e 

(—), H ou se 

ac tion co mpar ed w it h 

1959 est im at e

A dm in is tr at io n:

Per so nal s er vi ce s........................................

In te rsta te tr av el ex pe ns es ....... ...............

O th er a d m in is tr a ti v e e xpense s______

T o ta l, a d m in is tr a ti o n ..........................

Disea se co nt ro l:

P erm an en t p osi ti ons................................

Posi tions oth er th a n p erm a n e n t..........

C o n su lt ati v e s e rv ic e s .. .. ........................

M ed ic al su pplies........................................

O th er ex pe ns es...................... .....................

T o ta l, dise as e co n tr o l...........................

M ate rn al ch ild health:

P erm an en t posi ti ons.................... ...........

Pos itio ns o th er th a n p erm a n e n t..........

O th er e xp en se s...........................................

T ota l, m ate rn al ch ild h e a lt h ______

P u b li c h ealt h nu rs in g:

Per so na l se rv ices.......................................

In str u cti n g vis itin g n urs es ..................

O th er e x p en se s.. .......................................

T ota l, publi c h ealt h n u rs in g .............

Labora to ri es an d pha rm ac ie s:

Per so na l se rv ic es................ . .....................

M ed ic al an d labora to ry su ppli es.........

O th er e x p e n se s.........................................

T o ta l, la bor at ories a n d ph ar m ac ie s.

$652,893 

22, 525 

104,796

$762,978 

22,525 

197,338

$706,331 

22,525 

185,656

-$ 56,6 47

-1 1,6 82

780,214 982,841 914,512 -6 8,3 29

449,8 93

45,4 39 

12,928 

52,705 

145,405

706.3 70

382,387 

150,810 

107,711

640,9 08

672,4 46

35,0 00

61,914

769,3 60

180,863

45,4 05 

18,41 2

244,6 80

551,981

45,439 

12,928 

52.705 

66,536

729,589

409,937 

150,810 

109,301

670,048

724,996

35,000

71.368

831.364

181,234

45, 405 

18,412

245,051

529,058

45,439 

12,928 

52,705 

153,480

793,610

391.379 

150,810 

107,006

649,195

664,311

35,000

61,914

761,225

181,234

45,405 

18,412

245,051

-2 2,9 23

+8 6, 94 4

+64 ,021

-1 8,5 58

-2 ,2 9 5

-2 0,8 53

-6 0,6 85

-9 ,4 5 4

-7 0 ,1 3 9
1 9 0 DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1959

District of Columbia Department of Public Health allotments below the activity

level—Continued

A ppro pri ation, 1958E sti m ate ,

1959

H ous e ac tion

In cr ea se (+ ) 

or d ecreas e 

(—), Hou se 

ac tion co m ­

par ed w it h 

1959 e st im at e

D en ta l h ealt h :

P er so nal s erv ice s. 

D en ta l su p p li e s.. 

O th er ex pen se s. .. 

T o ta l, d e n ta l. ..

Foo d an d public hea lt h en gine ering:

Per so na l se rv ic es ................... .........

T ra v el ex pe ns es ............ ...............—

A b ate m en t of n uis an ce s------------

Em er gen cy se wer a n d w ate r c o n n e cti o n s.. .

O th er ex p e n ses.. ....................... ............... - .........

T o ta l, food a n d p ublic healt h e ng in ee ring . 

D is tr ic t of C olu m bia G en er al H osp ital :

Per so nal s ervice s------------ -------------------------

R ep air s to b uildi ng s, gr ou nd s, etc ............ ..

F u e l........................ ................................................

M ed ic al a n d h osp ital s u p p li e s.. .....................

P ro vi si on s........... .......................... ........................

O th er s upp lies --------------------------------------

R ep la ce m en t of e q u ip m en t------------------------

O th er ex pe ns es ............ ........... - ................. ..........

T ota l, D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia ^ Gene ra l 

H o sp it al....... ...................................................

G le nn D al e H os pital :

P erm an en t po si tions --------------------------------

Pos itio ns o th er th a n p erm an en t......................

R ep ai rs t o bu ildi ng s, gr ou nd s, e t c .................

F u el----------- ---------------------------------------------

M ed ic al an d h osp ital su p p li es-------------------

P ro v is io n s..................... ......... ............. .................

O th er s u ppli es------------------------------------------

R ep la ce m en t of e q u ip m en t . .................. .........

O th er e xp en se s------------------------ -----------------

T ota l, G le n D al e H o sp it a l..... ............... .......

M ed ic al c ha rities :

Em er ge nc y H o sp it al_______ ________ ____ _

C hil dre n’s H o sp it al----------- ----------- -----------

C as ual ty H o sp it al............................... . ...............

Epis co pal , E ye, E ar, N os e, an d T h ro at

H o sp it al. ------------------ -------- -------------------

Garfie ld H o s p ita l...------------------------ --------

George W as hin gto n U n iv ers it y H o sp it a l. . .

Geo rg etow n U niv ers it y H o sp it al.................. ..

H ad le y H o sp it a l. ..................................................

Pro vi de nc e H o sp it al......... ............. .....................

W as hi ng to n H om e for In cu ra b le s................. ..

C h ri st C hi ld H o m e..............................................

C on va le sc en t H om e for C h il d re n __________

U n all o tt ed ...............................................................

T o ta l, m ed ic al c h ari ti es_________________

F re ed m en ’s H osp it al ...................................................

St . E li za bet hs H o sp it al......... ....................................

Do g P o u n d .......................... ................. .......................

T ota l, D ep art m en t of P u b li c H ea lt h .........

$254,071 

10,206 

24,491

$254,071 

10,20 6 

24,491

$254,071 

10,206 

24,491

288,768

426,450

24,519 

8,500

15,000 

59,265

533,734

5,991,955 

56,681 

125,440 

652,997 

400,979 

125,685 

115,164 

533,153

8,0 02, 054

2,186, 857 

56,391 

38, 046 

44, 236 

79,264 

280,0 00 

62,75 0 

34,5 50 

221,818

3,0 03,91 2

215,620 

288,581 

338, 745

70, 712 

38,7 56 

110,788 

172,168

74,644

88.5 00 

23,3 00

51.5 00 

11,486

1,484, 800 

359, 500 

11,4 02,000

i 2 8,216,300

288,768

435,580

24,519 

8,500 

15,000 

59,835

543,434

7,2 39,09 5 

369,181 

171,440 

799,547 

446,229 

263,941 

364,164 

602,457

10,2 56,0 54

2,1 91,49 6 

56,391 

38,04 6 

44, 236 

79,264 

280,000 

62,7 50 

34,550 

221, 818

3,0 08, 551

240,667 

294,577 

375,802

77,6 18 

40,7 29 

114,283 

178,626 

22,0 55 

81,1 43

88.5 00 

23,300

51.500

1,588,800 

394,500 

11,788 ,000 

49,000

31,376 ,000

288,768

426,590

24,5 19 

8,500 

15,000 

59,265

533,874

6,710, 173 

292,681 

171,440 

778,397 

427,979 

246,068 

204,164 

573,012

9,403,91 4

2,191,49 6 

56,391 

38,0 46 

44,2 36 

79,264 

280,000 

62, 750 

34,5 50 

221,818

3,008,55 1

251.975 

309,710 

396,027

79, 546 

43,0 86 

115,903

185.975

23,000 

84,2 78

88.5 00 

23,300

51.500

1,65 2,80 0 

416,500 

11,788,000 

49,0 00

30,505 ,000

-$ 8,9 90

-5 7 0

-9 ,5 6 0

-5 28, 922 

-7 6,5 00

-2 1,1 50 

-1 8,2 50 

-1 7,8 73 

-1 60 ,0 00 

-2 9,4 45

-8 52,1 40

+1 1, 30 8 

+15 ,1 33 

+20 ,2 25

+1, 928 

+2,3 57 

+1,6 20 

+7,3 49 

+945 

+ 3,1 35

+64 ,0 00 

+22 ,0 00

-8 71,0 00

1

 In cl ud es $56,000 tr an sf er re d from “ Per so nal se rv ices , wa ge -sca le em pl oye es ” an d ex cl ud es $69,000 co m 

para ti ve t ra ns fe r to o th er ac co un ts .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA .APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 191

Gen er al Sta te m en t

Senator Pastore. All right, sir.

I)r. Heath. Senator, I have one short statement to make at the 

start and that is that we are very appreciative of the consideration 

that was given to us in the presentation of the budget and what they 

have given us will certainly be an appreciable help in the operation 

of our program.

However, a careful evaluation of the program made us feel that 

it was proper to come back and request further consideration on six 

items.

Shall I start, sir?

Senator Pastore. Yes, go ahead.

RING WOR M CONTROL PROGRAM

Dr. Heath. There are three items in public health and one concerns the ringworm control program. We had quite an outbreak 

about 3 years ago and we were not able to take care of the problem 

with the facilities we then had, and we had to resort to an increased 

emphasis.

We did so with the help of $28,000 th at was given to us. We are 

glad to report to you that we are beginning to show tangible results 

of getting it under control, but the problem is still great.

It is a well-developed program and we are making progress.

We recognize that this $28,000 was only on a temporary basis until 

we could get over the hump. We sincerely believe that we are not 

over the hump as yet. We hope it will not be cut out at this p artic ular point and request that we continue to have this in our base for a 

period of another couple of years.

Senator Pastore. When you say you are not over the hump, what 

is the hump? What have we done with this program and wliat happens if you do not get the $28,000? What do you do, just close shop? 

What happens?

Dr. Heath. I doubt if we will close shop. We have to find a way 

to keep this program because otherwise the problem would certainly 

get out of hand.

Senator Pastore. You could always scrape up a few dollars to carry 

on the program. You see these boys in the House are pretty smart 

boys. I have never heard anybody yet say if you do not give me this 

we will have to close the door. No one ever says that. It seems to 

get done.

Mr. Karrick. We are not questioning the intelligence of the Memliers of the House.

Senator Pastore. I do not either.

Dr. Heath. Senator, I am very glad to bring up the problem about 

approaching the hump. We have had a concentrated survey in 

schools where we had this extensive problem and we found less new 

cases and the problem has decreased 50 percent.

Senator Pastore. The Public Health Department in 1958 had 

$28,216,300. You now have $30,505,000 which is $214 million more, 

approximately.

Do you mean to tell me with th at increase you are not going to do a 

little job on ringworm for $28,000 ?

Dr. Heath. Senator, that money is distributed in many areas.
192 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Senator Pastore. Comb these things out yourself before you come 

and you would have a more substantial case. Tha t is the reason why 

I complimented the Commissioners that they only came back with a 

request of less than one-half of what was taken out by the House. 

That shows that you have actually combed these things out pretty 

carefully.

You are saying to me now that unless you get this $28,000 you are 

going to be in a bad way on this program, you are not going over this

hump.

PROGRESS OF PROGRAM

Dr. Heath. It will be difficult. The program is progressing successfully. I do not think that we can abandon the program at this 

time no matter how much it is going to hurt to do it.

It is certainly important and desirable tha t we continue for the 

time being.

TOTAL EMPLO YEES

Senator Pastore. How many people do you have working on it?

Dr. I Ieatii. Five people. A dermatologist, 2 nurses, and 2 others.

Senator P astore. That is something with regard to these temporary 

programs, it is always hard to let people go.

Mr. Karrick. I cannot speak immediately, Mr. Chairman, but I 

think we have a condition that has to be fought down continually or 

there will be a sharp and widespread occurrence of the scalp ringworm.

Senator P astore. Do you have to fight it at the same tempo? You 

are asking now for the same amount of money tha t you did before. 

This comes down to people. This whole program is personnel. I suppose the Department is in a dilemma of which 1 of the 5 is going to 

go and they will ask for the whole 5. Tha t is what makes it tough here.

When these programs get underhand whereby you have to diminish 

the activity I think you have to take it upon yourselves and exercise 

some courage and say it is not as big as it used to be.

You are insisting that you need the $28,000.

Dr. Heath. We have to have the program going, sir We have to 

have this $28,000.

Mr. Karrick. Or take it out of something else.

FU NDS AVA ILABLE FOR RINGWORM PROGRAM

Dr. Heath. The problem is too urgent, too widespread, and too 

much of a community effect.

Senator Pastore. Will you please insert the funds available for the 

ringworm program exclusive of the restoration requested ?

(The information requested follows:)

1 medical officer 25-40 tim e_________________________________________$5, 408

I clinical ai d______________________________________________________ 3, 200

Drugs and sup pli es________________________________________________ 2, 500

To tal--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11,108

Senator P astore. Let us go to the next one.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 193

N orth w es t Cen tr al Cl in ic

Dr. II eatii. The operat ion and prote ction o f the N orthw est Ce ntral 

Cli nic. The item is for $40,000. Th e dev elopment of th at c linic was 

the tran sf er of previous act ivities of the Hea lth Dep artm en t’s pr ogram s conducted in the Po lk School bu ild ing and an old warehouse 

and p ar t o f an oth er school bu ilding .

The school bu ild ing has been torn down. Th e warehouse was un ­

suitab le. Fo rtun at ely we had discon tinued the use of the Ups hu r 

St reet H os pital abo ut th at same time . Th is was about the only plac e 

left fo r us to go to concent rate on the Publi c Hea lth Clinic activities .

The activitie s before were carried on in thr ee differe nt locatio ns and 

were merged into this one location. Th is is a l arge r building . We did 

no t hav e any bu dg eta ry supp ort. We had no way to get it at th at 

pa rtic ul ar time. Th e resu lt is th at it cost $40,000 more to opera te 

this large clin ic th an it did the other clinics we had, which base was 

$19,000.

T hat leaves $40,000 th at we immedia tely need to finance No rthwest 

Ce ntral Clinic which in the pa st has been tak en fro m variou s places 

throug ho ut the He alth De pa rtm en t, taki ng money here and the re, 

keepi ng pos itions vac ant , cu tti ng down sup plies to pro vid e fun ds fo r 

ele ctricity, telephone, fuel, and other ma inte nan ce of the building .

We th ou gh t th at it would be wise to have this $40,000 restored to 

maintain the clin ic fac ilities . I t is a lar ge c linic fac ility.

La st yea r th ere were 110,000 pa tie nt visits or services re ndere d w ithin 

this build ing .

TR AN SFER OF DOG FO UN D FROM POLIC E DEP ARTM ENT

Th ere is one o ther ite m in the P ub lic Hea lth section, Senator , which 

is on page 40, i f J migh t tak e th at now, sir, and the res t will be concerned with Di str ict of Columb ia gen eral impro vem ent of services 

and pu blic he alt h of $49,000.

Se na tor P astore. Yes.

Dr. H eat h. Th e House App ro pr iatio ns Com mittee gav e us the 

amoun t of $2,316,000 and specified the 10 areas in which it would be 

app lied.

In ad dit ion , there was the tr an sf er of $49,000 fro m the Police 

Dep artm en t to the Hea lth Dep artm en t because the Hea lth Dep artment an tic ipa tes op erating the Dog Po und. How ever, when you add 

the alloca tions of the 10 defined are as plu s the tran sfer of $49,000 it 

comes to $2,365,000. Ye t the House ap pr op riated $2,316,000, le avi ng 

us a difference of $49,000.

Fr om the sta tem ents in the rec ord we do not believe th at the y inten ded th at we sho uld tak e a $49,000 cut. W ha t we have had to do 

un til we appeare d here , was to mak e certa in adjustments. We had 

a $130,000 increase appro ved by the Hou se Ap pr op ria tio ns Comm ittee fo r imp rov ement o f services in public healt h, so we have decreased 

th at by $49,000 in o rder to sta y in balanc e.

We reques t con sidera tion of t hi s $49,000 whi ch will then let us pu t 

back into the budget nine public he alth nur ses worki ng in the school 

healt h divisio n which was p rev iou sly a par t of the $130,000 designate d 

in th e House repo rt.

Se na tor P astore. All r ight.
194 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

•Dr. Hf.atu. Tha t finishes the three items tha t we had in Public 

He alth Services.

D. C. Gen er al H o sp it a l

Mr. Heath. Next items are concerning D. C. General Hospital. On 

page 40 is convalescence and rehabilitation of narcotics. The amount 

is for $61,000 and is for 27 positions and supplies. We have a Public 

Law 764 which up to the present time we have been committing noncriminal narcotic addicts at Lexington.

However, the authority to use Lexington expires July of this year 

after which time it becomes necessary for the District of Columbia 

government to provide facilities for the care, treatment, and rehabilitation of narcotic addicts.

We planned to provide for a caseload of 50, feeling tha t it might 

reach that amount. However, based on the experience of the last 3 or 

4 yeai-s we have not reached a census of 50 at Lexington and it is not 

believed that we will reach a census of 50 narcotic addicts in the rehabilitation facility. In having to maintain the facilities for the rehabilitation, whether we would have 25 or 50 patients we would still 

need certain positions covered around the clock.

We will be treating alcoholics along with the narcotic addicts in this 

same setting in the old psychiatric building, tha t is for the convalescent phase of the treatment, thereby gaining an adequate return for 

the staffing of the facility which would be necessary for the rehabilitation. I would like to point out one thing and that is that the acute treatment phase, the so-called drying out process will be conducted in the 

new psychiatric building and then the patients will be transferred to 

the old psychiatric building for a period of convalescence.

NINE TY TH OU SAND DOLLARS IN BASE FOR NARCOTIC ADDICTS

We have $90,000 in the base now to pay Lexington on a per diem 

basis. That will be available to apply to the $151,000 total for this convalescent facility and leaving a difference of $61,000.

Senator P asture. Has this been authorized ?

ML Heath. What has been authorized ?

Senator Pasture. This seems to be a change in policy doesn't it?

Mr. Karrtck. You mean the treatment of narcotics ?

Senator P asture. Yes.

Mr. Karrtck. The Federal Government has notified us they will accept no more patients at Lexington.

Senator P asture. Only because the law expires. What if the law 

were continued ?

Mr. Karrtck. T don't know whether its the expiration of law or 

capacity.

Mr. Heath. The law continues but the authority for Public Health 

Service to take these noncriminal addicts was for a period of 2 years 

and that authority for Public Health Service to take these from the 

District under a reimbursable basis expires July 1 of this year.

Senator Pastore. Why can’t the authority be renewed? Has anyone discussed that? I am not trying to superimpose myself on the 

policy, but we are bringing up in an appropriation matter somethinir 

here that seems to me to be a question of administrative policy. Tf
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 195

f

the District has decided this is the way they want to do it I would like 

to hear it.

Mr. Karrick. I don’t think it’s a decision of the District as much 

as the Department of Public Health of the United States Government.

Mr. Bowman. They allowed us to use their facility for the past 4 

years until we could have a facility of our own.

Mr. Karrick. They don't want to continue. I think the motivation 

comes from the United States Public Health Service. It may be due 

to their lack of capacity.

Senator Pastore. Have these discussions been verbal or do you have 

something in writing that indicates they don’t want to continue this ?

Mr. Bowman. I haven’t myself, sir. All I know is what I have 

been told in that regard and th at it is a top policy matter.

Senator Pastore. The reason why 1 say this to you is this. Of 

course, you are going to tie this in with alcoholics. I am not a doctor. 

I don’t know if there is any incompatibility there. But it strikes me 

bring ing within the same environment a person who is sick from alcohol and one who is sick from narcotics, you raise a question that I don’t 

know whether in the medical field its the rig ht thing to do.

I realize tha t you do have these abandoned facilities, tha t you can 

make them over and tr eat these patients, if you have to, i f the Federal 

Government doesn’t want to take these people at Lexington there, 

isn’t it much more th at you can do ? I go along with the idea.

Mr. Karrick. That is right.

Senator Pastore. But has anyone really explored with enthusiasm 

and vigor the renewing of this authority to have the Government 

accept them at Lexington? That is the way it strikes me. I think 

you ought to have something more documentary than this. I wouldn’t 

quit that easy.

DISC USSIONS WIT H HEALT H, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Mr. Karrick. Some discussion was held with the Secretary of 

Health and Welfare a little over 2 years ago, I think, before I was a 

Commissioner. The District government at this time, I believe, 

agreed tha t we would make budgetary arrangements to handle our 

own addicts after July 1,1958.

(The following was later sub mitted:)

Department of H eal th, Education, and Welfare,

October 14,1955.

Hon. Rowland R. H ughes,

Director, Bureau o f the Budget,

Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. H ughes : This le tte r is in response to your request of August 12,1955, 

for a report on a dr af t hill to amend section 345 of the Public Health Service Act.

The bill would provide for a 2-year extension of the author ity of the Surgeon

General, under section 345 of the Public Hea lth Service Act, to adm it to Public 

Health Service hosp itals narco tic drug addicts committed from the District of 

Columbia. This au tho rity will otherwise expire on July 1,1956.

Commitments under this autho rity have not in fact placed an undue burden 

on the facilities of the Public Health Service. As of October 1 of thi s year, the 

total number of addicts committed since the enactment of the authorization was 

only 50, and the Federal Government is reimbursed by the District of Columbia 

for the cost of caring for patients so committed. We would interpose no objection, therefore, if a 2-year extension of the act were deemed essential to the 

fu rth er development of an effective program of prevention and control of narcotic 

addiction in the District of Columbia.
196 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

We a re concerned, however, by the absence of any indication that tlie proposed 

exte nsion of this authority is p art of a broader plan to improve the local addiction 

con trol program. Although we believe that hospitalization is an essential element 

in any effective program, hospitalization alone will accomplish comparatively 

little. The most urgent need in this field is for the development of services of 

prevention and rehabilitation to.reinforce and complement the services available 

in hospitals. The enclosed statement, recently presented by the Surgeon General 

before a Senate subcommittee develops this position in somewhat more detail 

tha n is feasible in this letter.

For the reasons indicated in this statement, we would recommend th at —• 

through legislative provisions or otherwise—the proposed 2-year extension of 

the provisions of section 345 of the Public Hea lth Service Act be evaluated in 

the context of the broader requirements of the District ’s problem of narco tic 

addiction control. If such an extension is an integral pa rt of a program of improved control, it would be very sympathetically rega rded by this Depa rtment. 

If not, we have serious reservations as to the advisability of encouraging furth er 

postponement of local assumption of the esse ntially local responsibility for preventive and treatm ent services.

Sincerely yours,

M. B. Folsom, Sec retar y.

Executive Office ofthe President,

Bureau of the Budget, 

Washington, D. C., November 2,1955.

Hon. Samuel Spencer,

President, Board of Commissioners

for the District of Columbia, Washington, D. C.

My Dear Mr. Spencer : The enclosed copy of the D epartment of Health, Edu cation, and Welfare’s views lett er of October 14, 1955, rela tes to your dr af t bill 

to amend section 345 of the Public Health Service Act. Before advising you with 

regard to the draft , we would apprecia te your reaction to the enclosure. We 

would also apprecia te furth er information with respect to the District government’s thinking with regard to the development of facilitie s by the District of 

Columbia for the commitment of narcotic-drug addic ts. As you know, the Pre sident, in his stateme nt of June 24, 1953, approving Public Law 76, 83d Congress, 

said that he was confident that the Dis trict of Columbia would be able “to develop 

a program under which adequate care for narc otics patients can be provided in 

hospitals under the jurisdiction of the D istr ict government.”

I shall be glad to discuss this with you a t your convenience if you wish. 

Sincerely yours,

Roger W. Jones,

Assistant Directo r for Legislative Reference.

Government of the District of Columbia,

Executive Offices, 

Washington, D. C., November 25,1955.

Mr. Roger W. J ones,

Assistant Director for Legislative Reference,

Exe cutive Office of the President,

Bureau of the Budget, Washington, D. C.

My Dear Mr. J ones : Reference is made to your letter of November 2, 1955, 

together with your enclosure from the Honorable Secretary of the Department 

of Health, Education, and Welfare, dated October 14, 1955.

Both of these communications deal with the proposed dr aft of a bill to amend 

section 345 of the Public Health Service Act to provide for a 2-year extension 

of the authority of the Surgeon General for the Distric t government to utilize 

services of the Lexington Hospital facilities. I note th at some concern was 

expressed with respe ct to the Dis trict government’s ability to have in effect a 

complete rehabilita tion program by the end of thi s 2-year extension period. I 

should like to advise you that the Commissioners have this year approved in the 

1957 budget an item of $14,000 for planning conversion of the old psyc hiatric 

building at District of Columbia General Hospital for rehabilita tion purposes. 

This conversion embraces thre e much-needed services: care and rehabilita tion 

of mental patients, care and rehabilitation of alcoholics, and care and reh abilitation of narcotic addicts. Our Departm ent of P ublic Health is c urrently studying 

the additional ancillary service necessary to provide a narcotic rehabilita tion
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 197

program. Thus, there will be provided upon completion of the changes within 

this building a complete program for narcotic addicts. While the number of 

addicts to be cared for under amended legislation cannot be definitely determined 

at this time, it can be said with assurance t hat ample facilities will be available 

to take over the services rendered to the D istrict a t Lexington some time during 

the fiscal year of 1957-58.

This does not mean that the District might not ultimately provide for separate 

facilities for the care and rehabilitation of narcotic addicts. However, until our 

experience dictates the need for such separate facilities, I feel confident that the 

facilities proposed will be adequate.

I shall he pleased to furnish any additional information you may desire relative 

to this matter.

Sincerely yours, J

President, Board of Commissioners, District of Columbia.

HO US E ACTION

Senator Pastore. Look at this as it stands now before us at this 

moment. This amount was not allowed by the House, right? Now 

the Federal Government won’t take these addicts. What are you 

going to do with them? I mean this requires some serious sitting 

down and talking. It isn’t a question of whether or not you are 

going to have the money or not have the money.

But the House has already disallowed it which means tha t if we 

don’t put it back and the House doesn’t agree to it, and the Federal 

Government doesn’t renew its authority what do you do with these 

people after J une 30 ? Wha t do you do with them ? This is a pretty 

serious business.

Mr. McLaughlin. Could I get into this ?

I was in the Navy long enough to know you don’t volunteer, but 

somehow this is a hard lesson to learn.

Mr. Chairman, on two occasions we had the Congress amend the 

law extending our use of facilities in Kentucky. I have never had 

such an unpleasant session as I did on one occasion trying to get that 

extension. We got it, but with the very definite promise that we 

would do something to take care of our people at the end of that 

period.

Then within a few months we received from the Bureau of the 

Budget an inquiry saying tha t HEW had been in touch with them 

and what were we going to do, what plans did we have. This came 

out of a conference with our psychiatrists and the people who are 

charged with handling these people. You were at the meeting, I 

think?

Mr. Heath. Yes.

Mr. McLaughlin. We said all right we are going to have this 

space. We intended to use a great deal of it for rehabilitation of 

people we are paying St. Elizabeths for and will bring the ones nearly 

ready for discharge back in here and rehabilitate them and put them 

on street instead of continuing to pay St. Elizabeths. Just use of 

part of that space is for alcoholics, part of it for narcotics and some 

is still to be used for this rehabilitation program. We spelled that 

out to the Bureau of the Budget and tha t was our answer back to 

HEW . So we attempted to keep our building program, tha t is the 

building of the new buildings, and the reconstruction of the old one, 

tied into July 1 of this year.

Mr. Heath. Tha t is correct.
198 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

BASIC LEGIS LATIO N

Mr. McLaughlin. For taking over the rehabilitation of narcotics. 

I just wanted to get the whole story on the record.

(The following was later submitted:)

Public Law 76, 83d Congress, approved Jun e 24, 1953, to provide for treatm ent 

of users of narcotics in the District of Columbia.

Public Law 355, 83d Congress, approved May 8, 1954: This amended Public 

Health Service Act (42 U. S. C., Ch. 6A) to permit the District of Columbia to 

use the facilities at Lexington, Ky., for the care of narcotic addicts picked up 

under Public Law 76 mentioned above. This auth ority expired Jul y 1, 1956.

Public Law 764, 84th Congress, approved July 24, 1956, which amended Public 

Law 355, 83d Congress: This extended the exp iration date of Jul y 1, 1956, and 

provided “no such addict shall be adm itted unless (1) committed prior to Jul y 1, 

1958; (2) * * *”

YEARLY CO8T8 AT LEXIN GTON

Senator Pastore. II ow much does it cost you a year for this work 

tha t they do for you at Lexington? Give me the total.

Mr. Heath. In the year 1957 it was $39,459. For the first half 

of 1958 it was $24,183, the per diem being $8.84 a day.

Senator Pastore. You have got less funds available in 1958 of 

$90,000. Would this be in addition to the $24,000 that you have already 

spent? Where do you get the figure of $90,000?

Mr. Heath. The $90,000 is in the base to pay for the care at Lexington and for the travel of taking the persons there and bring ing 

them back and the expenses of the United States marshal. We have 

$90,000 in the base for that, sir. So far for the first half of 1958, 

it has cost us $24,000.

Senator Pastore. Therefore, you have 90,000 less 24 ?

Mr. Heath. Tha t was for the first half of the year. That would be a 

few thousand left over from this $90,000 on a contractual basis for 

the year.

Mr. Bowman. This coming year we would have $90,000 available 

which would be transferred to District of Columbia General Hospital 

to maintain these rehabilitation programs. It is th at figure plus the 

$61,000 tha t is needed to operate the unit w ith the minimum number 

of staff, 24 hours a day. We are asking for $61,000, which will be 

added to $90,000 we already have.

Senator P astore. The point I am getting at is th is : This might haveno bearing if you can work it out, if they are adamant tha t they are 

not going to take these people. I was wondering, insofar as costs are 

concerned, which is the cheaper way of doing it, if it can be done.

COSTS OF PROGRAM

Mr. Bowman. Just for the addicts it would be cheaper to use Lexington if we could do it, provided the caseload stayed at the level it is 

now. However, we have 50 beds in this unit at District of Columbia 

General and if we included alcoholics in this program and keep the 

building fully occupied, as you can readily do with alcoholics, the 

cost for addicts would run about the same as it would a t Lexington.

Mr. McLaughlin. I don’t want to mislead the chairman. It is my 

recollection that after the second of those definite extensions that when 

the general legislation was passed a couple of years ago, a year or two 

ago, on narcotics, tha t this possibility of future use of Lexington, 

it’s my recollection was left open.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA -APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 199

I believe tha t was the last treatment of it, after the two definite 

extensions.

Senator Pastore. I am a lawyer. I am not a doctor. I am not 

qualified or competent to speak on this subject, but I have had a little 

bit of experience in running these various hospitals when I was back 

home. They were my responsibility. It strikes me t ha t if you are 

setting up a hospital of your own you can’t tell me that you can do it 

cheaper or as much as it would if you sent these people out to Lexington.

You don’t have the means, the personnel, the experts you have to 

have, the caliber of doctors. It amazes me tha t you said $61,000.

Mr. IIeatii. In addition to the base of $90,000.

Senator Pastore. Even so what is it, $151,000 ? That is no money 

today when you begin to pay people. You come in here with a little 

item where you want a couple of layers.

Mr. Karrick. This is an augmentation of the operation of District 

of Columbia General Hospital. This building is on the grounds of 

the District of Columbia General Hospital.

Mr. McLaughlin. It’s the old psychiatric building there.

Senator P astore. I s it all renovated for this purpose ?

Mr. Karrick. It’s being done.

Mr. McLaughlin. It’s supposed to have been completed.

POS SIB LE RECO NSIDERATION OF PLAN

Senator Pastore. In any event the District is determined to change 

its policy of sending these people to Lexington. Am I correct in tha t 

assumption ? They feel that it’s better to treat these people here. Is 

that your decision? You raised a point that Lexington doesn’t want 

them. I would like to give you a little help if you prefer there to do 

it that way.

But you are betwfixt and between here.

Mr. McLaughlin. We were started in this other direction. We have 

never considered a revision of our plan.

Mr. Karrick. Because Public Health Service is so determined tha t 

we should not continue the use of Lexington tha t we have been reconciled for the necessity of establishing our own.

Senator P astore. I am on their subcommittee, too. Why don’t you 

get the responsible person and say th at the chairman of the Subcommittee on the District, Mr. Pastore, wants it in writing, because that 

is a very important thing.

The House has disallowed this figure. You are saying you don’t 

want to continue it. Wha t if the House doesn’t go along with us, then 

where are we? I can’t work in a vacuum. I am not going to accept 

a vacuum. Something has to be done here one way or the other.

LETTER FROM AS SIST AN T SECRETARY OF HE W

(The following letter was received on the matter of accommodating 

narcotic addicts at Lexington, Ky.)
200 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Department op Health, Education, and Welfare,

Office of the Secretary, 

Washington, D. C., June 20,1958.

Hon. J ohn O. Pastore,

United States Senate,

Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator Pastore : This Department has been advised by Commissioner

David B. Karrick of the District of Columbia, of your concern rega rding the 

fact th at the Public Health Service Hospital at Lexington, Ky., will be unable 

to accommodate narco tic addicts from the District of Columbia who are commtted af ter Jun e 30, 1958.

As you are no doubt awa re patients from the District of Columbia have been 

accommodated at Lexington under the provisions of the Public Health Service 

Act, section 345 (a ), as amended by Public Law 764, 84th Congress. This section specifically provides that only those persons committed prior to Jul y 1, 

1958 shall be accommodated. At the time this law was enacted, it was understood that the District of Columbia would seek to provide its own facilities to 

care for narcotics patients. Last fall, this Departm ent was advised that the 

District of Columbia would seek to meet that u nderstanding and provide its own 

facilities fo r the trea tment of narcotic addicts.

This Department is, of course, prep ared to give fu rth er consideration to at 

least a temporary extension of legislation authorizing comm ittal of District 

narc otics patients to Lexington, and we will be happy to consult with the Distric t Commissioners after we have had an opportu nity to survey the situ atio n 

at Lexington and after we have had an opportunity to discuss the policy issues 

involved with the Executive Office of the President.

With assurances of our desire to cooperate fully in efforts to provide for the 

adeq uate care of Distric t of Columbia narco tics patients, I am 

Sincerely yours,

Elliot L. Richardson,

Assistant Secretary.

CHRONIC ALC OHO LI CS IN T H E DIS TR IC T OF CO LU MBI A

Dr. Fazekas. May I say a word, Senator? The rehabilitation of 

patients is an extremely im portant part of any medical-care program. 

The rehabilitation program for addicts is only one small part of 

the job we should be doing. We don’t want to undertake this responsibility but apparently we must; however, in addition there 

are many other patients at the hospital who are candidates for rehabilitation.

As you know there are about 50,000 chronic alcoholics in the city of 

Washington.

Senator Pastore. Say th at again.

Dr. Fazekas. There are 50,000 chronic alcoholics in the city of 

Washington. We do absolutely nothing for these alcoholics but admit 

them and dry them out and send them back to the community where 

they again resume their old habits and are readmitted.

We have had patients who are admitted to our hospital as often as 

70 times a year. We have many physically disabled people who also 

require total rehabilitation. On the ground floor of the old psychiatric building, a vocational rehabilitation area is all set up and ready 

for use. The House has appropriated approximately $847,000 for the 

conversion of these buildings recognizing that this area will be u tilized as a rehabilitation unit for District of Columbia General and 

for the District of Columbia.

I think if we are going to run any medical program it must be a complete program, not restricted to addicts alone. This is only a small 

pa rt of our job. But we have to do it if we are going to practice good
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 201

medicine, we have to do the complete job and this is what we are 

trying to do.

Senator Pastore. In other words, is i t fai r for me to assume that 

the House wasn’t opposed to you taking over this activity on the local 

basis but they think you can work it in this big rehab ilitation program of yours and you can absorb this ? Is that the reason why they 

knocked it out ?

MED ICAL POLICY

Dr. Fazekas. In the first place it’s considered good medicine to 

rehabilitate addicts, alcoholics and others in the same area. We 

should be making every effort to rehabilitate these patients instead 

of turning them out in the streets.

Senator Pastore. In the event we do not restore these figures, can 

you go out an hire these people? Listing, adm itting clerks, clerkstenographers, medical officers, psychologists, social workers, physical 

therapists, dietitians. Do these people depend upon our restoration 

of this or would it be done any way ?

Dr. F azekas. This is what we would have to do, Senator. We have 

to do as we have been doing for years, rob Peter to pay Paul to put on 

a new program tha t we are not at all prepared for. We can’t run 

our present programs efficiently and another program is added; if we 

don’t get the necessary help and the money, then we obviously can’t 

do a good job.

Senator Pastore. This is a good time to recess until 2 o’clock.

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p. m., Wednesday, June 18, 1958, the committee recessed, to reconvene at 2 p. m., the same day.)

Afternoon Sessio n—2 P. M. (W ednesday, J une 18, 1958 )

EQ UIPM EN T REPL ACE MEN T, BASIC IMP ROVEM ENT S, DIST RICT OF COLU MBIA 

GENERAL HO SPITA L

Senator Pastore. All right, the next item is “Equipm ent replacement.”

Dr. Heath. The item of “Equipment replacement” is $144,000. 

Originally, in the House, we had a 3-year catchup figure which was 

both for equipment and maintenance. This was afte r a 5-year regression period of needs versus resources. In addition to that, we 

had $356,500 for annual replacement of equipment on a recurring 

basis. The House gave us the recurring figure, but did not approve 

the 3-year catchup figure.

On evaluation, it w\as felt tha t we would take out of tha t catchup 

figure the items which had to deal with equipment only, and not 

maintenance, and request tha t the equipment portion be restored as 

part of a 3-year program of $144,000 a year.

It was felt tha t in getting this equipment up to a reasonable level 

over a 3-year period tha t the continuing figure, added to the small 

base we now have, would help us to keep it at a reasonable level.

TYP ES OF EQ UI PM EN T NEEDED

Senator P astore. What would you need to buy ?

Dr. H eath. X-ray equipment and many other things.
202 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

Mr. Bowman. We have accumulated, over many years, very much 

obsolete and antiquated equipment in the hospital, which will have to 

be replaced.

For example, we have three X-ray units there. I believe all 3 of them 

are over 15 years old. Dr. Fazekas can verify this subsequently.

To replace those 3 units with the necessary lead lining and other 

installation costs it could run us over $100,000, so you can see tha t 

the $144,000 is not a tremendous amount of money in terms of meeting 

our equipment needs.

Senator Pastore. Did they give you any money for equipment replacement ?

Dr. Heath. They gave us $89,000.

Senator Pastore. $89,000 of the $350,000 ?

TH REE -Y EAR PR OGR AM

Dr. Heath. That portion was to be applied to equipment; yes, sir; 

but this request is a 3-year program, after which we would not ask for 

this $144,000. In other words, we want to replace the obsolete equipment over a 3-year period.

Senator P astore. How long has the program been in existence ?

Dr. Heath. It has not—we want to start the 3-year catchup program.

Senator P asture. This is a brand new program ?

Dr. Heath. Yes, sir. We estimated our maintenance and equipment 

cost in the other figure which you were given, based on working with 

reasonably good equipment. We want to put all of our equipment in 

good condition or replace it with new equipment.

X-R AY E Q U IP M EN T

Senator P astore. Why don’t you do it tha t way? I am being 

curious. Why do you not bring it up item by item which you need 

to have replaced ? There must be something much more urgent than 

something else.

Dr. F azekas. May I elaborate on this, please, and provide a little 

bit of background information ?

For the past 10 years there has never been a realistic budget given 

to the, hospital for equipment. I can recall year after year getting 

the medical officers together and trying to divide between 15 services 

approximately $50,000 for replacement of equipment. We could not 

even use tha t $50,000 because there would be deficits incurred in other 

areas of the hospital so th at we would end up with practically no ap ­

preciable replacement, and practically no new equipment, so that the 

equipment situation in the hospital has reached a very low and very 

poor level.

In March, I asked my medical officers to submit to me their equipment needs for their departments. The equipment needs to modernize 

their departments comes to about $404,814.

These requests have been reviewed, very critically, and I am sure 

they can all be justified. I have them here, if you care to go over them.

But there is one departm ent in the hospital in particular that I 

would like to talk about, and I think this should get immediate consideration. This is the X-ray department.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 203

Our X-ray departm ent is the heart of the hospital. We are depending more and more on X-ray facilities. We have a tremendous 

load in this department. The X -ray department, in 1953, was examining 38,412 patients. In 1957, we examined 447,448 patients. We 

are unable to do the job that we are supposed to do. The patients are 

having to wait for long periods of time before the X-ray examinations 

can be performed.

CONDITION OF X-RAY EQ UIPM EN T

Our X-ray equipment, considering the size of the hospital and our 

patient load, is in very poor condition. This is evidenced by the 

amount of money we are spending each year for repairs of this equipment. In fact, the Westingliouse people came out and practically refused to repair it. They said “You are wasting your money pu tting it 

into this equipment.”

We have only 2 really good units in this 1,200-bed hospital that 

we can use, 2 fluoroscopic diagnostic units.

Senator P astore. How many units all told ?

Dr. F azekas. We have two good fluoroscopic diagnostic units. We 

have a bone machine, which we use for bone and chest X-rays. This 

machine is over 15 years of age. The tim ing is off. It is a radiation 

hazard and we have been advised that we should not continue to use 

this machine; yet, because of our tremendous patient load, we are 

forced to.

COST OF MAC HI NE REPAIR

Senator Pastore. What does tha t machine cost to repair ?

Dr. Fazekas. The machine is beyond repa ir and a new machine 

will cost us about $20,000.

Senator Pastore. Why do you not ask for tha t $20,000? What 

else is there ? Proceed.

Dr. F azekas. I want to give you the entire picture. Our deep 

therapy machine is 18 years old. We have patients with cancer who 

regularly require deep therapy. Only last week this machine broke 

down and we could not give our patients the therapy they needed. We 

just absolutely had to shut down shop.

You wanted to know earlier whether an operation had to be given 

up because of the lack of material or equipment. This is one operation we had to absolutely deny our patients, deep therapy treatment. 

Everything considered, a new therapy machine would cost approximately $25,000.

The superficial therapy machine is also well over 15 years old, is 

antequated, and is also a radiation hazard. It is breaking down all 

the time and we certainly are in need of another superficial therapy 

machine.

These are the three “musts” in this department if we are going to 

do the job we are supposed to be doing. We are a 1,200-bed hospital, 

and if you go to any hospital in this city you will find they have twice 

as much X-ray equipment as we have.

Senator Pastore. What did you this last machine cost?

Dr. F azekas. The superficial therapy machine will also cost about 

$20,000 or $25,000.

Senator Pastore. Do you get any trade-in allowances on these 

things ?

Dr. F azekas. Very little. They are practically junk now.
204 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

RAD IATION HAZARD

Se na tor P astore. You say it is a ra diati on ha za rd ?

Dr . F azekas. Yes, si r; the tim ing is off. We do no t know exactly 

how much expo sure our pa tie nts are getting. Th is de pa rtm en t, as I 

ind ica ted , is one of the most im po rta nt de pa rtm en ts in the hospital 

with a tremendous workload. We have pa tie nts who, because of the 

inad equacies of our equ ipm ent, hav e to wa it 2 or 3 hours, inc lud ing 

pa tie nts who are acutely ill, admi tte d fro m the emergen cy area.

Se nator P astore. You see, th ese program s fo r replacem ents over a 

term of years always seem to be ra th er unnecess ary, I m ean, in sound. 

I think , myself, you would be a lot b etter off to pi np oint the things, 

whi ch you a re d oin g ri ght now.

Al l rig ht, wh at else is there ? I am only talk in g now about the 

abso lute “mu sts.”

ISOTO PE PROGRAM

Dr . F azekas. An othe r “m ust” is the isotope prog ram . As you 

know, isotopes are being uti liz ed more and more in med icine tod ay. 

We sta rte d our prog ram by ge tting the N IH to supp ly the equip ­

ment, to even buy the isotopes, because we we re u nable to do i t throu gh 

budgeta ry chann els. The N IH has ind ica ted they no lon ger can su ppo rt this opera tion because they have othe r com mitments, and the y 

feel th at af te r 5 years we sho uld be able to un de rta ke this responsi ­

bility ourselves.

To buy the equipm ent and the isotopes we need, wou ld cost ap pr ox ­

imately $5,000 a year. Th is we mu st do.

Senator P astore. Now, does a n isotope come un de r the cate gory of 

equip me nt or medicine?

Dr. F azekas. We ll, I am inc lud ing both the equ ipm ent and isotopes, p er se, whic h we m ust buy from va rious comp anies.

Se nator P astore. I do not think you are going to have much 

tro uble on th at. Let ’s get to the equ ipm ent before the ha nd lin g of 

the isotopes.

Dr . F azekas. Well, I can go over it.

FLUOROSCOPIC DIAGNOSTIC U NIT

In ad dit ion to the deep therap y machine, the bone machine, and 

the superficial th erap y un it, we shou ld have a nothe r fluoroscopic diagnostic un it in th e D epart me nt.

Senator P astore. W ha t is th at ?

Dr. F azekas. Th is is a un it utilized mostly fo r GI series, bu t it 

can be used fo r oth er things. Th e rad iologis t ca n fluoroscope t he area 

th at is invo lved and the n tak e p ict ures of the pa rtic ul ar area.

Se na tor P astore. H ow much does that cost.

Dr . F azekas. Th is w ill cost abo ut $20,000 also.

Se na tor P astore. Now, you know wh at I would do there? I w ould 

stop righ t the re, unless you have som eth ing else of high er urgency, 

and get the deale r prices on thes e so th at we can do something.

Dr. F azekas. The se are all the equip me nt needs for this de pa rtmen t, tha t are the most ur gent.

Se nator P astore. Well, th at is the way I w ould h and le it. Get th e 

official prices on thes e things. In other word s, ev ery thing here is 

“arou nd $25,000.” That does no t mean a thing. You may be a few
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 205

dollars short, that way. Get your prices and get them in the record 

and we will see what we can do for you in conference.

Dr. F azekas. We will do that.

(The information referred to follows:)

A list of equipment with estimates, including installation costs, obtained from 

a local representative of a national manufacture r, is as follows :

1. Diagnostic-fluoroscopic unit with image amplifier to reduce radiation exposure 1___________________________________________ $ 30,130

2. Diagnostic unit, bone room__________________________________ 17, 000

3. Diagnostic unit, chest room_________________________________ 17, 000

4. Superficial and deep therapy un it--------------------------------------------- 21, 500

5. Accessories for superficial and deep therapy un it------------------------- 11, 000

6. Lead lining and remodeling room for the rap y---------------------------- 17, 000

7. Remodeling diagnostic rooms_________________________________ 5, 000

Total__________________________________________________ US, 630

1Th is Is an addit ional unit.

RE QU ES T FOR RE ST OR AT ION OF 1 0 8 POSIT IO N S

Dr. Heath. The last item, Senator, is for personnel needed for the 

nursing service and the treatment of diagnostic services.

This request is for a restoration of 108 positions, amounting to 

$453,000. Our original request was for $1,013,090 for 270 positions.

Senator Pastore. Before I get off that, this would not interfere 

with the $89,000, would it?

Dr. Heatii. No, sir; tha t is a recurring item for equipment replacement, which lias already been approved as part of the $350,000. 

What you are speaking of r igh t now is a p art of a 3-year catchup replacement program.

Senator Pastore. We are not handling it tha t way, but replacing 

the equipment t hat urgently has to be replaced, otherwise we have a 

radiation hazard.

Dr. Heath. Yes. The last item for D. C. General is $453,000 for 

108 positions. Our original request was for 270 positions involving 

$1,013,090, and the House allowed of that amount $560,000, which 

we applied to cover 162 positions which were in the areas that had 

been very weak and needed terrific support, as has been evidenced 

by many surveys. Those personnel were distributed in the areas of 

administration, dietary, nursing assistants, ward clerks, maintenance 

and utility personnel, medical records, and library.

Now as to the remaining 108 positions for the nursing service and 

the treatment and diagnostic services, we feel that needs some bolstering, and we have Dr. Fazekas, who can answer any details on that, or 

elaborate to any extent you might desire.

Senator Pastore. Fir st of all, tell me how many new positions they 

allowed you in this category.

Mr. Bowman. No specific position, as such. We have included 162 

positions within the funds authorized, but we were not told how to 

apply these funds. We applied these funds to those areas which were 

most severely critized in the report of the investigation that was 

made.

Senator Pastore. When was that? This 162 positions—you mean 

in this budget ?

Mr. Bowman. The House, sir, authorized funds for 162 positions.
206 DIS TRI CT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1959

Senator Pastore. How many were you asking for ?

Mr. Bowman. 270.

Senator Pastore. So that leaves 108 that you are asking for now ?

Mr. Bowman. Right. And the remaining positions fall into the 

areas designated, nursing, treatment, and diagnostic services.

Senator Pastore. Was this presentation made to the House?

Mr. Bowman. We made a full presentation to the House, sir.

Senator Pastore. Well, the doctor back there keeps nodding his 

head. Why ?

Dr. Fazekas. There was a written presentation and a general discussion, but I did not testify on specific items.

Senator Pastore. Well, let’s put it on the record in flat, simple 

language.

What happens to you if you do not get these jobs? What happens 

to the patients in the hospital ? What is your position if you do not 

get this ?

Dr. F azekas. May I have the privilege of reviewing each one of 

these positions ?

Senator Pastore. Well, it means 108 of them, but if I have to take 

it that way I have to take it tha t way.

Mr. Karrick. Group them a little bit.

OBSTETRICAL SERVICE

Dr. Fazekas. I will group them as much as I can. I will start 

with the obstetrical service.

Senator Pastore. Now I want to make this point, Doctor, that I 

hope we are not talking about clerk-typists and stenographers, but 

rather about people that are taking care of the sick in the hospital. 

That is the kind of jobs we are talkin g about here, I hope.

Dr. F azekas. Yes. But, unfortunately, we are in the position that 

if we do not get clerk-typists or if we do not get technicians then the 

professional people have to spend their time doing this type of work.

Senator Pastore. I know you are giving me the same arguments I 

made this morning. You must have been here this morning, but do 

not emphasize that—that p art of it is incidental. I understand tha t 

it is a necessary incidental, but the point I wish to make is that we 

are urging here better care for our patients at the hospital.

Dr. Fazekas. Well, a good program involves not only physicians 

but nurses, attendants, and clerks, as well. It is necessary that you 

have a good group working together and if you do not have this, you 

do not have good patient care.

PERSON NEL AT D. C. GENERAL HO SP IT AL

Dr. F azekas. 1,500 people all told.

Mr. B owman. There are 1,729 authorized positions but we are running around 1,500 employees.

Senator Pastore. 1,500 employees?

Mr. Bowman. Yes; but we have 1,729 authorized positions. 

Senator Pastore. Those are authorized positions ?

Mr. Bowman. Yes.

Senator Pastore. Now you get money to pay for how many of 

them ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 207

Mr. B owman. Sir, at the moment, I have a figure only for the Departm ent as a whole. It is 161 jobs below authorized streng th and 

I am having a breakdown made of that.

Senator Pastore. Do you not see what I am getting at with these 

authorized positions? You only have 1,500 working but you are 

authorized so many, and you have some tha t you are not hiring. 

Why? What do you need this money for? Do I make myself 

clear ?

Here we are talking about another 108 positions and there are 229 

tha t we authorized tha t are not even hired.

Mr. Bowman. The corrected figure on the number of employees 

is 1,620.

Senator P astore. All rig ht; 1,620 are the authorized.

Mr. Bowman. 1,620 people hired.

Senator Pastore. Hired, working?

Mr. Bowman. Yes, sir. There are 1,729 authorized positions.

Senator Pastore. 1,729. Tha t is 109 tha t you have not been able 

to fill.

Mr. Bowman. As I say, I have a figure for the overall department, 

on the average number we cannot fill. That is 161, for this year.

Senator P astore. Why can you not fill them ?

Mr. Bowman. There is not enough money.

Senator P astore. I see.

Mr. Bowman. Now what I did not know was District of Columbia 

General’s share of the 161 positions. As 1 do not have the exact figure 

I would say tha t it represents more than half of the numlier for the 

Department. Tha t at least 80 of the jobs th at must be held vacant 

departmentalwise would be chargeable to District of Columbia General.

STATUTORY IN-GRADE PROMOTIONS

Mr. Karrick. Do you have statutory in-grade promotions? Why 

do you not have enough money ?

Mr. Bowman. Well, your turnover is supposed to take care of your 

statutory in-grade increases. Tha t does not always hold true in certain limited areas, but, generally speaking, it is supposed to be the 

case.

Senator Pastore. In other words, while you are authorized more 

than you are able to engage, that is the limit you can go to because 

this money has to be used for in-grade promotions, otherwise you 

could not make the promotions ?

Mr. Bowman. That is one way of putting i t; yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. In other words, you do not end up with any surplus at the end of the year ?

Mr. Bowman. No, sir; but we have to end up in the black.

Senator Pastore. All right; give me in the main what these 108 

jobs are for.

Dr. F azekas. I am requesting 70 positions for approximately 15 

services which leaves only about 4 positions per service. The D. C. 

General Hospital is a large hospital. Our medical service has a bed 

occupany of about 250. Our surgical service is about the same. We 

are running about 6 fairly good-sized hospitals in this 1 operation.

When you consider tha t I am only asking for about 70 positions to 

be distributed among all of these areas, you can see tha t we are not
208 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

asking for an exorbitant number, but only fo r what we need to operate 

these specific areas efficiently.

Now in the X-ray department, we do not have any attendants 

assigned at all. You would not like me to talk about attendants, 

because they are not professional men, but to me they are just as 

important.

Senator P astore. Who said I did not like t hat ? I love that. I am 

for the people, too.

Dr. F azekas. We do not have any attendants assigned to the X-ray 

department at all. This means the X-ray department cannot schedule 

patients properly. They cannot schedule work because they do not 

have enough attendants on the wards to regularly bring patients to the 

X-ray department.

If an attendant is busy doing something else he is not able to bring 

the patient for an examination. This means tha t the patie nt waits 

for prolonged periods of time. The radiologist also waits for prolonged periods of time. Patients coming from the admitting office 

for an X-ray have to wait because there are not any attendants to 

take them to and from the X-ray department. There is absolutely 

no one assigned to the division to clean the department. If the patien t 

cannot retain his enema, it means the room cannot be used until we 

contact the housekeeping service to get someone down to clean it up. 

This wastes about a half an hour of the doctor’s time.

Now if we can have six attendants, we can then operate the d epartment much more efficiently for the X-ray division.

I am just going to give you the important ones.

Senator Pastore. All right.

PERS ON NE L NEEDS FOR RE HA BILI TA TI ON PROGRAM

Dr. Fazekas. There are two areas tha t we have touched on this 

morning th at are concerned with the rehabilitation program tha t we 

are developing. It is obvious tha t we cannot have a rehabilitation 

program unless we have personnel. We must have psychiatric personnel, a psychiatric team tha t will care for these patients, and we 

must have a rehabilitation team. We need them if we are going to do 

the job that you people expect us to do.

In the budget request for psychiatry, 1 medical officer, 1 psychologist, 1 psychiatric social worker, and a secretary were requested to 

work on this rehabilitation program.

The rehabilitation service will require one medical officer, a manual arts instructor, a physical therapist, a speech therapist, and a 

clerk-typist. This is the minimum needed to get the program on the 

road.

Senator Pasture. What is that program ?

Dr. Fazekas. The rehabilitation of narcotic addicts, chronic alcoholics, and the physically disabled, at our hospital.

Senator Pastore. Now has this anything to do with what we are 

speaking about ?

Mr. Bowman. Tha t is a. separate item and we passed that particular 

one before; we are now discussing the regu lar program.

Dr. Fazekas. Well, did you figure tha t if Senator Pastore could 

give us enough money to hire enough personnel we could start this
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 209

Mr. Bowman. I am saying that we passed that item, and are on 

the items starting on page 44 dealing with all of the other needs.

Senator Pastore. Why do you not do this for me, because I think 

you gentlemen represent a pretty good group here? I have gone 

over this a hundred times. I have always found tha t if a hospital 

is properly staffed that in the long run you save money; that is, if 

you have the right, people doing the right job at the right time. Naturally, of course, there is always a certain amount of suspicion on 

the part of the people who have the responsibility of supervising the 

budget—they always have this feeling, tha t if you give everything 

tha t is being asked for, sometimes they are asking for just a little bit 

too much. Then, of course, we have the continuous experience, from 

year to year, even after you cut it down a little bit, the job seems to 

get done, anyway.

But what I would prefer you to do, doctor, is make a list not of the 

whole 108 but of what is absolutely necessary, as to how many, who 

they are, and then give t hat to Mr. Merrick for the record and we 

will take it to conference to see what we can do with it.

(The information requested is shown on p. 354.)

COMMITT EE RE SPON SIB ILITY

Senator Pastore. You see, you are a little confused on rehabilitation. We asked about rehabilitation a little while ago and here it 

pops up again. I want tha t clear.

Mr. Bowman. There are two different items, sir.

Dr. F azekas. In the same program.

Senator Pastore. Well, gentlemen, I mean you have to realize our 

responsibility here, too. As I said in the beginning of these bearings, 

whatever arguments you present in behalf of these projects they have 

to be powerful arguments so that I can present something when I 

go to conference. I wish you would do that.

Now I want tha t list cut down from 108. I do not think we ought 

to approve the 108. I want you to get that down to a minimum 

basic request, just as we did on the equipment. Get down to the 

basics of what you actually need.

MED ICAL CH AR ITIES

Senator Pastore. There will be inserted in the record at this point 

a distribution of the Medical Charities allocation for 1959, by activities.
210 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Medical charities— Am ounts allotted to contract hospitals fisca l year 1958 and tentative

allotments fiscal year 1959

H osp it al

C asu alt y H osp it al_________________ __________ _

C h il d re n ’s H o sp it al____ _________________ ____ _

E m er gen cy H o s p ita l.....____________________ _

E pis copal E ye, E ar, No se an d T h ro a t H osp ital .

G ar fiel d H osp it al ..........................................................

Geo rg e W as hin gto n U niv ers it y H o sp it al______

G eo rg et ow n U niv er si ty H o sp it al______ ________

Pro vid en ce H osp it al_____________ _____ _______

H ad le y H o sp it al.......... .................................................

A m o u n t u n a llo tte d .. ................. ............... . ..............

T o ta l, ex clud ing H om es _________________

W as hin gto n Hom e for I n cu ra b le s_____________

C onval es ce nt H om es ____________ _____ _______

C h ris t C hil d H om e___________________________

G ra n d to ta l..........................................................

1958 all o tm en t

C om m is si oner s budget 

est im ate 1959

H ous e ac tio n 

1959

$338,715

288,581 

215, 620 

70, 712 

38, 756 

110,788 

172,168 

74,644

$375,790

294.577 

240,667 

77,618 

40,729 

114,283 

178,626 

81,143 

22,055

$396,027

309,710

251.975

79,546 

43,0 86

115,903

185.975

84,2 78 

23,0 00

11,486

1,3 21, 500

88.5 00

51.500 

23,3 00

1,425,488

88.504

51.504 

23,3 04

1,489,60 0

88.500

51.500 

23,300

1,4 84, 800 1,588,80 0 1,652,800

All right that you gentlemen will take the next item. 

Senator P astore. All right, I thank you.

Department of P ublic Welfare

STATEMENTS OF GERARD M. SHEA, DIRECTOR; DONALD BREWER, 

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR; GUY W. PUNTCH, ADMINISTRATIVE 

OFFICER; AND DONALD GRAY, WELFARE ASSISTANT

RESTORATIONS REQUESTED

Mr. Herman. The next item is the Department of Public Welfare. 

The restoration requested is $263,000. Mr. Gerard Shea, Director, 

and associates, will testify as to the items.

(The justification follows:)

DEP ARTM EN T OF PU BLIC W ELFA RE

oper at ing ex pen se s

Ap propriatio n, 1958-----------------------------------------------------------------$13,136, 000

Estim ate , 1959------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15, 263, 000

House allow ance, 1959 (re ducti on of $263,000)___________________ 15, 000, 000

AMENDM ENT REQUESTED

Pag e 15, line 25, str ike ou t “$15,000,000” and in se rt in lieu the reof “$15,263,- 

000,” or an increa se of $263,000 in the app ropriat ion .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS. 195 9 211

Application of House reductions

S ta n d ard clas sific at ion E sti m ate , E st im ate , 

1958 1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

In cr ea se

(+ ) or decrea se (—), 

bill co m ­

p are d w it h

est im ate

A m o u n t of 

re st ora ti on 

re ques te d 

in Se na te

Per so nal s er vi ce s..................................................

T ra v el......................................................................

T ra n sp o rt ati o n o f t h in g s...................................

C om m unic ation s erv ic es. ....................... .........

R en ts a n d u ti li ty s er vi ce s......... ..................... ..

P ri n ti n g a n d r ep ro d u cti o n ____ ___________

O th er c o n tr actu al se rv ic es. ..............................

Service s pe rf or m ed b y oth er ag en cie s..

Suppl ie s an d m ate ri als _____ ____ ________

E q u ip m e n t............................... . ...........................

G ra nts , su bs id ie s, a n d co n tr ib u ti o n s............

$5, 656 ,46 6 

26,6 06 

4,09 0 

44,3 28 

150,471 

4,38 4 

1,570,869 

66,0 95 

1,400, 627 

132,936 

4,2 02,32 0

$6,2 65, 145 

28,721 

4,09 0 

56, 756 

172, 571 

4,817 

1,53 9,8 38 

66,095 

1,4 64, 617 

185,214 

5,56 6,3 28

$6,079 ,145 

28,721 

4,090 

56,756 

172, 571 

4,817 

1,474, 838 

• 66,095

1,464,617 

185,214 

5,5 54, 328

-$ 18 6, 00 0

-6 5 ,0 0 0

-1 2 ,0 0 0

S u b to ta l.............. ............... ......... ...............

D educt ch ar ge s for q u art ers an d su b si st ­

en ce _______ _______ ____________________

T o ta l esti m ate or ap pro pri at io n.

13,259 ,192

91, 192

13,1 68,0 00

15,3 54,1 92

91,1 92

15,263 ,000

15,091 ,192

91,192

15,000,000

-2 63,0 00

-2 63,0 00

+$ 186,0 00

+65 ,000

+12 ,0 00

+2 63 ,00 0

+2 63 ,000

Recapitulation (by activities)

S ta n d ard clas sific at ion

1. A d m in is tr ati o n ________________________

2. P u b li c a ss is ta nc e:

(а) P u b li c A ss is ta nce D iv is io n_____

(б) S urp lu s Food D iv is io n _________

3. C hild W elfare D iv is io n ...............................

4. D is tr ic t of C o lu m b ia w elfa re in s ti tu ­

tions :

(a) D is tr ic t of C olu m bia V ill a g e .. .. 

(5) R ec ei vi ng H om e for C h il d re n .. .

(c) Ju n io r V ill ag e_________________

(a) M u n ic ip al Lod gi ng H o u se ...........

(e) T em p o ra ry H om e for So ldiers 

an d Sai lo rs .....................................

5. C h il d re n ’s C en te r..................................... ..

T o ta l est im ate o r ap p ro p ri ati o n _____

E st im ate ,

1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

$215,258 $215,258 $215, 258

4,3 57,90 2 

150,000

2,4 23, 082

5,698,90 2 

150,000

2,535,08 2

5,6 98,90 2 

150,000

2,4 22,08 2

1, 556,472 

295,6 36 

518,5 56 

27,50 4

1,6 76,47 2 

295,6 36 

633,556 

27,5 04

1,6 76, 472 

295,636 

633,556 

27,504

36,210 

3,5 87,38 0

36,2 10 

3,9 94,38 0

36,2 10

3,8 44, 380

13,168,000 15,263 ,000 15,000 ,000

In cr ea se

( + ) or de ­

crea se (—), 

bill co m ­

par ed w it h 

est im ate

A m o u n t of 

re st ora tion 

re ques te d 

in Sen at e

-$ 11 3, 00 0 +$ 113,0 00

-1 50 ,0 00 +1 50 ,000

-2 63 ,0 00 +2 63 ,000

1

 In cl udes $32,000 tr ansf er re d f ro m “ P er so nal s er vi ce s, w ag e-sc ale em plo ye es .”

H O U SE REPORT

“The committee considered a budget estimate of $15,263,000 to finance the 

public welfare activities of the District of Columbia and recommends an appropria tion of $15 million. This is a decrease of $263,000 below the estimate but 

a n et increase of $1,932,(XX) above the 1958 appropriation. The committee directs 

that no pa rt of the reduction is to be applied a gainst the public assistanc e ac tivity 

for which a total allocation of $5,848,000 is recommended. The major portion 

of the incre ase allowed, $1,341,000, is for the public assistance activity and is to 

finance an increasing number of recip ients of public assistance funds and to 

increase the amount of the individual grant. The balance of the increase, 

$591,000, is for financing increased population and improved services at the 

various welfare institu tions under the jurisdiction of the Dep artm ent.”
212 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 1959

JU ST IF IC AT IO N

The in creases requested are as follows :

(a) Child Welfare Division____________________________________ $113,000

( b) Children’s Center_________________________________________ 150, 000

Total increase_____________________________________ 263, 000

(a) Child Welfare Division, $113,000

It is requested that $113,000 be restored to provide for the child ren under the 

care of this Division. In J anuary 1958 services were provided for 4,061 children 

and by April 1958 this had increased to 4,203 children. These are children committed or refe rred to the Departm ent because of dependency and neglect. If 

children cannot be kept in the ir own homes or public institution s, it is necessary 

to pay for their care in foster homes or priv ate institutions. The 1958 budget 

provided funds for this purpose for 1,260 children. As of April 1958 ther e were 

1,356 children for whom this service had to be provided. Exclusive of personal 

services, it requires approximately $865 a year to pay for board, tuition, clothing, 

and medical expenses for this group. The $113,000 will, therefore, be necessary 

to provide for the present caseload and for an additional 35 children which 

present estim ates indicate as a conservative incre ase during fiscal yea r 1959.

Application of funds.—Funds in the amount of $45,000 will be applied to personal services relating to social work positions; $65,000 will be applied to other 

contractual services, which includes board and care, medical and tuition costs ; 

and $3,000 to grants and subsidies which relates to civil-service retirem ent reduction in accordance with the number of positions th at it will be necessary toeliminate.

(5) Children’s Center, $150,000

The Depa rtment requested that the per cap ita cost for Children’s Center be 

raised to $6.31 per day fo r the capacity population of the center, 1,734. The daily 

average population for 1958, as set forth in the House hearing, was 1,325. As of 

Jun e 13, 1958, th ere were actually 1,546 children in the ce nter. There is a wait ­

ing list of mentally retard ed children who will be comm itted as soon as the 

cou rt reconvenes in September, and there is also the possibility th at commitments of delinquents will be expedited when a second juvenile court judge is 

added since the court dockets are now several months in arrears. It is considered, therefore, that the capacity figure of 1,734 will be reached. It will, 

therefore, be necessary to operate on a per cap ita cost of $6.08 per day rathe r 

than the $6.31 per capita requested. This will mean th at there will have to be 

a reduction in services requested. This will affect primarily the District T raining School, where the greatest population incre ase is anticip ated and where we 

have the most helpless residen ts and infan ts. Staff coverage has never been sufficient to provide adequate ca re for this group and supp orting services are needed 

to properly maintain the buildings and to provide suitable standard s of sanitation.

Application of funds.— Fund s in the amount of $141,000 will be applied to 

reduction in personal services, including 18 nursing ass ista nts, 7 culinary personnel, labor and main tenance personnel as well as specialized personnel in 

social and medical services. Nine thou sand dollars will be applied to gra nts 

and subsidies for civil-service retirement relating reduction in the number of 

positions originally requested.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 213

Allotme nts below the activ ity level

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WE LFA RE

Adm inist ratio n:

Person al se rv ic es ..................................... .

Othe r a dm in istra tiv e ex p en ses. ................

To tal, ad m in istrat io n.

Pu bl ic A ssis tance Divis ion :

Perso nal s erv ices........ ..................

Gra nt s______________________

Other a dm in istra tiv e expen ses . 

To tal, pu blic assi sta nce..........

8u rp lus Food Divis ion :

Pe rso nal s erv ices______________

Other adm in istra tiv e ex pe ns es .. 

To tal, Su rplus Food Division.

Ch ild Welfare Divis ion :

Perso nal serv ices...... .............. .......

Other c on tra ctua l serv ices:

Bo ard a nd car e__________________

Nationa l Tra in in g School for Bo ys.

Unm arrie d mot he rs______________

Other re lated ser vic es_______ _____

To tal, co ntractua l ser vic es. 

Other a dm in istra tiv e ex pe ns es .. . 

To tal, ch ild w elfare .....................

Distri ct of C olum bia V illage: 

Pe rso nal se rvices _______

Supplies a nd m ate rials:

Medica l s up pl ie s..................

Fuel .........................................

Pr ov isi on s_______________

Othe r su pp lie s___________

Othe r ad m in istra tiv e expen ses .

Tot al, Distri ct of C olum bia V illa ge.

Rec eiv ing H om e for Ch ild ren:

Perso nal ser vic es___________________

Other a dm in istra tiv e expen ses ............ .

To tal, Recei ving Ho me for C hi ld re n.

Ju ni or V illage:

Perso nal servic es_________

Supplies an d ma ter ial s:

F u e l. ____ _____ _____

Wearin g ap pa re l.......... .

Pr ov isi on s__________

Other re lated s uppli es. 

Other op erating exp enses..

To tal, Ju ni or V illage.

M un ici pa l Lodgi ng Hou se:

Perso nal servic es.............

Other o pe ratin g expenses..

To tal, M un ici pa l Lodgi ng Ho use .

Te m po ra ry H om e for Sold iers a nd Sailors:

Perso nal service s______ _____ _______

Other op erati ng expe nse s____________

To tal, Te mpo rary H om e for Soldiers an d Sailors

App ro pr iation,

1958

Es tim ate,

1959

Ho use

actio n

Increase ( + ) 

or decrease 

(—), H ous e 

actio n 

com pared 

with 1959 

est im ate

$196,327 

18,931

$196,327 

18,931

$196,327 

18,931

215,258 215,258 215,258

528,992

3,738,443 

90,467

537,422

5,070,443 

91,037

537,422

5,070,443 

91,037

4,357,902 5,698,902 5,698,902

76,295 

73,705

76,295 

73,705

76,295 

73,705

150,000 150,000 150,000

609,157 729,212 684,212 —$45,000

835,860 

653,581 

21,630 

12,565

866,660 

553, 581 

30,630 

37,801

835,860 

553,581 

21,630 

12,601

-30 ,800

-9 ,0 00 

-25,20 0

1,523,636 1,488,672 1,423,672 -65 ,00 0

290,289 317,198 314,198 -3 ,0 00

2,423,082 2,535,082 2, 422,082 -11 3,0 00

1,135,912 1,194,411 1,194, 411

16,000 

20,100 

162,450 

79,433 

142,577

16,000 

27,955 

162,450 

81,233 

194,423

16,000 

27,955 

162,450 

81,233 

194,423

1,556,472 1,676,472 1,676,472

235,688 

59,948

235,688

59,948

235,688 

59,948

295,636 295,636 295,636

364,866

20,807 

16,463 

55,733 

18,853 

41,834

450,528

20,807

20,463

65,102

21,802

54,854

450,528

20,807 

20,463 

65,102 

21,802 

54,854

518,556 633,556 633,556

15,936 

11,568

15,936 

11,568

15,936 

11,568

27,504 27,504 27,504

21,086 

15,124

21,086 

15,124

21.086 

15,124

36,210 36,210 36,210
214 DIS TRI CT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1959

Allotme nts below the activity level— C on tinu ed

A ppro pri ­

at io n,

1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

H ouse

ac tion

Increa se ( + ) 

or de crea se 

(—), H ou se 

ac tion 

co m pa re d 

w it h 1959 

es ti m at e

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE—C o n ti n u ed

C h il d re n ’s C en te r:

Per so na l serv ices . . _______________ _________ ___

Supp lie s an d m at er ia ls :

Fue l

$2,381,015

94,60 8

145,699 

375,8 42 

184,811 

405,405

$2,7 17,6 46

101,849 

145,699 

375,842 

208,601 

444,743

$2,576 ,646

101,849 

145,699 

375,842 

208,601 

435,743

-$ 14 1, 00 0

W ea ring a p p a re l. . _ . . . _____ . . . ___ . . .

P ro vi si ons . ___ . . . . .. . . . . ..

O th er su pplies______________________________ _

O th er o per at in g e xp en se s. .. _ ___ ______ _ __ -9 ,0 0 0

T o ta l, C h il d re n ’s C en te r. ___________________

T o ta l, publi c w elfa re_______________ . . . ____

3,5 87,38 0 3,9 94 ,38 0 3,8 44,38 0 -1 50 ,0 00

13,168,000 15, 263,000 15,000,000 -2 63 ,0 00

PREPAR ED ST ATE M EN T

Senator Pastore. All right, sir. Proceed.

Mr. Shea. Mr. Chairman, I do have a brief opening statement 

that I will submit for the record.

Senator Pastore. All right; submit it for the record, and give us a 

brief summary.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Sta te m en t of t h e D irecto r of P ubli c W el fa re

The Depa rtment of Public Welfare is asking for a restoration of $113,000 

for the Child Welfare Division. $150,000 for the Children’s Center, and $84,000 

for capital outlay.

As of April 30, 1958, there were 4,203 active cases in Child Welfare. Of this 

number of cases there are 1,356 children in foster homes, subsidized homes, in 

homes with relatives, and in priv ate institution s. This number has increased 

from 1,260 in July 1957. The proposed 1959 budget anticipates an increase 

of only 35 additional children.

Sixty-five thousand dollars is being requested for board and care for these 

children. Approximately $45,000 is being requested to be restored for add itional workers to be assigned to the are as of adoption, protective services, and 

fpster-home recruitmen t and supervision. The problem of dependency is increasing a t an alarm ing rate. We feel it app rop riate to conc entrate as much of our 

efforts as possible on the prevention and control of this problem.

For the Children’s Center, we are requesting a restoration of $150,000. This 

is divided into three are as : Cottage supervisory personnel for retard ed children ; 

additional culinary personnel to provide more sanit ary controls and health 

standa rds in the cottage feeding are as ; and additional maintenance, grounds, 

and laundry personnel to provide a more adeq uate program to meet the maintenance needs of 82 buildings covering over 800,000 square fe et; to properly maintain 230 acres of lawn and 6 miles of roadw ay; and to keep in operation a laundry 

that presently has a workload of over 60,000 pounds of laundry a month. It is 

expected that in less than 15 months 15,000 pounds more will be added per 

mouth as a result of additional residents being housed in new buildings now 

under construction.

For capital outlay, $84,000 is requested. Sixty-three thousand fou r hundred 

dollars of this is for a retaining wall and fence at the Receiving Home for 

Children. Prim arily, this is an engineering requirement since there is a considerable am ount of erosion takin g place which is endangering the lateral supp ort 

of the foundations of the building. The wall would be 8 to 12 feet high and 

there would be approximately 1,162 feet of fencing required. A secondary advantage would be additional exercise and recreation space for the children.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 2 1 5

We are requesting elimination of individual electric meters on staff bousing 

and placing all the units on a cen tral meter. As a consequence, the kilowatt 

rate will be much less and will res ult in a 5O-percent decrease for the charge of 

electric service for these units. As of this morning, we have been informed 

through the staff of the Departm ent of Buildings and Grounds, w’ho have been 

in contact with the Baltimore Edison Elec tric Co., th at this installation can be 

made for somewhere between $5,000 and $0,000 per staff housing grouping rather 

than the $9,000 per grouping previously indicated. Finally, they are asking 

for funds amounting to $2,000 to install 3 compartmented sinks on the second 

and third floors of the hospital, and in the 2 cottages housing the lowest mentality 

patients. This is a requirement of the Hea lth Dep artm ent regulations.

This is a brief summary of the Department’s request for restoration of funds 

in operating expenses and in cap ital outlay.

RESTO RAT ION S REQUESTED

Mr. Shea. Actually, sir, we are requesting restoration of $263,000, 

$113,000 of which is identified with the Child Welfare Division, and 

$150,000 with the Children’s Center. Basically, the reasons for our 

asking for this restoration are very briefly summarized in the numerical increase that we find ourselves facing daily in child welfare, our 

effort to provide some services for these children, through the various 

sections of th e Child Welfare Division, and really a problem of neglect at the D istrict Training School fo r Retarded Children. With the 

Child Welfare Division as of the first day of July of this past year, 

there were 1,260 children in the foster home section, which are children in foster homes as well as in private institutions, and in subsidized foster homes. As of the 30th of April, there were 1,356 children 

in foster home and private institutions. So, actually, we are requesting a restoration of $65,000 for what is referred to as board and care, 

to take care of these additional children who are presently in foster 

homes or in private institutions. We are anticipating a very minor 

increase of only 35 additional children in Child Welfare Foster Homes 

Section during fiscal year 1959.

CH ILD WE LFA RE DIVI SIO N

Senates- Pasture. This $113,000 is for what purpose?

Mr. Shea. Board and care, as well as for the staff of the Child Welfare Division.

Senator P astore. But I want a breakdown.

Mr. Shea. $65,000 of it is for the board and care for children in 

foster homes and private institutions for whom we may, on an average, about $72 a month, which includes board and care, clothing, tuition, and incidentals and medical care.

$45,000 approximately is for 9 additional social workers in the 

Child Welfare Division. That would be to take care of the additional children, as well as to take care of the children in adoptions to 

get more children adopted, and working with the Protective Service 

Section.

PROTECTIVE SERV ICE SECTIO N

Senator Pastore. How many are doing that work now?

Mr. Shea. We have in the Protective Service Section 22 people, and 

in the Foster Homes Section 22, and in the adoptions, we have 9.

Senator Pastore. 22 and 22 and 9 gives you 53.

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.
216 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Senator Pastore. How many more would this give you ?

Mr. Shea. This would give us an additional 9.

Senator Pastore. Do you need them all ?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir. Actually, the Child Welfare Division is divided into four major sections—the adoption, protective services, foster homes, and institutions.

Senator Pastore. Well, you can swing these people around, can 

you not ?

Mr. Shea. Yes, we can, but there is pressure in these particula r 

areas, particularly in the protective services, where we are having 

more and more children brought to our attention, who are found in 

very precarious circumstances, and whom we are trying to prevent 

from being removed to a home.

Senator P astore. Are these the only nine you are asking for?

Mr. Shea. In the Child Welfare Division, yes. We are asking for 

additional clerical people in Child Welfare.

Senator Pastore. Did they give you clerical in the House allowance?

Mr. Shea. Yes; they did.

Senator Pastore. IIow many ?

Mr. Shea. Twenty-two positions.

Senator Pastore. Twenty-two positions?

Mr. Shea. Yes; clerical positions, which actually would enable us 

to establish a ratio of supervisors, caseworkers and clerical positions 

throughout the 12 sections of this particular Division.

Senator Pastore. Do these clerical positions have anything to do 

with these cases ?

Mr. Shea. No, sir; they actually are strictly clerical workers in the 

office, processing cases in terms of typing and shorthand and dictaphone work.

Senator Pastore. And in this budget they gave you 22 more ?

Mr. Shea. Yes.

Senator Pastore. How many did you have before they gave you 

the 22 ?

Mr. Siiea. Clerical positions?

Senator P astore. Yes.

TOTAL CLERICAL PO SIT IO NS

Mr. Shea. We have a total of 133 positions in Child Welfare Division.

Senator Pastore. I s this correct, tha t overall, in child welfare you 

asked for 144 positions and the House allowed you 90 ?

Mr. Shea. That is correct.

Senator Pastore. Tha t leaves 54.

Mr. Shea. Fifty -four, yes.

Senator Pastore. You are asking for restoration of the 54?

Mr. Siiea. Yes; 9 in Child Welfare and the balance in the Children’s 

Center.

The Child Welfare Division, as you know, sir, is one of the areas 

tha t is increasing in terms of pressure, particularly in the area of 

dependency.

At the moment at least numerically, we are down, in terms of the 

number of delinquents that are in our care, but the problem of de-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 217

pendency, actually, is increasing, as reflected in our Junior Village 

population, as reflected in the protective services, and as reflected 

actually in Public Assistance.

Senator Pastore. I know that. It is an area tha t gets more and 

more serious from year to year. It is hard for lay people to understand, but what I would expect you to do, is th is :

Plere is the point. You come in asking for 144 and you get 90 positions under the House bill and then you come back and ask for the 

balance. Is there anyway of justifying pa rt of this ?

Mr. Siiea. Well, actually, we have tried to be very conservative with 

our estimate but, as I said in the beginning, the numbers are actually 

increasing at such an alarming rate in Child Welfare, and there does 

not seem to be anything in the horizon tha t is going to stop the children from coming to the Protective Services.

Senator P astore. I do not find any quarrel with the $65,000, because 

if you do not have the children, and do not board them, the money 

is still ours.

Mr. Shea. Yes, or they end up in institutions.

Senator P astore. But it is this idea of putting more and more people 

on to the payroll because you cannot take people from one room and 

put them in another room, say take a typist from one room and put 

him in another room, because I am afra id there is sometimes too 

much of tha t in the Government.

Everytime we have a new responsibility we have more people doing 

just that. We never look over our shoulder to see if there is somebody 

sitting around th at can be utilized for a better purpose.

Mr. Shea. Actually, every one of the caseworkers in Child Welfare 

are carrying considerably in excess of what they can handle.

VACANT POSITIONS

Senator Pastore. How many vacancies do you have on an average?

Mr. Shea. Eig ht vacanices.

Senator P astore. That is an average, th at you do not fill, anyway?

Mr. Shea. Normal turnover.

Senator Pastore. Why do you need these nine people when you 

cannot fill these other positions ?

Mr. Shea. Because, actually, we hope to fill these vacancies.

Senator Pastore. I know you hope to do it, but I say on an average, 

you have eight people for whom you have a vacancy.

Mr. Shea. And if we do not have the money in 1959 budget, assuming we are able to get these additional workers, we would not be able 

to pay for them.

Senator Pastore. That is assuming you are able to, but over the 

past years, you have not been able to get them, this average of eight, 

therefore you end up with extra money.

Mr. Shea. In the total department, you are not going to end up 

with any extra money. Actually, we estimate now somewhere between 

$30,000 or $40,000 being left out of the $13 million budget.

Senator Pastore. Without consideration as to what the overall 

problem is, how’ many of these nine would you consider necessary, in 

order to take on the added responsibilities to be created by the $65,000 

for board and care ?
218 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Shea . O f course, the y wou ld hav e to be direc tly rel ate d to the 

Fo ster H ome Section, and th at would be 3 of the 9.

Se na tor P astore. Th ree of the nin e ?

Mr. S hea. Yes.

Se na tor P astore. H ow much would th at be in dollars?

Mr. Shea. Tha t would be appro xim ate ly $18,000. Bu t, you see, we 

wou ld be unable to prevent the c hildre n th ro ug h the pro tec tive services, which is the next 3 o f these 9, from c oming into t he foste r home 

section, which may result in increased cost, because if the y end up in 

foste r homes it costs $72 a m onth fo r each one.

HOUS E ACTION

Senator Pasture. Yes, but you are a practic al man and you asked 

fo r 144 and the Ho use gave you 90 ?

Mr. Siiea. Yes.

Senator P astore. An d you presen ted all the arg um ents there th at 

you are presentin g to me. Why slap bac k at me wha t they knocked 

ou t ? W ha t do y ou th in k is go ing to ha pp en ? Th ere is no n eed of my 

kidd ing you a nd yo u kidd ing me. I mean, everything yo u are sayi ng 

to me you said in the House. Ye t they knocked it out.

Now wh at is a s tro ng er a rgum ent fo r w’hat has ha ppened since this 

th at I can go back with and get them to chang e th ei r mind s ?

I mean, unless I can go there and say, fo r inst ance, “W ell th ey have 

reviewed this figure and the y have studie d it very caref ull y and the y 

find they can not escape the responsi bility of add ed board and care for 

these ch ildr en and th ey can get alon g wi th 3 inste ad o f the 9.”

At least I have an arg um ent to go on. Bu t to just go in and ask 

them to reve rse themselves completely on all fou rs, you k now wha t is 

going to happen .

Mr. Shea. I th ink, actually , th ere w as a g reat deal of consideration 

given to the num ber of chi ldr en who were on bo ard and care at the 

beg inn ing of Ju ly 1957, at the begin nin g of th is fiscal ye ar ; bu t, actually, the numb er h as increased m onthly t o the e xte nt now th at it has 

increas ed'b y 96 children.

T just won der if the re was any real c onsidera tion giv en to the num erical increase over which we have no con trol . I f the W omen’s Bu rea u 

picks up a child or the clergy or a n eig hbor or any one brin gs i t to th e 

attentio n of th e Pro tet civ e Service, we h ave to d o som eth ing about it.

COMPARISON OF 1 9 5 8 AN D 1 9 5 9 FU NDS

Se nator P asture. In 1958 the budget fo r yo ur de pa rtm en t was 

$13,136,000.

Mr. S hea. Yes.

Se nator P astore. The estimate fo r 1959 was $15,263,000. They 

knocked off th is qu arter o f a million d oll ars , a little m ore th an a qu ar ­

te r o f a million dollars, on a $15 million b udget , so do not tell me t ha t 

they did not con sider this.

Mr. Shea . I am sure they did. We are very appre cia tiv e of what 

the House did.

Se na tor P astore. Well, do no t te ll me th ey did no t co nsider it, w ith 

the gr an ting of $15 million and only knock ing off $263,000. which is
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 219

a very, very small percentage. Apparently, they scrutinized this very, 

very carefully.

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Senator Partore. Now what you are doing is this: You are saying 

that we are 100 percent right and yet you say, “ You have to give us 

everything we asked for in the beginning, or we cannot do business.”

Mr. Shea. No.

Senator Partore. I mean you are asking me to restore every single 

penny that they took out.

NEE D FOB RESTO RATION

Mr. S hea. The fact is, if we do not do something about working 

with these children, and working on behalf of this protective service, 

and i f we are unable to get more wards adopted, and they are placed 

in foster homes, in the long run it will cost the District of Columbia 

more money.

Senator Partore. Maybe so. I subscribe to that but, on the other 

hand, with $15 million, do you not think part of this responsibility 

maybe could be absorbed ?

Now, do you know whether, in dealing with $15 million, you are 

not going to reach a spot where you will have a few dollars in some 

other category left over ?

Mr. Shea. I would hope tha t would happen. But public assistance 

is going up in the District of Columbia. IVe were very fortunate in 

getting a substantial amount from the House—this is the first time 

we were able to pay 100 percent of the grants, which is to the credit 

of the Members of the House—but we do not see anything on the 

horizon that is going to reduce the pressure of public assistance or 

the pressure with respect to the increase in dependency.

Unfortunately, it is increasing, and there is nothing th at I can see 

tha t is going to reduce it.

ch ildr en ’s center

Senator Partore. All right, Mr. Shea, let us get down to this 

$150,000.

Mr. Shea. The $150,000, actually, is related to the Children’s Center. That center will require 45 positions.

Senator Partore. Forty-five new ones?

Mr. Shea. Those that were eliminated by the House.

Senator P astore. How many do you have there ?

Mr. Shea. A. total of 673 positions.

Mr. P astore. 673?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Senator P astore. How many vacancies do you carry there now ?

Mr. Shea. As of the 16th of June we had 9 vacancies at the Cedar

Knoll School and 10 vacancies at the District Training School, 7 of 

whom are nursing assistants.

Senator Partore. Out of 673?

Mr. Shea. Yes, as of the 16th of June.

This, actually, sir, is the reference I made in the beginning, as to 

the problem of neglect.
220 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

You know a t t he Ch ild ren’s Cente r we have three different types of 

child ren —re tarded , young offenders who are delinq uen ts, and old er 

delinquent children.

Senator P astore. Th is is like th e one I have back home.

Mr. Siiea. Yes, like the F er n wood School up in Walt ham, Mass.

We have 870 reta rded children.

PERSON NEL

Senator P astore. They did no t allow you any personnel a t all ?

Mr. Shea. We were allow ed $116,000 in personnel fo r the new infirm ary , which we opene d a few mo nth s ago fo r the bed pa tie nts , bu t 

over th e yea rs the re has been complete neglect o f the a mb ula tor y lowgrade ind ividual, th e ind ivi dual with an I. Q. of 20 o r below. So, for 

exam ple, righ t now we have 91 male idiots, in a cottage, and at no time 

are there any more th an 3 people on du ty betw een 6: 30 a. m. and 

2: 30 p. m.

Se nator Pastore. Wo uld you re pe at t hat again ?

Mr. Shea. In this cottage where we have these 91 low -grade male 

am bulatory idio ts, we have 3 people on du ty fro m 6: 30 a. m. to 2: 30 

p. m., an d between 2: 30 p. m. and 10: 30 p. m., we have 2, and betw een 

10: 30 p. m. and 6 a. m. we h ave 2 p ersons We are ask ing th at it be 

increased to 4 in t he m orn ing , 4 in the a fte rno on, and 2 a t nigh t.

Senator P astore. Plow m any cottages a re th ere ?

Mr. Shea . Ele ven cottages now, and fo ur under con stru ctio n.

Senator P astore. Are there any con sidera tions being mad e for the 

cottages goin g up ?

Mr. Shea. No. Th is will be in the 1960 request. They will not be 

com pleted un til the end o f 1959 fiscal year.

NURSING AS SIST AN T TRAINING COURSE

Se na tor P astore. Do you have m uch turnov er in pers onnel ?

Mr. Shea. Ac tua lly it is becoming considerably more stable. We 

have a much be tte r caliber person , much bette r caliber people since 

there has been establis hed a nu rsi ng assis tan t trai ni ng course.

Ac tuall y, there are 18 wo rki ng in this typ e of stu dy th at I men ­

tion ed.

Se na tor P astore. They ta ke care of w hat ?

Mr. Shea. Low-g rade p atients.

Se na tor P astore. W ha t is the re quireme nt?

Mr. Shea . T o be a gr ad ua te of the nu rsi ng assis tan ts’ trai ni ng 

course.

Se na tor P astore. Tha t is n ot a pr ofessio nal course ?

Mr. S hea . No, sir; the nu rsi ng assistan ts’ trai ni ng is sufficient. 

Th e nu rsing assista nts, in addit ion , will have addit ion al gu ard duties 

in the hospital. It is a small hospita l of 70 beds, and because we have 

not only th is typ e of pa tie nt com ing into the hospital, bu t also very 

emotiona lly distu rbed delinq uen ts, we h ave to have staff coverag e fo r 

staff pro tec tion, as well as the pro tec tion o f th e child.

Se na tor P astore. I s the cen ter very efficient ? I mea n, have you 

ha d any in cidents ?

Mr. S hea . No, sir.

Se na tor P astore. I mean, hav e you had any of th ese incidents, because of the lack of personnel ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 221

Mr. Shea. Well, we have had injuries because this type of patient 

is not only mentally retarded, but also might have a great many physical handicaps such as epilepsy, cardiac, blindness, and so on.

Senator P astore. All right. You have up to $22,000.

Mr. Siiea. In addition to that, we have in these cottages, the cottages for below-grade children, we have over the years been requiring 

the nursing assistants to actually act as dining room supervisors. 

When a person is supervising the dining room and bringing in the 

food and trying to clean up afterward, some 1 person has to take care 

of the other 90 children. We are asking for 7 supervisors to be assigned to the dining rooms physically in existence, in the cottages for 

low grades, of which there are 91 in 1 case, tha t of males, and 82 in the female group.

CUT APPLIED TO CHILD WELFARE DIVISION

Senator Pastore. Now you were, in toto, cut $263,000?

Mr. Shea. Yes. We applied it to the Child Welfare Division.

Senator Pastore. Why did you do that ? Why neglect the children 

in the event we would not put it back ? Or was this done to glamorize 

it here in this presentation ? I mean, it makes it look as though the 

House cut out this child welfare, which would shock me. I do not think 

they did that at all. They just cut out a figure, and you are allocating 

it there?

Mr. S hea. Yes, we did that. Actually, in the House report, I think 

it said that no portion of this cut may be applied to public assistance, 

or wording to tha t effect. We actually applied the $115,000 in the 

Junio r Village where we have in reality something like 80 in excess 

of the budget, in population, which to us seemed logical. In other 

words, we have 335 children there today, and are supposed to have 

a canacity of 240.

We applied the $120,000 to the D istrict of Columbia Village, which 

actually is to take care of maintenance as well as clerical personnel at 

the District of Columbia Village, the Receiving Home, and the other 

institutions in the city.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA VILLAGE

Senator Pastore. What do you do at the District of Columbia 

Village?

Mr. Shea. That is the home for the aged.

Senator. Pastore. All righ t, you have me up to 22. Now proceed, 

please.

Mr. Shea. In addition to that, we have something like 800,000 

square feet of building space, and have to maintain 230 acres of lawn, 

so we are asking for some laborers to try to keep those buildings and 

grounds in perfect condition.

Now, I know that it may sound far removed from the care of the 

patients.

Senator Pastore. How many of those are you asking for?

Mr. Shea. Seven.

Senator P astore. How much does that cost ?

Mr. Shea. Tha t comes to $18,200—I am sorry. Tha t comes to 

$21,112.
222 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

PRIORITY TEST

Senator P astore. Now, Mr. Shea, it strikes me that afte r listening 

to you, that you could help me out a little bit in this responsibility by 

giving me a list of the musts.” I cannot possibly feel tha t out of a 

budget of $15 million with a cut of only $263,000, that there is not 

some place where you could say “Well, for the time being, we can do 

without this.”

I would like to feel as I did with the previous case involving the 

hospital, that I could go in and earmark this and indicate what our 

situation is. I would like to be able to say, “Now, gentlemen, you do 

not want to do this, but you want to do that.”

You cannot just give me a blanket statement saying tha t you need 

everything.

Mr. Shea. Well, sir; we will prepare a priority list of personnel.

Senator P astore. I wish you would do tha t. I hope t hat will not 

take too long, because we are moving along fast. Will you do that for 

me?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. I would appreciate it very much, because this 

is a field about which I am very, very sensitive. I would like to work 

for it and I would like to argue for it, providing I would feel tha t I 

was on solid ground. Now you give me the ammunition and I will 

fire it, but you have to give me the ammunition.

Mr. Shea. Yes; we will.

Senator Pastore. All right. Thank you.

(The information referred to follows:)

P rior ity Lis t of Needed P er so nnel

18 GS-2 nursing assis tan ts---------------------------------------------------------- $53,280

7 WBS-7 dining-room help ers----------------------------------------------------- 18,200

1 WRS-9 laundry foreman-------------------------------------------------------- 2, 766

1 WBS-9 laundry rep airman____________________________________ 2, 766

7 WBR-3 la bo re rs ___ ________________________________________ 21.112

l-OSM housekeeper— ---- 1--------------------------------------------------------- 3,415

1 GS-4 dental hygienis t------------------------------------------------------------ 3, 415

I GS-7 physical the rapist----------------------------------------------------------- 4, 525

I GS-7 speech therapis t------------------------------------------------------------- 4, 525

1 GS-7 social worker__________________________________________ 4, 525

1 GS-7 pharm acist____________________________________________ 4, 525

1 GS-9 social worker supervisor-------------------------------------------------- 5, 440

I WBR-11 painter____________________________________________ 4,202

1 WBR-11 stea mfitter_________________________________________ 4.202

2 GS-3 clerk-typists------------------------------------------------------------------ 6, 350

These positions are needed prim arily to provide more adeq uate and safe care 

for the low-grade, feebleminded patients in the D istrict Tra ining School. These 

included 203 males and 91 females housed in 4 sep arate cottages. These are 

patients who cannot take care of the ir own personal needs and require bathing, 

feeding, and personal a tten tion th roughout a 24-hour period. During the daytime 

hours we now have only 3 staff per cottage caring for these individuals, and we 

need to raise this by 1 person during the daytime and evening and night hours. 

This accounts for the nursing ass istant positions requested. Nursing personnel 

now also, in add ition to other responsibilities, h andle the feeding of these patients. 

This is not sound either from a san itary stan dpo int or from the standpoint of 

needed care and we want to provide dining-room helpers to relieve nursing a ssi stants from feeding duties.

The increasing number of helpless patients at this institution places an add itional burden on the laundry and has resulted in fewer residents th at can help
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 223

on maintenance work. Lau ndry workers, laborers, and m aintenance w orkers are 

requested for this reason. The other i>ositions requested relate to our need to 

provide more specialized rehabilita tive services to work with these children in an 

attempt to allev iate and corre ct th eir physical defects.

Department of Licenses and I nspections

STATEMENTS OF J. J. ILGENFRITZ, DIRECTOR; R. DONALD KIN NEY, 

DEPUTY DIRECTOR; F. E. ROPSHAW, CHIEF, OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION; AND H. W. STEWART, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR

RE ST OR AT IO N RE QU ES TE D

Senator Pastore. All r ig ht; proceed with your next item, please. 

Mr. Herman. The next item is the Department of Licenses and

Inspections.

The request is for a restoration of $29,000, and the justifications 

appear on page 51.

Mr. J. J. Ilgenfritz, Director of the Department of Licenses and 

Inspections is here to present the justifications.

(The justification follows:)

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS 

Ope rati ng E x pe nses

Appropriations, 1958--------------------------------------------------------------- $1, 862, 000 Estimate, 1959______________________________________________ 2, 061, 000 House allowance. 1959 (reduction of $61,000)______ t

____________ 2, 000* 000

A M EN D M EN T RE QU ES TE D

Page 18, line 3, strike out “$2,000,000” and ins ert in lieu thereof “$2,029,000”, 

or an increase of $29,000 in the appropriation.

Application of House reductions

Standa rd classification Estima te,

1958

Estima te,

1959

Amount

recommended

by House

Increase

(+ ) or decrease (—), 

bill compared with 

estimate

Amount of 

restoration 

requested 

in Senate

Personal services.............. _ ....... $1,577,542 

39,450

400 

7,000 

16,000 

18,000 

59,108 

15,000 

14,500 

13,000

102,000

$1,748,952 

42,882 

400

7,900 

16,780 

19,500 

59,378 

15,000 

15,861 

21,273

113,074

$1,692,298

42,302 

400

7,900

16,780 

19,500 

59,378 

15,000 

15,861 

20,244 

110,337

—$56,654 

-580 Trave l______________________ ... +$27,230

Tran sportation of th ings,___ _____ , Communication services_______

Ren ts a nd utility services___________ .. Prin ting and rep roduction__________

Other contractual services____ .. .. Services performed by other agencies,. 

Supplies and materials ________ .

Eq uip me nt_________ -1,029 

-2,7 37 Grants, subsidies, and contributions____ +1, 770

Tota l estimate or ap propria tion ____ 1,862,000 2,061,000 2,000,000 -61,000 +29,000

27235— 51 15
224 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Recapitulation (by activities)

S ta ndard cl as sific ation E st im ate ,

1958

E st im ate ,

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m en d ed

b y H ou se

In cr ea se

(+ ) or d ecr ea se (—), 

bill co m ­

par ed w it h 

es ti m at e

A m ount of 

re st ora ti on 

re ques te d 

in Sen at e

1 A dm in is tr at io n ___ _ - __ ___ $154,891 $150,644 $146,626 -$ 4 ,0 1 8

2 In sp ec tion __ ______________ - - - 966, 548 1,016,911 994,573 -2 2,3 38

3 Tdcensps an d per m its ____ _______ -- 234,479 268,9 62 253,719 -1 5,2 43 +$ 15 ,0 00

4 H o u s in g _____ _____ __ - 506,082 528,483 523,082 -5 ,4 0 1

5. Zon in g...... ........... - ...........- ............................... 96,000 82,000 -1 4,0 00 +14 ,0 00

T o ta l es tim at e or ap p ro p ri ati o n ------- 1,862,000 2,061,000 2,000,000 -6 1,0 00 +29 ,0 00

HO USE REPORT

“The committee recommends an appropriation of $2 million, a reduction of 

$61,000 in the budget estimate, hut an increase of $138,000 over 1958 funds.

Specific budget increases approved are as follow s:

Reallocations--------------------------------------------------------------------------- $17, 000

Plumbing inspection program for certification of District of Columbia

water supply------------------------------------------------------------------------- 52,000

Administration of Distric t of Columbia Cha ritable Solicitation Act----- 10, 000

Housing improvement program---------------------------------------------------- 17, 000

License issuance program----------------------------------------------------------- 4, (XX)

Zoning reg ulations enforcement program--------------------------------------- 47, 000

“The committee has specifically denied the requ est for a community relatio ns 

adviser in the Housing activity inasmuch as the Congress approved las t year an 

almost identical position in the urban renewal a ctiv ity un der the Executive Office 

appropriation. The budget estimate of $61,(XX) for the enforcement of the new 

zoning code of the District‘has been reduced by $14,(XX). The committee is of 

the opinion th at the enforcement of the new code can be adequately handled 

within the present stalling of the Departm ent and has approved, in effect, the 

tra nsfer of funds from other activities of the Department to this proposed new 

activity. Included in the tota l allowed for this new program is $9.(XX) which 

will be saved due to the abolishment of 3 positions as a result of the leasing 

of the Eastern Market. The committee has been concerned for several years 

about the financial loss incurred in the operation of Eas tern and Western Markets and notes that the recently negotiated lease for the operation of Eas tern 

Market will eliminate $9,000 in personnel costs and will bring an annual rental 

retur n to the D istr ict of $7,500 for the next 5 years. The W estern Market o perating loss for fiscal year 1958 is estimated a t $2,559. However, the Commissioners 

have under consideration an incre ase in rentals of individual stands to eliminate 

this loss and the committee urges th at such action be taken.”

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

The increase requested is as follows: (1) Administration of District of Columbia Charitable Solicitation Act,

$li>,000.—Public Law 85-87 authorizes the Distric t Commissioners to promulgate regulations for the registration and control of all cha ritable solicitation 

activities. The act furth er provides that both the act and the regu lations shall 

become effective 60 days after the promulgation of the regulations. The Department of Licenses and Inspections and the specially appointed Advisory Council 

have prep ared such proposed regulations. A public hearing before the Board of 

Commissioners was held on May 21. 1958. As a result it is anticip ated th at the 

regulations will be promulgated by July 1. 1958, and th at the effective date will 

be September 1, 1958. This Department has requested appropriations for personnel and rela ted expenses beginning July 1, 1958, in order to pre par e for the 

anticip ated effective date. Forms, records, procedures, and the training of 

personnel will be instituted during this 60-day period.

The House has reduced the requested amount of $25,000 by $15,000. This will 

have the effect of cutting the conservatively estimated force of 3 investigators 

and 3 clerks to 1 investigator and 1 clerk, and will reduce the activity to a 

superficial recordkeeping procedure negating the intent of Congress to protect 

the public from unscrupulous cha ritable racketeers.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959 225

App lica tion of fu n d s. —I t is es ti m ate d th a t th ere will be a t le ast 1,000 org an iza tion s which wi ll be re qu ired to re gis te r unde r th e ac t an d th a t th es e or ga ni za ­

tion s wi ll ut iliz e man y th ou sa nd s of in di vid ual so lic ito rs. Exp er ie nc e in com ­

pa ra ble lic en se act iv itie s has show n th a t th e appro pri at io n re qu es ted is th e 

minim um re qui re d to st af f su ch a pr og ra m fo r th e ne ce ss ar y in ve stig atio n, en ­

fo rc em en t, an d cl er ic al wor k an d to pr ov id e ad eq uat e pro te ct io n to th e public. 

Thi s new ac tivi ty ca nn ot he ab so rb ed by th e ex is ting pe rs on ne l of th is D epart ­

men t. The re fo re , it is re qu es ted th a t fu nds in th e am ou nt of $14,085 fo r pe rs on al 

se rv ice fo r 2 in ve st ig at ors an d 2 cler ks , an d $915 f or re la te d ex pe ns es fo r a to ta l 

of $15,00 0 be re stor ed .

Fin an ci al an al ys is.— The pr op os ed in cr ea se will be dis tr ib ute d as fo llow s: 

Gen eral fu nd

A cti v it y 3,

lic ense Object: a n a p er m it

01 Per so na l se rv ic e____________________________________________ $14 ,08 5

11 G ra nts , su bs idies, an d contr ib utions------------------------------------- 915

T ota l re st ora ti on re qu es te d------------------------------------------------ 15, 000

(2) Zo ning re gu la tion s en fo rc em en t prog ra m, $llf,000

Co ng ress au th ori ze d ap pr ox im at el y $150,000 fo r a co mplete st ud y of zonin g 

fo r th e D is tr ic t of Co lum bia in ord er to br in g up to date th e an ti quate d re gu ­

la tions wh ich had re m aine d vir tu all y un ch an ge d fo r 3 de cade s. Thi s m aj or 

st ud y cu lm in at ed in th e pr om ul ga tion of th e new zonin g re gul at io ns on Ma y 12, 

1958, de sign ed to co nt ro l an d re gula te str u ctu re an d la nd us e fo r th e prom otion 

of pu blic sa fe ty , hea lth, an d ge ner al w elf are ; to pr ev en t un du e co nc en trat io n of 

p opula ti on; an d to pr ov id e such dis tr ib uti on of resid en ce , bu sine ss an d in du str ia l pro per ties an d use of la nd which will cre ate co nd iti on s fa vo ra ble to tr an spo rt at io n, pr ot ec tion of pro per ty va lues , arid which will te nd to fu rt h e r th e 

eco nom y an d efficiency in th e s up pl y of p ub lic service s.

The D ep ar tm en t of Li ce ns es an d In sp ec tions im m ed ia tely pr ov id ed live 

tr ain ed em ploy ee s to cope w ith th e in it ia l ru sh of zo ning in qu irie s an d ac tion s 

ari si ng from th e new re gu la tion s. Sinc e th is em erge nc y adju st m ent in th e inte re st of pu blic service , a th or ou gh st udy of th e adm in is tr ati ve an d pr oc ed ur al 

re qu irem en ts under th e new re gula tions w as co mp let ed . A minim um of $96,000 

w as de te rm in ed to be re quis it e fo r ap p ro p ri ate adm in is tr ati on of th e zoning 

re gu la tion s an d th e es ta blish m en t of th e Zo ning Divisi on . Of th is am ou nt, 

($96 ,000 ) th e D epar tm en t of Li ce ns es and In sp ec tions w ill be ab le to absorb 

$35,000 by th e tr a n sfe r of five po sition s to th e new Divisi on . The ba lanc e of 

$61,000 w as r eq ue st ed in a su pp le m en ta l a ppro pri ati on r eq ue st.

The Hou se h as cut th e $61,000 su pp le m en ta l re ques t by $14,000. The effect 

of th is re du ct io n w ill be to el im in at e 1 of th e 2 vit all y ne ed ed insp ec tors, as 

w ell as a re co rd s an aly st an d a c le rk fr om th e p ro po se d 15 p os iti on s. The zoning 

re gu la tions pr ov id e fo r th e in te rm it te n t in sp ec tion of all of th e ap pr ox im at ely 

266,000 pr op er ties in th e D is tr ic t and th e re g is tr ati o n of mor e th an 5,000 nonco nf or ming uses. I t is est im at ed th a t 30,000 bui ld in gs and us es of land wi ll be 

ch ec ke d and re co rd ed in th e fi rs t ye ar . Eve n th ou gh a g re at po rtio n of the 

insp ec tion w or k w ill be carr ie d out by pre se nt in sp ec tion staff, th e a pp lica bi lity 

of th e ne w zo ning re gula ti ons re quir e a m in im um of 2 in sp ec to rs special ly 

qu alifi ed an d tr ain ed in zo ning tech ni qu es , sinc e ap pr oxi m at el y 750 sp ec ial insp ec tio ns w ill ha ve to be m ad e annual ly re gard in g ne w re quir em en ts in re la tion 

to m ec ha ni ca l p ro vi sion s fo r smoke , noise , ari d vib ra ti on c on tro l.

The proc es sing of zo ning d a ta fo r th e adm in is tr ato n an d en fo rc em en t of the 

re gula tions as well as th e est ab lish m en t of a la nd us e in ve nt or y is es se nt ia l to 

dis tr ic tw id e pl an nin g an d oper at io nal pro gra m s such as th e urb an re ne wal 

ac tivi ties . The pr op os ed re co rd s analy st w ill or ga ni ze , cl as sify an d proc ess no t 

on ly th e zonin g d ata but also th e p ert in en t la nd us e in fo rm at io n fro m ot her 

oi> erating divi sion s an d dep ar tm en ts . T his d a ta will be proc essed by mac hine 

an d in te gra te d in th e ex is ting m ac hi ne ta bula ti on pr oc ed ur es . Ho we ver, w ithou t th e re co rd s analy st an d th e re qu es te d cler k it will no t be po ssible to ab so rb 

th e ad ditio nal workloa d.

App lica tion of fu nds.— Th e re qu ired ex am in at io n of th e es tim at ed 13,500 p la ns 

an d ap pl ic at io ns an nu al ly , th e 750 sp ec ial in sp ec tion s an nu ally , th e in te rm it te nt 

insp ec tio n of all pro per ties in th e D is tric t, th e re gis tr ati on an d review of mo re 

th an 5,000 no nc on form ing uses, an d th e adm in is tr ati on an d reco rd s proc essin g
226 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 1959

will requ ire the restora tion of the requested funds. Therefore, it is requested 

th at funds in the amount of $13,145 for personal service for 1 inspector, 1 records ana lyst and 1 clerk, and $855 for rela ted expenses for a tota l of $14,000, be 

resto red.

Financial ctnalysis.—The proposed increase will be distr ibuted as follows: 

General fund

A c ti v it y 5, Ob jec t: zoning

01 Personal service _______________________________________ $13,145

11 Grants, subsidies and contributions_______________________ 855

Tota l restora tion requested ____________________________ 14, 000

D epa r tm en t of Lic e n s e s and I n spe c t io n s

Allotm ents below activity level

A ppro pri - E sti m ate , 

at io n, 1959

1958

In crea se (-+-) 

or d ec reas e 

H ous e (—), H ous e 

ac tion ac tion 

co m pa re d 

w it h 1959

est im at e

A dm in is tr at io n:

Per so nal s ervic es: P erm an en t posi tions..........

T ra v el...........

r

................ ................... - .....................

P rin ti n g a n d r e p ro d u cti o n .................. . .............

R ep air a nd al te ra ti ons of D is tr ic t p ro p e rty ..

R ep la ce m en t of e q u ip m e n t------------ ----------- .

C o ntr ib uti on to c iv il se rv ic e re ti rem e n t____

O th er e xp en se s____________________________

T ota l, A d m in is tr ati o n ......................... .............

In sp ec tion s:

Per so na l s erv ices: P erm an en t po si tions..........

T ra v el................ . ........... - .................................... .-

P ri n ti n g a nd r ep ro d u cti o n .......... . . ...................

Em er ge nc y ex pe ns es -----------------------------------

R ep ai rs a nd al te ra ti ons of D is tr ic t p ro p ert y .

R ep la ce m en t of e q u ip m en t________________

C o ntr ib uti on to c iv il se rv ice re ti re m e n t____

O th er e xp en se s................ ............... ........................

T ota l, In sp ec ti ons- .......... ......... ......... ...............

Li ce ns e an d P er m it :

Per so nal service s: P erm an en t posi ti ons.........

T ra v e l--------------------------- ----------------------------

R en t of e q u ip m en t--------- ----------------- ----------

P ri n ti n g a nd r ep ro d u cti o n ............. .....................

R ep ai rs a nd al te ra ti ons of D is tr ic t p ro p ert y .

R ep la ce m en t of e q u ip m e n t-------------------------

C o n tr ib u ti o n t o c iv il ser vice r e ti re m e n t____

O th er e xp en se s--------------------------------------------

T ota l, Li ce ns e an d P e rm it ............... .............

H ou sing :

Per so nal s ervice s:

P erm an en t posi ti ons.................. ................. .

Pos itio ns o th er th a n p erm an en t.............. .

T ra v e l.................................... —.............—............. .

P ri n ti n g an d re p ro d u cti o n ...........................—

E m er ge ncy e x p e n se ................. ........................

R ep air s an d alt era ti o n s of D is tr ic t pr op er ty .

R ep la ce m en t of e q u ip m en t____ ____ _______

C o n tr ib u ti o n to c iv il s er vi ce r eti re m en t____

O th er e x p e n se s.. ................. ................................

T o ta l H o u si n g ............................................. .....................

Zo ni ng :

Per so na l s ervice s: P erm an en t po sition s.

T ra v el........... ......................... ..........................

P ri n ti n g a nd rep ro d u cti o n -------------------

C o n tr ib u ti o n to civi l se rv ic e re tire m en t. 

O th er ex pe ns es ...............................................

T o ta l Zo ning .

T o ta l ap p ro p ri ati o n an d e s tim a te .. .........................

$136,227 

350 

3. 750 

1,150 

1,025 

8,84 0 

3,54 9

$140,792 

350 

3,75 0 

1,150 

1,025 

9,07 2 

2,93 5

$137,377 

350 

3,75 0 

1,150 

1,025 

8,850 

2,173

—$3,415

-2 2 2

-3 81

154,891,

841,702

21, 550 

3, 140 

5,000 

5,800 

7,125 

54,580 

27, 651

966, .548

198,219 

2,3,50 

9,700 

6,75 0 

1,850 

1,250 

12,855 

1,505

234,479

396,744 

4,650 

15,200 

4,360 

47,208 

1,200

3,4 50 

25, 725 

7, 545

1,862,000

159,074 155,056 -4 ,0 1 8

902,193

24,190 

3,140 

5.000 

5,800 

7,125

59,002 

37,031

880,660

24,190 

3,140 

5,00 0 

5,800 

7,125 

58,197 

37,031

-2 1 ,5 3 3

-8 0 5

1,043,481 1,021,143 -2 2,3 38

232,035 

2,614 

9,700 

5. 245 

1,650 

1,250 

14,871 

1,597

217,950 

2,614 

9,700 

5,245 

1,650 

1,250 

13,956 

1,354

-1 4,0 85

-9 1 5

-2 4 3

268,962

419,612 

4,650 

15,200 

4,360 

47,208 

1,200 

3, 450 

27,288 

5, 515

528, 483

49,700

528

1,500

3,230

6,04 2

61,000

2,061,00 0

253, 719

414, 541 

4,650 

15,200 

4,360 

47,208 

1,200 

3,450 

26,9 58 

5,51 5

523,082

36, 555

528 

1,500 

2,375 

6,042

47,0 00

-1 5,2 43

-5 ,0 7 1

-3 3 0

-5 ,4 0 1

-1 3,1 45

-8 5 5

-1 4,0 00

2,0 00,00 0 -6 1,0 00
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 227

HOUSE ACTION

Senator Pastore. All right, proceed.

Mr. Ilgenfritz. Mr. Chairman, the House cut our request by 

$61,000 and I am here to ask for a restoration of part of that; namely, 

$29,000, which I feel we need very badly for the administration of 

two important programs.

charitable solicitation act

The first program here is the administration of Public Law 85-97, 

which is the District of Columbia Charitable Solicitation Act.

Tha t act was dated July 10 of last year. It authorized regulations 

to be drafted for the protection of citizens against charitable solicitation racketeers. It provides for the registration of all charities and 

their solicitors and the accounting of their proceeds.

Now the regulations have been drafted by a special committee set 

up by the Commissioners in connection with our Department. Public 

hearings were held on May 21, 1958, and I expect that the Commissioners will promulgate these regulations in July .

We have estimated tha t approximately 1,000 organizations will 

come under these regulations, and therefore will be required to be 

registered. Now that means that several hundred thousand solicitors 

will have to lie issued what is called solicitor information cards. 

Accordingly, the accounts of these various charities will have to be 

audited, analyzed, and disclosed.

Senator Pasture. How many people will you have for that activity?

Mr. Ilgenfritz. With this cut they allotted me $10,000. 1 can only

hire 1 investigator and 1 clerk to carry on this operation. I had 

asked for 3 clerks and 3 investigators at a total of $25,000. I feel 

that with 1 clerk and 1 investigator we cannot carry out the intent of 

Congress because the program will result in a meager recordkeeping 

activity, the public will obtain no protection, and 1 think we will be 

doing a halfway job.

Senator Pastore. Why do you not try 2 investigators and 1 clerk? 

I mean, I am not trying to bargain with you, but I am merely trying 

to keep these down to a minimum. I realize your responsibility. 

Congress is giving you a responsibility. They say ‘‘Build a house*’ 

but they are not giving you a hammer and saw to do it with. I realize 

that, but, on the other hand, it is pretty hard for you to say what 

this big responsibility is. You might not even lie satisfied with 3 

or 4, as far as tha t is concerned; 1 do not know. The job may be 

even bigger than you think.

Mr. I lgenfritz. I have to admit that; this is such a new field.

Senator Pasture. Yes; it is a new field. I realize, or rather, I am 

afra id tha t 1 investigator could not keep 1 clerk busy. Will your 

investigator be a fieldinan ?

Mr. Ilgenfritz. A fieldman; yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. What will the clerk do?

Mr. I lgenfritz. The clerk will handle all of the registration work, 

the clerical work in connection with the registrations. The investigator will do other than fieldwork, too. He has to analyze the registration certificates when they come in, and the clerk will do the typing of the cards and keep the records.
228 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 19 59

Senator Pastore. Well, this is no allocation that you have made 

yourself, and taking this request for this particular activity, they 

have limited you to 1 investigator and 1 clerk.

Air. Ilgenfritz. Yes; that is what the money boils down to— 

$10,000.

Now, Senator, this act also provides that a fee shall be set, commensurate with the cost of the operation. Accordingly, based on the 

best estimate that we can make, we have set a $25 fee, which is supposed to bring back the $25,000 and make the program self-sustaining.

Senator Pastore. Let me get this straight. In other words, there 

is going to be a fee connected with this?

Mr. I lgenfritz. Yes, sir; the act provides tha t and the regulations 

provide it also.

Senator Pastore. I see. All right. Now, let's take the next item. 

enforcem ent of zoning regulations

Mr. I lgenfritz. The next program that I am asking for a restoration is the zoning regulations enforcement program, in the amount of 

$14,000, for the enforcement and administration of the new zoning 

regulations which went into effect on May 12.

Senator Pastore. How many people have you there now?

Mr. Ilgenfritz. We have transferred from our Department five 

people to try to operate this newly created division. Now, we have 

seen a need for zoning administration for many years. These regulations make it even more apparent, because they are even more 

strict and require a lot more duties than we ever performed in this 

connection before.

Senator Pastore. Is there not someone else in the Department that 

could do part of this work? That is the point that I am making here. 

Every time we add a new activity we seem to need new help. They 

never seem to be able to spread it out a bit.

PE RSO NNEL RE QU ES TE D

Mr. Ilgenfritz. We have taken care of that, Senator. We asked 

for a complement of 15 persons, which totals $96,000, to put this 

Division into effect. We are transferring from within our own 

Department, positions which total $35,000, and therefore we have 

asked of the Ilouse the difference, which is $61,000.

The House authorized $47,000 and T am asking for the restoration 

of the difference, $14,000.

Now, even with the complement of 15 persons we will still be 

utilizing many of our building inspectors, who do special fieldwork 

for us—we will be utilizing other clerical help throughout the Department, but this is a nucleus which will coordinate all the zoning 

activities within the Department. It will provide a central point 

where the public can come. It will provide consistent interpreta ­

tions of zoning regulations all in the public interest.

Senator Pastore. They did have to make an allowance for that activity. It was only a question of their not giving you everything you 

asked for.

Mr. I lgenfritz. That is right.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 229

FI NANCIA L SITU AT IO N

Senator P astore. But you do have $47,000?

Mr. Ilgenfritz. I have $47,000. I asked for $61,000.

Senator Pasture. You asked for $61,000 and they gave you $47,000. 

This is not a case where you are going to have to close the doors, but 

it is a question of whether or not you are going to be overloaded with 

work.

Mr. Ilgenfritz. We are certainly not going to close the doors, but 

we would like to do a better job.

Senator Pastore. Well, I suppose, since it is a new activity, you 

have to creep before you run; I realize that. However, I am a lot 

more sympathetic on your other appeal than I would be on this, not 

because I think this is inferior in any way, but it is a ne w activity, 

and maybe we ought to see it work, and maybe you will not need it 

and we can talk about it later on.

Mr. I lgenfritz. Of course, we always had zoning, and therefore 

we know what we are getting into on this a lot more than we do 

on the other program. We know what we are getting into on this.

Senator Pastore. I)o you expect you are going to have all of this 

new activity because of these new zoning regulations? Is that why 

you believe you are going to have all of this activity ?

WORKLOAD

Mr. I lgenfritz. I know we are going to have 60,000 permits to 

process next year, the same as we have done every year for the last 

10 years. I know we are going to have 14,000 plans that we are going 

to have to check. 1 just went through the construction reports of the 

eastern district yesterday, when it came over my desk and I see where 

Washington is still booming, way ahead of the other cities, and there 

is no sign of a construction slowdown.

Senator Pastore. And you have taken these people from your other 

activities and assigned them to this responsibility ?

Mr. Ilgenfritz. That is right.

Senator Pastore. Of course, this is quite an important activity.

Mr. I lgenfritz. 1 feel this w ay: Congress appropriated $150,000 to 

promulgate an up-to-date set of zoning regulations, and those regulations are no better than the enforcement that we are going to be able to 

give them.

Senator Pastore. That is right. I am not quarreling with that. I 

am merely trying to work these down to a minimum, i f I can, but you 

feel this is your minimum figure ?

Mr. Ilgenfritz. I think we scaled it down awfully low when we 

started. Now, Senator, we studied this thin g very carefully for many 

months. We sent questionnaires out to 25 other comparable cities to 

see what they were doing. We got 18 replies back; 16 of those 18 

have a comparable setup to what we are asking for, and the personnel 

in those varied from 15 to 30. We found none with less than 15, and 

we are trying this with the rockbottom minimum.

Senator Pastore. All right, sir Thank you. Is that all you have?

Mr. Karrick. Mr. Chairman, there is one point I might mention in 

reference to your reasoning, about the necessity of creeping before 

we run, with these zoning regulations.
230 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

W he n th e new zo ning re gu la tio ns ar e pr om ul ga te d fo r th e en tire 

city, I th in k pe rh ap s th e reve rse is true . You may ha ve to ru n firs t.

Se na to r P astore. You m ay hav e to ru n first and s it do wn an d take a 

re st afte rw ar d.

Mr. K arrick. W it h the nu m be r of requ ests yo u ge t fo r al te ra tion s 

on th e new re gu latio ns I th in k th e op po site will be true .

Sen at or P astore. You m ay b e ri gh t. I wo uld no t qu es tio n th at . 

A ll rig ht . Tha nk you.

P ublic B uil ding Constructio n

STATEMENTS OF GERARD M. SHEA, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF 

PUBLIC WELFARE; SCHUYLER LOWE, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT 

OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION; JAMES A. BLASER, DIRECTOR, 

DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS; JOHN M. RIECKS, 

ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, PUBLIC SCHOOLS; AND GEORGE 

E. S. REYNOLDS, BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Capital Outlay

Appropriation, 1958--------------------------------------------------------------$13,154, 000

Estim ate, 1959--------------------------------------------------------------------- 19,089,000

House allowance, 1959 (reductio n of $3,985,000)________________ 15, 704, 000

AM END M EN TS RE QU ES TE D

(1) Page 27, line 7, strike out “$15,704,000” and ins ert in lieu thereof “$18,- 

083,000”, or an increase of $2,379,000.

(2) Page 20, line 21, after the word “Reform atory”, ins ert the following: 

“warehouse for public schools and Departm ent of Buildings and Grounds (including shop facilities and record ce nter)”.

(3) Page 26, line 22, after the word “Village”, insert the following: “and 

motor vehicle safe ty inspection station (ad ditiona l am ou nt)”.

(4) Page 27, line 8, strik e out “$7,350,000” a nd insert in lieu thereof “$7,850,- 

000”, or an increase of $500,000.

(5) Page 27, line 9, strik e o ut “$830,250” and ins ert in lieu thereof “$881,020”, 

or an increase of $44,770.

(6) Page 27, line 9, after “1959”, ins ert the following: “and $81,000 shall be 

payable from the highway fund”.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 231

Applica tion of House reductions

S ta n d ard cl as sific ation E sti m ate ,

1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ou se

In cr ea se

( + ) o r d ecrea se (—), 

bill co m ­

pare d w it h

esti m ate

A m o u n t of 

re st ora ti on 

re quest ed 

in Sen at e

PUBLIC BUILDING CONSTRUCTION

O th er co n tr actu al se rv ic es ___ ____________

E q u ip m e n t________________ ___ _______

L ands an d str u ctu re s___________________

Tax es a n d as se ss m en ts ........... . . . ............... . .

$816,690

792,900 

11,1 78,4 32 

978

$1,178 ,250 

944,1 00

17,166,650 

1,383

$836,2.50 

703,910 

13,7 63,8 40 

1,383

-$ 34 2, 00 0

-2 40,1 90

-3 ,4 02,8 10

+$4 4,77 0 

+1 22 ,500

+2 ,2 11 ,7 30

T o ta l, p u b li c b uil din g co n str u cti o n ..

ALLOCATED TO NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, 

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR

Per so nal se rv ic es ____ ___________________

12,7 89,0 00 19,290,383 15,305,383 -3 ,9 85,0 00 +2, 37 9, 00 0

70,0 00

1,000

13,000

13,000

3,00 0 

265,000

50,000

1,000

15,000

15,000

4,000

313,617

50,000

1,000

15,000

15,000

4,00 0

313,617

P rin ti n g an d re p ro d u cti o n ___ _________

O th er co n tr actu al se rv ic es ________________

Sup plies a n d m ate ri als ................. ......... ...........

E q u ip m e n t____ _________ _____________

L an d s a n d str u ctu re s______ ______________

T o ta l, N ati o n al P ark Ser vi ce _______

T o ta l, esti m ate or a p p ro p ri ati o n ____

365,000 398,6 17 398,617

13,1 54,0 00 19,6 89,0 00 15, 704,000 -3 ,9 85,0 00 +2 ,3 79 ,0 00

Reca pitulation {by activities')

S ta n d ard clas sific at ion E sti m ate ,

1958

E sti m ate ,

1959

A m o u n t

re co m ­

m ended

b y H ous e

In cr ea se

(+ ) or d ecre as e (—), 

bill co m ­

par ed w it h 

es ti m at e

A m o u n t of 

re st ora ti on 

re quest ed 

in Sen at e

P u b li c sch oo ls_________ _________________ $10,642,722 

456,400 

365,9 78

40,000

141,500

$9, 748,0 00 

571,000 

400,000 

956,0 00 

724,000 

6,00 0

1,013,000 

2,2 47, 000 

1,05 0,00 0 

2, 778,000

81,0 00

115,000

$8,920 ,300 

517,000 

400,000 

860,000 

696,000

-$ 827 , 700 

-5 4,0 00 P u b li c L ib ra ry _____ . ________________

R ec re at io n D e p a rtm e n t__________________

M etr opoli ta n Police ______________________

F ir e D e p a rtm e n t________________________ -9 6,0 00

-2 8,0 00

—6,000 

-1 3.0 00 

-3 7,0 00 

-2 13, 300 

-2 ,5 14,0 00 

-8 1,0 00 

-1 15,0 00

Office of C iv il D ef en se ___________________

D ep art m en t of P u b li c H e a lt h ____ _______

D ep art m en t of C orr ec ti ons_______________

D ep art m en t of P u b li c W elfar e___________

D ep art m en t of B uildin gs an d G r o u n d s .. ..

D ep art m en t of V ehicles an d Tra ff ic _______

N ati o n al Zoolo gic al P a r k _________________

430,900 

511,000 

491,500 

74,000

1,000,000 

2,2 10, 000

836,700 

264,000

+$ 84 ,000

+2, 21 4, 00 0

+81 ,0 00

T o ta l est im ate o r ap p ro p ri ati o n ____ 13,154,000 19.6 89,0 00 15, 704,000 -3 ,9 85,0 00 +2 ,3 79 ,0 00

HO USE REPORT

“The budget proposed a public building program of $19,689,000 for which 

the committee recommends an app ropriation of $15,704,000. This is a net 

reduction of $3,985,000 in the estimate but an increase of $2,550,000 above 

the 1958 program. The public school system voluntarily reduced the ir estimates 

by $826,800, achieving this result by deferring the acquisition of 2 sites, and 

a revision of estimate of costs for acquisitio n of 2 other sites. However, the 

committee has included unbudgeted items in the school construction program 

in the amount of $1,118,100. This action is discussed under the public schools 

operating exjienses item. A table setting forth the committee's action as to 

each item contained in the estimate is shown on pages 13 and 14 of this report.

“Several of the items in this table were denied to conform with the actio n 

of the Joint Fiscal Subcommittee of the Distric t of Columbia Committees in 

their report on the recently revised public works program.

“Several items of increase were denied inasmuch as the costs of the projects 

had increased over the total amounts proposed when the committee originally 

approved the projects. The committee expects these projects and all future 

projects to be completed within the amounts allowed and within the cost
232 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

est im at es or ig in al ly ju st ifie d to th e co mmittee . The att enti on of th e he ad s 

of th e va riou s de pa rtm en ts of th e D is tr ic t is direc te d to th e co mm itt ee st ate ­

m en t on pa ge 9 re la ting to its ap pr ov al of a pro gr am pla nn in g st af f fo r th e 

D ep ar tm en t of Buildings an d Gr ou nd s.

“T he co mmittee has ap prov ed fu nd s fo r pl an s fo r th e re pl ac em en t of th e 

ho sp ital a t th e Lo rto n R ef or m ator y. How ev er, th e Com miss ione rs an d th e 

D irec to r of th e D ep ar tm en t of Cor rections sh ou ld ex pl or e th e fe as ib ility of a 

co ns olidated ho sp ital c en te r on t he Lor ton Res er va tion .

“T he co mmittee ha s ag ai n de nied th e re ques t fo r $63,GOO fo r a re ta in in g 

w al l an d fenc e a t th e Re ce iving Ho me fo r Chi ld re n an d fu nd s re qu es te d to 

fin ance th e cost of th e w ar eh ou se an d u ti li ty bu ild ing a t Blu e Pla in s ab ov e 

th e a m ou nt jus tif ied to t he com mitt ee l a st ye ar .

“T he m aj or ite m of de cr ea se in th is co ns truc tion pr og ra m is $2,214,000 

re qu es ted fo r a co ns ol idated w ar eh ou se fo r th e D epar tm en t of Bui ld in gs an d 

Groun ds, th e D ep ar tm en t of G en eral A dm in is trat io n, an d th e pu blic sch ool 

syste m. Th e ju st ific at io n s ta te s :

“ ‘I t ha s been de term in ed th a t du e to bo th bu ildi ng s be ing erec te d on th e 

same si te i t wo uld b e more econ om ica l to e re ct a sing le s tr u ctu re .’

“T he co mmittee ca nn ot rec on cil e th a t st ate m ent an d th e pro je ct co st of 

$2,214,000 w ith th e to ta l co st of $1,860,000 fo r th e 2 se para te bu ildi ng s pro ­

posed in th e 1958 bu dg et fo r wh ich pl an nin g fu nd s w er e ap prov ed . I t ha s, 

th er ef or e, de nied th e pr oj ec t until a mo re re ali st ic es ti m ate of c ost is pre se nt ed .”

JU ST IF IC A T IO N

Th e incr ea se s re qu es ted are a s fo ll ow s:

(a ) Pu blic w el fa re ------------------------------------------------------------------------ $8 4,00 0

(b ) Buildings an d gr ounds________________________________________ 2, 21 4, 00 0

(c) Ve hicles an d tra ffi c___________________________________________ 81, 000

T ota l------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2, 379, 000

(a ) Public welfare, $84,000

P la n s an d 

sp ec ificat io ns

C on st ru crio n

T ota l

1. Rec eivi ng H om e for C hil dre n, perm an en t im pro vem ents , 

re ta in in g w all an d fen ce _____________________ ____ ___ $3,6 00 $59. 800 $63, 400

2. D is tr ic t T ra in in g School a nd C ed ar K no ll Sc ho ol, C h il d re n ’ 

C en te r, perm an en t im pro vem ents , plac e all st af f ho us in g 

on in st it uti onal el ec tric m ete rs . _. ________________ _ 1,020 16, 980 18,000

3. D is tr ic t T ra in in g Sc hool, C h il d re n ’s C en te r, p erm an en t 

im pr ov em en ts , in st all ati on of 3- co m par tm en t si nks 

(h os pi ta l an d 2 c o tt ag es)______ ______________ ___________ 150 2,450 2,600

T o ta l. __________ ___________________________________ 4, 770 79,230 84,000

1. Receiving Home for Children, permanent improvements, retaining wall and

fence, $63,400.—Th e are a in th e re a r of th e Re ce iving Ho me slo pes stee ply do wnw ar d fro m a he ig ht o f from 5 to 10 fe et to t he ad jo in in g pr op er ty . Thi s pro pe rt y 

lin e is ap pr ox im at el y 690 fe et alon g th e re a r bo un da ry an d dra in s from th e 

Re ceiving Ho me pro per ty on to re si den ti al pro per ty to such an exte nt th a t th e 

D is tr ic t could become inv olved in leg al ac tio n re su ltin g fro m th e dr ai na ge . 

Bec au se of th e ra te of th is slope eros ion is ta kin g plac e an d th is is en da ng er in g 

th e la te ra l su pport fo r th e fo un da tion s of th e bu ild ing. To el im in at e th is 

co nd ition it is ne ce ss ar y to co ns truct a re ta in in g wall alo ng th is lin e a t a he ig ht 

of fro m 8 to 12 feet. At th e sa m e tim e it is ne ce sa ry to prov ide a fenc e ar ou nd 

th e en tire Rec eiv ing Hom e are a, ap pr ox im at el y 1,162 feet. Thi s wou ld pr ov ide 

spac e fo r ou td oo r ex er ci se an d re cr ea tion fo r th e ch ildr en in det en tion w ith out 

re la xin g cu stod y, as well as off er pro te ct io n to th e in st itution from ou tsid e 

ac tivi ties s inc e i t is lo ca te d in a c on ge sted a re a.

2. District Training School and Cedar Knoll School, Children’s Center, permanent improvements, place all staff housing on institution al electric meters,

$18,000.—Staff ho us in g of th e D is tr ic t T ra in in g Sch ool an d Ced ar Kno ll Sch ool 

a re m etered in di vi du al ly fo r el ec tric ity. Thi s ca us es th e co st fo r el ec tric se rv ice 

to be mu ch hi gh er be ca us e ea ch u n it is ch ar ge d a ba sic de man d load ch ar ge . By 

el im in at in g th e in di vi du al m et er s an d plac in g all units on th e centr al m ete r
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959 233

th e kil ow att ra te wo uld be mu ch less and wo uld re su lt in ap pro xim at el y a 50 

pe rc en t de cr ea se in th e ch ar ge fo r el ec tric se rv ice to th es e units. Thi s am ou nt 

o f $18,000 is brok en down as fo llow s: $510 fo r pl an s an d sp ec ifi ca tio ns , $8,490 

fo r co ns truc tion , mak ing a to ta l co st of $9,000 fo r ea ch of th es e in st itutions.

3. D is tr ic t Tra in in g Sc ho ol, Child re n’s Ce nte r, pe rm an en t im pr ov em en ts, in ­

sta lla tio n o f 3-co mpa rtmen t si nks (h os pital an d 2 co ttages ), $2,600.— Mea ls ar e 

se rv ed on th e sec ond an d th ir d floors of th e ho sp ital an d in Do gw ood an d Ho lly 

co ttag es a t D is tr ic t T ra in in g Sch ool. T h at ne ce ss itat es th e w as hin g of dishes, 

po ts, an d pa ns . At pre se nt th es e are as are eq uipp ed w ith 2- co m pa rtm en t sink s 

whi ch allow w as hi ng an d 1 rins e. A sing le-rinse is no t co mplying w ith H ea lth 

D ep ar tm en t re gu la tion s which re quir e th a t pr ov ision be mad e fo r th e us e of an 

ad ditio nal di si nf ec ting ri nse which will ki ll var io us ge rm s tr an sfe rr ed by conta ct . The re fo re , to mak e co mplian ce w ith th e H ea lth D ep ar tm en t re gu la tion 

po ssible th e in st all ati on of th re e- co m pa rtm en t sink s in thos e are as is requ es ted, 

(ft) D ep ar tm en t o f bu ild ings and g roun ds , $2,214,000

'Ware house , sho p fa ci lities , an d rec ord ce nter .— T hi s pr oj ec t is a com bin ed 

w ar eh ou se an d shop fa cil it y to ho us e sh op s an d stor ag e fo r th e D ep ar tm en t of 

B ui ld in gs an d Groun ds , ce ntr al reco rd s, an d pe rs on al pro per ty st ora ge fo r the 

D epar tm en t of G en er al A dm in is tr at io n, an d pu blic sch ool food an d supp ly 

st or ag e an d di st ri bution.

Fo llo wing are th e 4 dis ti nct D is tr ic t oper at io ns which sh ou ld be cond uc ted 

in ce nt ra lize d spa ce, th e firs t 2 o f which ca nnot be mingled w ith ea ch ot he r or 

w ith a ny o f th e o th e rs:

1. Buildi ng op er at ion an d m ai nten an ce .— Thi s ac tivity is re sp on sibl e fo r m ai nta in in g an d re pair in g al l D is tr ic t bu ildi ng st ru ctu re s an d mus t stoc k ap pr ox im at ely 30,00 0 lin e ite m s of su pp lies and p art s va lu ed cu rr entl y at $250,000 fo r 

p a rt tim e in it s ce ntr al sho ps. In ord er to co nd uc t it s work ex pe ditio us ly it 

th a t pu rpos e. It em plo ys 250 pe rs on s of wh om 90 are em plo yed eit her fu ll or 

p a rt tim e in its centr al sho ps. In ord er to co nd uc t its work ex pe di tiou sly it 

op er at es carp entr y an d millwo rk, w elding an d mac hine , sh ee t m et al , gla zin g, 

an d hard w are re p air an d fa bri cati ng shop s, an d m ai nta in s tool, pu mbing , electr ic al, ha rd w ar e, pa in t, lumbe r, an d oth er bu ildi ng supp ly st or ag e are as . Pre sen tly , it s ac ti vit ie s are ho us ed in se ve ra l co nv erted, an tiquate d st ru ctu re s at 

1617 U S tr eet NW., which are no t in co mpl ianc e w ith cod e re qu irem en ts fo r 

fire sa fe ty , are po orly ad ap te d to th e ope ra tion s, an d who lly in ad eq uate with 

re sp ec t to ve hicle st or ag e an d m ate ri al sh ip pi ng fa ci lities . Upo n co mp let ion 

of th e new fa ci li ty th is si te wo uld be avai la ble fo r sa le a t an es tim at ed am ou nt 

o f $140,000. W ith th e ex ce ption of st ora ge fo r 65 var io us ty pe s of vehicles, 

th e ap pr ox im at e sq ua re fo ot sp ac e in th e pre se nt sh op s an d st or ag e st ru ctu re s 

has been us ed in co ns id er in g sp ec ifi ca tio ns of th e prop os ed st ru ctu re an d wo uld 

be ad eq uat e fo r an y spac e occupie d if su ch sp ac e co uld be econ om ica lly desig ned 

an d ar ra ng ed .

Dep en ding on th e chara cte r of th e wor kloa d, shop , stor eroo m , an d office per ­

sonn el ma y va ry from da y to da y be tw ee n th e ex tr em e lim its of 41 an d 70 per ­

sons wh o mu st ha ve he at ed an d well-lig hted sh op s and offices in wh ich to wo rk. 

A minim um of 20 ad ditio nal em ploy ees re port fo r wor k at th e shops da ily fo r 

as sign m en t a t ou tlyi ng wor k loca tio ns . T he re m ai ni ng em plo yees re port di re ctly 

to va riou s jo b lo ca tions; ho we ver, som e of th es e em ploy ee s m us t vis it th e centr a l shop s da ily fo r pick up of m ate ri als to be us ed on sm all isolated jo bs no t 

econ om ica lly served by th e re gula r tr uck del iv er y su pp ly ing m aj or jobs in 

prog ress. Thi s ac tivity op er at es 44 tr uck s, 8 pa ss en ge r vehic les , an d 13 pieces 

of wh ee led spec ial co ns truc tion eq uipm en t, al l of which m us t be prov ided secu re 

st or ag e an d pa rk in g fa ci lities . In ad di tion , fr eq uen t load in g re qu ires ad eq ua te 

m an eu ve ring a nd load in g sp ac e in ord er to ex pe di te d eliv er ie s an d to pr ev en t los s 

of job time .

Also, be ca us e m an y of t he m ec ha nics w or ki ng p a rt tim e in th e shops or re port ­

in g to th e shop s fo r as si gn m en t use th eir per so nal ve hicles wh en trav el in g to 

w or k loca tio ns , pa rk in g, eit her on or off st re et, m us t be av ailable. The se dem an ds va ry du ring a w or kd ay from 30 up to a max im um of 50 in th e ea rly 

mor ning p eri od .

2. Pu blic sch ool food an d su pp ly stor ag e an d di stri bu tion.— The pu blic sch oo ls 

m us t pr ov id e centr al stor ag e an d dis tr ib uti on of ed uc at io na l su pp lie s fo r ap ­

pr oxi m at el y 175 in st it uti ons in th e school sy stem a nd c entr al rece iving, assembly, 

pa ck ag ing, stor ag e, an d dis tr ib uti on of cert ain foo d stoc ks fo r th e op er at io n of 

th e lunc h pr og ra m s. Th e prob lem is on ly p art ly one of bu lk st ora ge sin ce t here 

is co nst an t ac tivity in th e assembly, pa ck ag in g, an d dis pa tc hi ng of th e m ultitude 

of ite m s ne ce ss ar y to te ac hin g re qu ir em en ts as opposed to st ri ctl y a st at ic -
234 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

storage operation. In addition, tlie food service activity receives considerable 

qua ntities of its supply by rail and conducts a continuous program of food 

menu devising and testing.

In order to accomplish its purpose, the schools operate a fleet of 47 vehicles 

of various types including 11 truck s, 14 driver-trainin g car s and 22 passengercarrying vehicles all of which must be accommodated in enclosed-storage areas. 

Adequate loading and maneuvering space must be provided for the 11 trucks 

in order to permit efficient handling of delivery assignments. In addition maneuvering space must be provided for receiving shipments frequently arriving in 

larg e van-type trucks.

School employees presently conduct these operations from six scattered locatio ns in old, poorly suited buildings designed originally for classroom use and 

utilized now only for lack of more efficient accommodations. Permissible floor 

loads, poor access, poor space arrangemen t and dece ntralization all impose 

handica ps on the efficient operation of the activity. In addition, the major 

storage cente r now used by the public-school system in the old Jefferson JuniorHigh School building must be razed in connection with the Southwest redevelopment plan.

This central operation would bring toge ther 70 employees eith er working in 

th e stru cture itself or operating vehicles from there. Forty-two of such 

employees, part of whom use the ir own cars in performance of official duties, 

would require parking eith er on or off street.

3. Central, records storage.—The pressing require ment of space for operatin g 

•departments, in the downtown areas particu larl y, dictated the establish ment of 

•a central records facility several years ago. Records which, by law or operational requirements, must be retained over a period of years but which are 

referred to only occasionally are transf erred to low-cost space where the maximum vertical utilization of space may be obtained and thu s there is vacated 

-premium office space for operational requirements. However, because such 

necords are not wholly dead, being subject to varying incidences of reference, 

a reasonable degree of tempera ture, ventilation, and dus t control must be 

maintained. Also they must be reasonably accessible both for reference and 

for ultimate disposal in accordance with approved programs. A minimum of 

two employees is engaged in classifying and pack aging records for storage, or 

removing them from storage for reference and for disposal. Also, audit employees and others engaged in official research work utilize material so stored. 

Heated, well-lighted area s a re required for this work.

4. Personal property storage and distribution.—The Distric t participates in 

the distribution of Fed eral excess property and require s warehousing for sto rage, display, and issuance of that prop erty and of District prop erty for redistribution among its operating agencies. This is a busy activity involving in 

the main, Federal prop erty valued at approxima tely $625,000 las t fiscal year 

in an upward trend from previous years. Readily accessible loading facilities 

are essential due to the wide participation by d epartments in this benefit.

The central records storage and personal property storage and distribu tion 

is presently located in a stru cture in southwest Wash ington which has been 

designated for demolition to comply with the provisions of the Southwest redevelopment program.

Funds for the preparatio n of plans and specifications were justified in the 

fiscal year 1958 budget as two sep arate projects (public schools project No. 

18-10 and buildings and grounds project No. 12-24). The justification sheets 

for the fiscal year 1958 budget indicated the following estim ated construction 

am ounts :

Project No. 18-10: School warehouse__________________________ $1,026,000

Project No. 12-24: Buildings and grounds fac ility_______________ 626, 000

Total________________________________________________ 1, 652, 000

The construction funding request of $2,059,000 contained herein is $407,000 

greater than the sum of the estimated amounts indicated in fiscal yea r 1958. 

The construction estimates submitted in the fiscal yea r 1958 budget were actually prepared in July 1956. Since that time, the local construction cost index 

has increased 7.5 percent accounting for $124,000. The remaining $283,000 

increase was necessitated by providing 20,000 squa re feet for adm inistrative 

records and personal property storage, which was not included in the original 

estim ate, thereby causing a tota l requirement of 140.000 square feet in lieu of
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 235

129,999 sq ua re fe et origi na lly an tici pat ed . Alth ou gh th e fiscal yea r 1958 ju stifica tion sh ee t fo r pr oje ct 12-24 in di ca te s th a t reco rd st ora ge wo uld be pro ­

vide d, a review of th e actu al es ti m ate in di ca te d th a t it was not includ ed . T he 

di sc re pa nc y was reve al ed a t th e tim e th e pu blic-w orks pro gr am w as deve lope d 

in M arch 1957. At th a t tim e it w as re al iz ed th a t th e co st wou ld be g re a te r 

th an an ticip ate d no t on ly be ca us e of th e ad ditio nal ar ea , but al so be ca us e po or 

fo un da tion co nd iti on s re quir ed pilin g. The re fo re , att em pts w er e m ad e to 

re du ce th e co st to th e max im um ex te nt. T hi s w as ac co mplishe d by co m bi ni ng 

al l fa cil it ie s in to one st ru ctu re an d re si ting th e bu ildi ng so th a t pi ling wou ld 

no t be re qu ired . In sp ite of th es e eco nomies, it w as ne ce ss ar y to in cr ea se th e 

es tim at ed co ns truc tion co st to $2,959,999. ba se d on pl an s v ir tu all y comp let e.

Th e ad ditio nal $40,999 re qu es ted fo r pla ns an d sp ec ifi ca tio ns is th a t am oun t 

ne ce ss ar y to pr ov id e th e full auth ori ze d 6 pe rc en t of co nst ru ct io n co st to cover 

al l ph as es of desig n, en gi ne er ing, co ns truc tion co ntr act adm in is tr ati on an d 

co ns truc tion insp ec tio n.

The $115,099 re qu es te d fo r fu rn it u re an d eq uipm en t is re quir ed by pu bl ic 

sch ools fo r th e f ollowing it e m s:

Binni ng an d sh el vi ng ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >$76, 009

W ar eh ou se ha nd ling eq ui pm en t---------------------------------------------------------- 28, 009

Fo od se rv ices office an d ha nd ling eq ui pm en t---------------------------------------- 11, 009

T ota l__________________________________________________________ 115,9 00

M ai nt en an ce fu nds in di ca te d unde r “Oi>e rating ex pe ns es ” are fo r th e publi c 

sch oo ls' po rtio n of th e bu ild ing. M ai nt en an ce of bu ilding s an d gr ou nd s po rtio n 

will be pa id ou t of wor ki ng fu nd al lo tm en ts an d in cr ea se d ap pro pri ati ons wi ll 

no t be re qu ired . Th e ge ne ra l adm in is tr ati on po rtio n wi ll be oper at ed an d m ai nta in ed from th e pre se nt ap pro pri ati ons fo r th e D ep ar tm en t of Bui ld in gs an d 

Groun ds.

Con side ra tion has be en g iven to re n ta l of pri vat el y ow ned w ar eh ou si ng w ithin 

th e D is tr ic t in lie u of co ns truc tion of a D istrict-ow ne d fa ci lity . How ev er, th e 

ne ed s of th e D is tr ic t a re su ch th a t m o st nor m al w ar eh ou se st ru ctu re s are econo micall y or op er at io na lly in ad eq ua te . T her e are c ert ain b as ic re qui re m en ts f o r 

th e op er at io ns .o utlin ed abo ve. The se re qui re m en ts are as fo llow s:

1. C en tral l oc ation.

2. H ea te d spa ce.

3. Sufficie nt ill um in at io n.

4. A de qu ate rece iv ing a nd sh ip pi ng fa ci lities .

5. Of f-s tre et se cu re s to ra ge fo r o fficial ve hic les .

(5. O n- stre et o r off-stre et p ar kin g f or em plo yees.

7. Acc essib ility.

8. A dap ta bility f or lu m be r a nd p ip e stor ag e.

9. Po w er an d u ti li ty re qui re m en ts fo r m ac hi ne , ca rp en tr y, an d weld ing sh op s,

19. Gasoline st or ag e an d di sp en sing f ac ilitie s.

11. Ful ly fi repr oo f sto ra ge fo r in flam mab le m at er ia ls .

12. In te rn al arr angem ent fo r ex pe di tiou s han dling of pro per ty and c on du ct o f 

shop op erations .

13. R ef ri ger at io n s pa ce for fo od sto ra ge .

In sp ec tio n of st ru ctu re s kn ow n to be avai la ble fo r re n t re ve al s th a t th ey a re 

se riou sly la ck in g in ab ov e re qu irem en ts. In ord er to co nv er t mos t st andard 

w ar eh ou sing , in cl ud in g th e st ru ctu re s in sp ec ted, to p ro vi de the uti li ty a nd sp ec ia l 

fa cil it ie s re qu ired , it ha s been co ns er va tive ly es tim at ed th a t appro xim at el y 

$349,CHX) wo uld be re qu ired . T hi s co st wo uld co ve r such ite ms as ad ditio nal 

plu mbin g, he at in g, ve nt ilat io n, el ec tric se rv ice, par tition in g, an d re fr ig era ti on 

ne ce ss ar y fo r th es e op er at io ns . The ex pen dit ure wo uld be on pr op er ty n o t 

ow ned by th e D is tr ic t an d wo uld be in addit io n to th e an nu al re nta l co st a s w el l 

as ope ra tion an d m ai nt en an ce . Th e ac co m mod atio ns th us pr ov id ed wo uld have 

to be su pp lem en ted by an es tim at ed 8.999 sq uare yard s of fen ce d en cl os ur e 

fo r th e st or ag e of 115 var io us ve hic les . No ne of th e fa ci lities insp ec ted in cl ud e 

are as fo r th is st ora ge wh ich , by th e n atu re of th e op er at ions , ca nnot be acco mmod ated a t lo ca tion s a p a rt from th e s ho p an d dis trib ution cente r a re as .

U nd er curr ent re gu la tion s it wo uld be nec es sa ry to rene w a le as e fo r re nte d 

sp ac e on an annual ba sis, al th oug h au th o ri ty fo r a 5- ye ar bas is w ou ld be re ­

qu es ted, if such re n ta l w er e co ntem plated . Eve n on a 5-ye ar ba si s th e D is tr ic t 

wo uld be fa ce d w ith a re cu rr in g pr ob lem w ith re sp ec t to pote nti al in cr ea se s in 

re n ta l ra te s an d th e po ss ib ility of hav in g to vacate an d ac co mplish co stly con-
236 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

version of other space. Even with a con stan t rental rate (exclusive of any 

initial capital outlay for necessary building modifications) and assuming depreciation over a 50-year jiieriod, a n economic ana lysis reveals a saving to the District of approximately $2,300,000 by construction of a District-owned facility in 

lieu of rental.

In order to determine the practice followed by o ther cities of comparable size 

to Washington, D. C., a survey of 12 such cities was conducted. Response from 

six cities indicates a unanim ous procedure for conducting all city warehousing, 

shops, record storage, garage, and food handling operations in city-owned facilities. The past exi>erieuee of some cities indicate s that renting space for such 

operation s is extremely uneconomical and u nsatisfacto ry.

The amount requested for fiscal year 1959 is as fo llow s:

Plan s and specificatio ns_________________________________________ $40, 000

Construction________________________________________________ 2, 059, 000

Fu rni tur e and equipm ent_____________________________________ 115, 000

Total_________________________________________________ 2,214,000

(c) Department of Vehicles and Traffic, $81,000

Inspection station replacement: An amount of $600,000 was appropriated to 

capital outlay in fiscal year 1957 to cover purchase of land, plans, and specifications, and, construction and equipment of a new motor vehicle test station to 

replace the existing station a t 10th and F Streets SW. which must be to rn down 

in order to make room f or the proposed new Southwest Freeway. Since appropriation of this amount, the Departm ent of Buildings and Grounds, District of 

Columbia—the agency which will actually be responsible for adm inistration of 

this appropriation and the physical planning, construction, etc. of this new 

facility for subsequent use by this Depa rtment—has made progress in this pro ject to the point where curr ent evaluation of plans and specifications for the new 

station and of foundation costs on the new site, indicate s a sub stan tial current 

increase over the original estim ate of the cost of construction and of equipment 

to be installed. The Director of Buildings and Grounds has requested that this 

Department take steps to secure these additional funds needed to complete this 

project. The inspection station is located adjacent to a Fire Department repair 

shop in the southwest area. Upon initiat ion of design, test borings revealed that 

the site for the Fire Departm ent repair shop was complicated by a large sewer 

and other o bstru ction s thereby requiring an expensive, heavy foundation. In the 

intere st of economy, th e locations of the Fire Departm ent repair shop and inspection station were interchanged, thereby placing the much lig hter inspection station 

structure on the poorest site. In spite of the lighter load of the inspection station, 

a pile foundatio n is still required to provide sufficient building support, although 

the foundatio n is less costly than would have been required for the Fire Department rep air shop. Due to this site change, an estim ated $81,000 is required to 

place this project under contract. This amount also includes $7,525 additional 

to cover an increased cost of testin g equipment and foundations for installation. 

Receivin g H ome for Ci i i i.dren

Mr. Herman. The next item is “Public building construction.”

This is divided into three items.

The first one is the Receiving Home for Children, permanent improvements, and Mr. Gerard Shea will do the justifying on that.

Mr. Shea. We are asking for a restoration of $84,000. We have a 

request here on this item of $03,400.

Senator Pasture. Which one is this?

Mr. Shea. This is for the Receiving Home. $63,400 is the figure 

for the retaining wall and fence for the Receiving Home for Children.

Actually, we have requested this wall for several years and. a ppa rently, some of the misunderstanding has been related to the idea that 

this is just another effort to get additional recreational outdoor play 

space. Actually, it is much more of an engineering problem than it is 

an effort to increase the recreational space.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 237

Apparently there is considerable erosion behind the building, which 

rtie building and grounds stall' has reported to me, and this is endangering the lateral support for the foundation of the building. Basically, it is a method of controlling the area behind this detention 

home with a wall and on top of that a fence.

Senator Pastore. What have you there now ?

Mr. Shea. Nothing, except a chain link fence on the edge of the 

property line between the District property and private property 

which is behind the building, immediately behind the building. There 

is a slope directly behind the building leading into private property.

RE CR EA TION AL AR EA S

Senator P astore. What is the purpose of the wall ?

Mr. Shea. The purpose is to prevent erosion of the property from 

the District property into the private property, together with an opportunity to enclose this with a fence so as to provide outside recreational area for the children in the Receiving Home.

Senator Pasture. They cannot have any outside recreation now ?

Mr. Shea. We do have outside recreation in some enclosed areas. 

There are four enclosed areas at the present time. This would lie an 

opportunity to extend that down to the property line.

Senator Pastore. Is the wall necessary ?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir. On the basis of engineering, it is much more 

necessary, actually, than it is on the basis of this outdoor recreational 

area.

EF FE CTS OF SO IL ER OS ION ON BUIL DIN G FO UNDA TI ONS

Senator Pasture. Tell me why it is necessary first, and then I will 

ask you about the other matters.

Mr. Shea. First, it is necessary to prevent erosion of the property, 

which apparently is having effect on the building foundation.

Senator P asture. You mean erosion of the soil ?

Mr. Shea. Soil erosion; yes, sir.

Senator P astore. What kind of effect is it hav ing '?

Mr. Shea. Apparently, it has affected, as 1 understand it from the 

buildings and grounds staff, it has the effect of endangering the support for the foundation of the building.

Perhaps Mr. Blaser, the engineer, can tell you about that.

Senator P astore. All right, Mr. Blaser, proceed.

Mr. Blaser. When the fill was placed at the site of this building it 

was sloped off away from the building. Subsequent to the completion 

of tha t fill, it has begun to wash with rain and other precipitation. 

That wash is gradually destroying the fill and in order to retain the 

fill, in its intended location, we must erect this wall. The wall itself 

varies in height. At the present time, it offers only a potential danger 

to the foundation of the building itself, but that will be different in 

the future.

Senator Pastore. Well, there is no wall there now ?

Mr. Blaser. There is no wall there at the present time. If we continue to postpone action on this wall, the potential condition in the 

foundation and walls of the building could get extremely dangerous. 

Senator Pastore. Are you an engineer ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir; I am.
238 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Senator Pastore. Is that your considered judgment ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. How do you feel about it, Mr. Karrick ?

Mr. Karrick. 1 am very strongly in favor of this wall. I have been 

over to these premises a number of times. I feel it is needed, not only 

for the purpose of retaining the ground till, but I think it is a proper 

adjunct to the Receiving Home in order that this outside area may 

be used for recreational purposes. They are using concrete areas now.

Senator P astore. Do you have anything else?

Mr. Karrick. That is about it. I think this is an appropriate 

thing, that is, to put the wall there for the public benefit.

Senator Pastore. Break it down. How much will go to the wall 

and how much to the fence ?

Not that 1 am sure that one is more important than the other, but 

so tha t the record will be clear? Are these 3 fences, or just 1?

Mr. Karrick. $63,000 is involved in this Receiving Home item; 

$3,600 are for plans and specifications and $59,800 for construction, 

giving you a grand total of $63,400.

Mr. Siiea. That is correct.

Senator Pastore. Yes, I see that you are asking for $63,400.

Mr. Karrick. That is right.

Senator P astore. Now, break that down for me.

Mr. Siiea. $3,600 are for the plans and specifications and $59,800 

for construction.

Senator Pastore. That is the wall and fence?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Now, how much is for the wall and how much 

for the fence ? Do you know that ?

Mr. Blaser. I will provide you with tha t figure in just a minute.

Mr. Chairman, I would say the wall itself cost between $35,000 and 

$40,000. The fence around $15,000. In some areas it is 14 feet high, 

so it is an appreciable amount. The remaining amount would be for 

grading and dressing im the site afterward.

Senator Pastore. How much more recreational area would that 

give to you ?

Mr. Blaser. I do not have tha t figure here, sir.

Senator Pastore. Approximately—just give me a nice picture.

Mr. Siiea. I do not know.

Mr. Karrick. Would you say half an acre ?

Senator P astore. How much do you have now ?

Mr. Siiea. I think the areas we have now do not actually amount to 

more than a half acre. They are completely enclosed.

Senator Pastore. This is practically for three purposes. It would 

not only give you more protection against running away but it would 

retain the soil, and it would give you more recreation.

What reason did the House give for this cut ?

Mr. Siiea. The only reason tha t was stated was tha t they had 

knocked it out before and they wanted to know if there was any 

reason why they should change their minds this year. Tha t is all 

tha t was said.

CONVERSION OF ELECTRIC METE RS

Senator Pastore. All right. I will bring tha t up. What is your 

next item ?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 239

Mr. Shea. The next item is an item of $18,000 for the conversion 

of electric meters, which are presently on each individual house of 

each individual member of the statf, to convert them and tie them 

into an institutional electrical system. Actually, when this item was 

submitted, the cost figure was $18,000. As of yesterday, 1 talked to 

Mr. Blaser’s staff and he had conversations as of yesterday morning 

with the electrical company in Maryland. They said they now can 

install the units on 2 different sites, actually, about 4 miles apart, for 

somewhere between $5,000 and $6,000 a unit, rather than $9,000 a 

unit, so there would be savings of somewhere between $6,000 and 

$7,000 in the total installation for the 2 different sections of the 

institution. So this figure would be something like $12,000 rathe r 

than $18,000 for this conversion.

This actually consists of several things. It is an installation of 

manholes underground.

RE SU LT S IN PO WER RA TE RE DU CT ION

Senator P astore. What is it for?

Mr. Shea. At the present time there are 10 staff housing units at 

the center. They are actually located at 2 different sites, some 4 miles 

apart. Presently each one of the units, whether individual houses 

or row houses, are on an electrical unit of its own. Now this is to tie 

in all of these houses to the institutional electrical system, and thereby 

conserving approximately 50 percent of the money th at is being spent 

for the monthly electrical bills.

Senator P asture. You mean that you get a different rate?

Mr. S hea. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Is that what this amounts to, that if you bring 

them all together you get a different rate ?

Mr. Elaser. Yes, sir. I understand the rate is approximately 30 

percent for the setup tha t we are proposing here—30 percent less.

Senator Pasture. You mean that this item is to bring together 

these staff houses?

Mr. Shea. Staff houses; yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. So if you get them all on the same circuit the 

rate is a lot cheaper?

Mr. Blasf.r. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. And what do you save in dollars ? What do you 

save in dollars on your electrical bill ?

Mr. Blasf.r. Perhaps Mr. Puntch can answer that.

Mr. P untch. It would bring it down to a savings of about $1,800 

or $2,000 a year.

Senator P astore. I s tha t the only reason for doing it ?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Mr. Puntch. You see, these people pay a stipend for the houses 

and we pay the bills out of the appropriated funds. We also have 

the institutions on the meter and what we are talking about is not 

putting all of these together but rather putting them on the institution's meter, which gives us the commercial rate and we will save a 

lot of money and a lot of bookkeeping. It is just an incidental.

Senator Pastore. Now why don’t you get me a little documentary 

evidence on this cost, since you have scaled it down to about $12,000? 

Get me something in writing so we can put down an accurate figure.
240 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Senator P asture. Yon say it is about so much—you may be a little 

under or a little over. Get the exact figure and put it in the record.

Mr. S hea. Yes, sir.

(The information referred to follows:)

J une 19, 1958.

T o: Director of Public Welfare.

Re project No. C07-23n-59, institu tion meter, Children’s Center; project No. 

C44-23h-59, institutio n meter, Cedar Knoll.

Su bjec t: Reduction of estim ated construction cost.

Contact by this Department with the Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. on Jun e

13, 1958, revealed that the estim ated cost for the above referenced project may 

be reduced. This reduction concerns removal of existing overhead powerlines, 

the value of which decreases annually due to amortization. The estimate prepared in June 1957 for the fiscal year 1959 budget indicated that project costs 

would be $8,500 each for construction and $510 for construction service. The 

estim ated amounts may now be reduced to the following :

Project No. 

CO7-23n-59

Pr oject No. 

C44-23h-59

Co nstru cti on _ _______ ___ ______ - - _______ _____ $6,000

360

$6,000

Con str uc tio n service __________ ____________________ _____________ 360

To tal ________________________________________________ _______ 6,360 6,360

In addition to above, this office was advised by the Baltimore Gas & Elec tric 

Co. that the industrial rat e for electricity will be approximately 30 percent less 

than cu rrent domestic rates.

J. A. Blas er,

Director o f Buildings and Grounds.

Child re n’s Cente r

Mr. Shea. Now, the third item is a small item, involving the installation of 3-compartment sinks r ather than 2-compartment sinks 

in the second and third floors at Children’s Center Hospital and at the 

2 cottages, Dogwood and Hollt Cottages, which I referred to before, 

where we have idiot patients.

This is a requirement of the Health Department, tha t there be 

3-compartment sinks rathe r than the present 2-compartment sinks 

that we have.

Senator P astore. What are they used for ?

Mr. Shea. For the sterilization of feeding equipment, such as 

dishes trays, and so on, which are used by the patients there.

Senator Pastore. Did the House give any reason for this cut here ?

Mr. Shea. There is no reference to that at all.

Senator Pastore. It was cut out ?

Mr. Shea. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. All right, thank you.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 241

Department of Buildings and Grounds

STATEMENT OF JAMES A. BLASER, DIRECTOR

WA RE HO US E----DECREASE IN ES TIMA TE

Mr. Herman. The next item is the Department of Buildings and 

Grounds.

This is a request for a warehouse costing $2,214,000.

Mr. James A. Blaser, Director of the Department of Buildings and 

Grounds, will justify the item.

Mr. Blaser. Mr. Chairman, initially, I would like to decrease this 

restoration from $2,214,000 to $1,886,000. That total figure is composed of a construction cost of $1,750,000, $21,000 for construction 

services, and $115,000 for shelving, binning, and equipment in the 

school portion of this structure.

Senator P astore. Why are you doing this ?

Mr. Blaser. For some several weeks, Mr. Chairman, we have known 

tha t it would take less than the $2,214,000 to construct this facility. 

We had no estimate of exactly how much we could decrease it. We 

did know it would be less, but we were unwilling, and had no figures 

on which to decrease that total price in any way.

As a result of the House hearings, in which the school people were 

charged with a study of the hot-lunch program, the results of that 

study due to be turned over to Congress at the opening of the next 

session, we realized that it was extremely important that we come 

up with a dollar amount that was as firm as we could possible make 

it at this time.

The price tag tha t 1 have quoted you was completed yesterday 

afternoon.

We have, as a result of the authorization of Congress, in fiscal year 

1958, the plans and specifications for this job virtually complete. 

They will be ready for advertisement the first week in July if this 

construction fund is authorized for fiscal year 1959.

Senator Pastore. What is this building going to be used for?

Air. Blaser. It is a combination shop, building, warehouse, and 

record storage place, Mr. Chairman.

LOCATION CH AN GE

Senator Pastore. Where is it to be located ?

Air. Blaser. The vicinity of New York and Chapel Road on prop ­

erty tha t the District of Columbia already owns. The facility price 

of $2,059,000 was prepared in the s pring of 1957, Air. Chairman. At 

that time we were confronted with a very unpleasant foundation 

condition and other difficulties on the site.

Those things are the things that control the $2,059,000. During 

the course of design in the past year we have surmounted those, we 

have shifted the site of the building, the location of the building within 

the site to resolve the foundation problem.

The prediction for bidding in the next 2 months is that it will 

remain at about the same level, a very competitive level during which 

we are getting excellent prices on those jobs that we are advertising.

So that if we are able to take bids on this job during the month of
242 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRLATIONS, 195 9

Au gu st as we are geared for at the present tim e we should get excellent prices on this pa rticul ar job.

Se na tor P astore. I s th e school warehouse as well ?

DUAL PURPOSE WAREHOUSE

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir. Th is facility abou t which we are ta lk in g 

includes the school warehouse and food ha nd lin g servic e, the record 

ret ire men t and pers onal prop erty storage.

Se na tor P astore. W ha t do you mean by the “ food handlin g*' ?

Mr. Blaser. I think Mr. Riecks of the school system can answer 

that.

Se na tor P astore. All rig ht.

Mr. Riecks. Mr. Chairma n, this is the school warehouse and it 

include s act ual ly our own storag e warehouse fo r all of the school 

supply items as well as the food service de partm ent of our schools 

whi ch runs o ur secondary school caf eterias .

At the presen t time we are pa rti cipa nts in the Fo od Serv ice Act 

un de r the Fed eral Gov ernmen t and we have a food service de pa rtme nt th at handles the surpl us foods and the distr ibution of th e foods 

to a ll o f the secondary school cafeterias as well.

Senator Pastore. Wh ere do you keep it now ?

Mr. Riecks. At the pre sen t time , it is housed in an old 8-room 

elementary school building . Six of the room s are used fo r classes. 

It is in a very crow ded section of the city . The othe r two rooms are 

used by the food service d epartme nt.

Then we have restore d an old playro om in the basem ent for storage. 

I t is the only storage are a th at we have. I f we need to re nt o r if we 

need to have refrigeration which we occasio nally do because of the 

type of surplus foods th at we get we ha ve to ren t refrigeration.

Th is warehouse will accommodate the food service d epart me nt which 

we mu st find qu arters fo r and sup ply the refrigeration th at we will 

need to hand le all of our su rplus foods.

Senat or P astore. Th an k you, sir.

HO USE REPORT

Th is is w ha t the House s aid :

The majo r item of decrease in this construction program is $2,214,000 

requested for a consolidated warehouse for the Department of Buildings and 

Grounds, the Department of General Administration, and the public school 

system. The justification st at es :

It. has been determined that due to both buildings be erected mi the same site 

it would be more economical to erect a single structure.

The committee cannot reconcile tha t the state ment and the project costs of 

$2,214,000 with the total cost of $1,800,000 for the 2 sepa rate buildings proposed 

in the 1958 budget fo r which planning fund s were approved.

It has, therefore, denied the project until a more realistic estimate of cost 

is presented.

Is that wh at you are answerin g tod ay ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

REVISED ESTIM ATE

Senator P astore. Did you say th at all happened y esterd ay ?

Mr. Blaser. No, s ir, this did no t happen all yes terday . I said our 

estimat e was fina lly complete d yesterday.

Se nator P astore. Wh o completed it?
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 243

Mr. Blaser. The Department of Buildings and Grounds.

Senator Pastore. Why had they not completed it by the time they 

-went to the House i

Mr. Blaser. Mr. Chairman, this estimate that 1 have given to you 

now is an estimate that we will use for the Government estimate of 

construction costs at the time we may solicit bids.

Senator Pastore. Which one is this?

Mr. Blaser. The construction portion is tha t $1,750,000, Senator.

Senator P astore. Yes.

Tha t figure of $2,214,000 shows that the estimate was originally 

too high.

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

REASONS FOR C HANG ING TO ONE BUILDING

Senator Pasture. Are you still going to build 1 building or 2 

buildings ?

Mr. Blaser. One building, sir.

Senator P asture. It must have been contemplated at one time th at 

there would be two.

Mr. Blaser. That is correct.

Senator Pastore. Yes.

Mr. Blaser. The original plan in 1956 when this project was first 

pu t into the budget was that the school system would have their 

-own structure, that the Department of General Administration and 

Department of Buildings and Grounds would have another structure.

The site on which these 2 buildings were to be constructed could be 

utilized more efficiently if 1 building was erected.

Senator Pasture. I realize that. But where did they ever get the 

idea of two buildings? Go ahead, Mr. Karrick.

Mr. K arrick. I think th at idea was perhaps before Mr. Blaser was 

with the District government. I do not know that he is in a position 

to answer it.

Mr. Riecks. Mr. Chairman, I believe I can answer that because 

I was in the original planning.

At the time that this site was selected there was a railroad spur 

located on it, coming off from one of the railroads and we had a 

problem of storing trucks, the rolling stock of the public schools as 

well as the Department of Buildings and Grounds.

There are about 135 trucks and buses and so forth. It was an 

arrangement on the site in an effort to maintain the spur of the 

railroad and still provide adequate parking areas.

In addition to that, at tha t particu lar time, the Highway Department was supposed to have used a portion of the area for storage 

of large pipes.

So by the time they began arrangements for the building in one 

phase or another it became two structures in order to keep the spur 

in and provide the parking. It is a peculiar-shaped lot and does not 

lend itself well to this type of an activity.

BEST INT ERESTS SERVED BY COMBINED STRUCTURE

Mr. L owe. But in any event, Mr. Chairman, as the discussion and 

planning on this project moved forward, it became quite apparent that
244 DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIAT ION’S, 1959

the best intere sts of the entire Distri ct of Colum bia gov ernment won hl 

be served by a combined str uc ture which would give you a maximum 

flex ibility to accommodate fu ture chan ges in requirements of the 

dif fer ent agencies th at would occupy the bui lding.

I t is a str uc tur e th at will last a good ma ny years .

Senator Pastore. W ha t is it to be made out of ?

Mr. Lowe. I imagine it would be cind er-b lock con stru ctio n.

Mr. Blaser. Cinder block, cons tructio n of steel in certain area s, and 

concrete in certain areas, Air. Ch airma n.

Senator P astore. W hat will hap pen to us if we do not build this 

bu ild ing ? I am t ry in g to point up in the record a necessity for this.

Mr. Blaser. Mr. Ch airma n, there are two opera tions, the Pu blic 

School System and the De partm ent of G eneral Ad ministrat ion which 

are cu rre ntl y occupy ing structu res which this will replace. Th e pr es ­

ent structur es are a pa rt of the res tor ation in southwest. Th ey must 

move from those s tru ctu res in the n ear fu ture to some othe r quart ers .

The qu art ers th at the De partm ent of Bu ild ings and Grounds cu rrently occupy were con stru cted in the e arl y 187O's as a wa ter p um ping 

station .

Those facilities are divided up into several small areas th at we 

occupy with our shop. Th at obviously is an inefficient opera tion.

Also because of the age of the str uc ture it is no t as stru ctur ally 

sound as a place for storag e of con struction mate ria ls sho uld be.

DEVELOPMENT OF ESTIM AT E

Senator P astore. Have you any record on this estimate th at was 

developed yesterda y th at we could have in ou r files fo r reference ?

Mr. Blaser. Tf T ma y furni sh those fo r the rec ord: yes, sir.

Senator P astore. You do not have to pu t them in the reco rd bu t we 

will incorp ora te it by referenc e in case we will have to refer back to it 

so we will have som ething tan gib le, yo ur pla ns and your dia gram s, 

whatever they hap pen to be.

Tell me a little bit more abou t how we got the figure of $2,214,000 

that led to this m isu nders tan din g. Where did t ha t originate and when 

and why ?

Mr. Blaser. Th at origin ate d in the sp ring of 1957 at the tim e we 

were reviewing pro jec ts for the pub lic-work s pro gra m.

At that time, Mr. Chairma n, we knew th at based upon the sit ing 

of th e 2 bui ldings in at least 1 of them we w ould have a sizable fo un da ­

tion . A large po rtion o f the are a is fill. So to con struct at least 1 or 

pe rhaps 2 buildi ngs on thi s fill would m ean t ha t we w ould have a very 

expensive fou ndation problem.

A t th at time we did not have any foun da tio n inv est iga tio ns in the 

area, no bo rings, or no dril l holes of any type .

Th at estimat e, then, assumed the most difficult fou ndation problem 

th at we would have to face.

Senator P astore. Was th at con tem pla ted as 1 stru ctur e or 2 at the 

time ? T th ink you said two.

Mr. Blaser. Xo, sir. The $2,214,000 figu re rep resents one 

structur e.

Senator P astore. One structu re ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Se nator P astore. Go ahead. ‘7 , ’
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 245

Mr. Blaser. During the course of planning that structure we 

found that if we moved the single building to a different location on 

the site we could entirely eliminate this piling foundation. The 

building as it is currently planned would.

Senator P astore. Say that again.

Mr. Blaser. If we moved the building still within the site but from 

its originally planned location we could entirely eliminate the piling 

foundation.' We did that. That is one of the principal economies 

tha t accounts for the change from $2,214,000 to $1,886,000.

Senator P astore. About how much of it ?

Mr. Blaser. $330,000.

PRESENTATION TO HOUSE

Senator Pastore. How in the world did you find that out? This 

was presented to the House only a short while ago, was it not ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, si r: it was.

The reason for it, Mr. Chairman, is strictly this : At the time we 

went to the House that figure, a total of $2,214,000, was the best we 

had available. We have been trying to economize on this structure 

as we went along. As we completed each portion of it as nearly as 

we could, we would add to the estimate of cost.

The building, at the time of the House hearings a month ago, was 

not sufficiently complete for us to put everything together.

Senator Pastore. Wh at was not sufficiently complete, the building?

Mr. Blaser. The building design.

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, if I may interject, at least I failed to 

hear it if it was called to your attention. In the present fiscal year 

appro priation the Congress has authorized detailed design money for 

this structure. This old estimate of $2,200,000 was a preliminary 

estimate, whereas, during this present year the detailed engineering 

work has been process.

Only in the last few days has that work progressed to the point 

where they could make a new definite firm estimate. Tha t is the 

point I make.

Senator P astore. Tha t may sound good to you, but here is a presentation which was made a month ago where you presented a figure of 

$2,214,000. Do not tell me that within the last 30 days you found th at 

by changing the location you would save this $330,000 on the piling. 

1 want an argument that bears some substance.

The House is going to say to me: “When did this all develop? 

They were before us a month ago and they said it was $2,214,000.”

I would say that they found tha t they could move it a few feet over 

and they saved that money. They are going to look at me the way 

I am looking at you now.

Mr. Blaser. Mr. Chairman, at the House hearings we could have 

said, “We are sure this building is going to cost less than $2,214,000 

total.” We had not figures put together th at we could have answered 

the question of how much less. We had not figures th at we could 

have put together to specifically state how much less.

Senator Pasture. No, but you could have said at that time, “ But 

we are under the impression tha t this figure is not a true figure, that 

it can be scaled down and if you will be patient with us we will render
246 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59

it to you or we will render it to the Senate in case we do not have 

time to bring it to you. We are under the impression that there is a 

considerable change because of the foundation problem.”

You could have said that. Yet you went before the House and 

advanced the figure that you knew you had to scale down. So it 

makes them right in denying it. It puts me under a cloud of suspicion when I begin to say, “All this has developed within the last few 

days.”

Mr. Blaser. The final answer has only been available since yesterday, sir.

Senator Pasture. In other words, yesterday the figures were put to ­

gether and we find that the overall cost is $1,886,000. Is tha t correct ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. And the actual construction is $1,750,000.

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. Anything furth er? Anybody else want to say 

anything on this item ?

Thank you very much.

Vehicle and I nspection Station

Mr. Blaser. Mr. Chairman, this is a replacement for a vehicle and 

inspection station that will be razed as a result of highway construction. This job was originally contained or rather the construction 

funds were authorized in the fiscal year 1957. At tha t time the exact 

site conditions were not known.

Early last year we found what the site conditions were. This area 

where this building is to be constructed is one in which the Fire Department rep air shop will likewise be located.

The buildings as they were originally planned, the heavier building, the Fire Department repair shop, was located in the area of 

poorer foundation conditions. The lighter structure, this motor 

vehicle inspection station, was located on the portion of the site tha t 

had the better foundation conditions.

We did, during the planning stage, interchange these sites so th at 

the heavier building would be on the better portion of the site, economizing some in the foundation conditions.

In any case, each structure must still have a pile foundation. In 

this immediate area there is a large sewer and there are other obstructions that we must arch over in order to fit the building into the site.

This is a site that has been assigned bv the Redevelopment Land 

Agency.

Mr. Lowe. This is part of the redevelopment plan.

Senator Pasture. Why does it have to be on such a site where you 

have to invest all this money in order to secure the foundation? Why 

can you not go someplace else?

Mr. Br xASER. As a part of the redevelopment plan, Mr. Chairman, 

they have assigned certain areas to provide space for facilities. This 

particular area is one that was assigned fo r these two structures.

Senator Pastore. What kind of an activity is this, Department of 

Veh icles and Traffic ? Wha t are you going to build here ?

Mr. Blaser. This is an inspection station for vehicles. This will 

be a place for all the public vehicles to get their inspection certificates.

Mr. Lowe. We have compulsory vehicle inspections here for safety
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 247

purp oses. The brakes are checked once a year, the ste eri ng is 

checked.

Se na tor P astore. H ow big a build ing is th is going to be?

Mr. Blaser. Ap prox im ate ly 17,000 square feet.

Se na tor P asture. 17,000 square feet ?

Mr. B i .aser. Yes, sir.

Se nator P asture. I s it going to be brick ? W ha t is it going to be ? 

Mr. B laser. Reinfo rced concre te fram e.

INCREASE D COSTS

Se na tor P asture. How much is it go ing to cost ?

Mr. Blaser. A total cost at the pre sen t time, Mr. Ch air man, is 

$383,000, an increase of $73,475 ove r the ori gin al est imate o f $319,575. 

That increase in cost is d ue en tirely to th is foundatio n con dition th at 

I speak of.

Se na tor P asture. Ar e you as kin g for $81,000 ?

Mr. Blaser. Th ere is an increase of $7,585 for testing equipm ent 

th at the Mo tor Vehicle De pa rtm en t needs to insp ect these vehicles. 

So the $73,475 and the $7,525 total $81,000.

Se na tor P asture. Ha s the money been autho rized and ap prop ria ted 

fo r the bu ild ing itse lf ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir. Co nstruction funds.

Se na tor P astore. It has been ?

Mr. Blaser. Cor rect.

Se na tor P asture. An d this is a question now th at on th is partic ular site you cannot build this bu ild ing unless you get this added 

money for the foundatio n ?

Mr. Blaser. Th at is rig ht.

Se nator P astore. Is th at the problem here ?

Mr. Blaser. Th at is correct.

Se na tor P asture. Why did the House take it ou t ?

Mr. Blaser. I cann ot answer th at , sir.

Se na tor P asture. Can anyo ne ans wer th at ? Does it say an ything 

in th e rec ord ?

Mr. F owler. I do not rememb er an ythi ng abou t th at in the rec ord : 

no, sir . I do not kno w why they took it ou t.

Se na tor P asture. H ow do you feel, Mr. Karric k, about this?

Mr. K arrick. Th ere is n othin g in the r ep ort here about it. 1 think 

we need it. I th ink this insp ection for vehicles is an extremely impo rtan t fu nct ion . I think we need th is money.

Se na tor P asture. You have the ap pr op riation for the bu ild ing 

itsel f ; do you n ot ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir. At the pre sen t time, Mr. Chairma n, for constr uc tio n th ere is au tho riz ed $309,575.

Se na tor P asture. I s that ju st autho riz ed or ap prop ria ted ?

Mr. Blaser. Tha t is ap prop ria ted ; yes, sir.

Se na tor P asture. Th at money is a lre ady available ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Se na tor P asture. And this whole thing, by the time you get throug h 

with it, it is g oin g to cost you how much ?

Mr. Blaser. Const ruc tion cost of $383,050. Eq uipm en t total cost 

th at will go into the bu ild ing if this request for resto ration is approv ed 

will be $45,000.
248 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Se na tor P astore. W ait a m inute. Will y ou say t ha t again , sir ?

Mr. Blaser. At the present time the re are dolla rs ava ilab le, ap pr opr iated, $309,575 to con struction , $37,075 for equipm ent.

Se na tor Pastore. An d t ha t is ap prop ria ted ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Senator P astore. Yes.

Mr. Blaser. Now our do lla r req uirem ent is $383,000 for construc ­

tio n, $45,000 for the D epartme nt of Mo tor Vehicles eq uipment, ma kin g 

an increase for con stru ctio n cost of $73,475 and for equ ipm ent for 

$7,585.

Se nator P astore. What did you say was in this $81,000 fo r equip ­

me nt ?

Mr. Blaser. $7,525.

Se nator P astore. Th ere for e, this $81,000 not only includes wh at you 

need for con stru ctio n of the fo un da tio n; it also includes this $7,525 

fo r equipment ?

Mr. Blaser. Yes, sir.

Se nator P astore. All rig ht. Any thing f urther ?

(Justifi cations for Gener al Pro vision s a pp ears on p. 357.)

National Zoological P ark and Smithso nia n I nstitution

STATEMENTS OF DR. T. H. REED, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL

ZOOLOGICAL P AR K; AND DR. JOHN L. KEDDY, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

RESTORATION REQUESTED

Mr. H erman. Mr. Chairma n, we have one more item un de r this 

approp ria tio n. Un fortu na tel y, the decision fo r resto ratio n was not 

made un til af te r we pre pared this ma ter ial . I wou ld like to call 

officials of the National Zoological Pa rk , Dr. T. II. Reed, Direc tor of 

the National Zoological Pa rk , and Dr . Jo hn L. Ke ddy, A ssi sta nt Sec reta ry , Sm ithsonia n Institut ion .

Se nator P astore. Will you po int out this item to me.

Mr. Herman. It is a bud geted item. It was deleted by the House. 

The appea l lette r was prepared in such a hu rry th at the decision was 

not mad e abo ut this item.

Mr. Lowe. The rep ort, sir, under the heading “ Na tio nal Zoological 

Par k,’’ states th e fo llo wing:

H o u se R epo r t

Item Budget

estim ate

Recommended

National Zoological Park:

Administratio n Bldg -...................... ... . . __ ___ $25,600

39.400

50,000 Antelope Bldg _ - _____ _ __________ _________

Permanent improvements _ __ _ __ . _................

Tota l, National Zoological P ar k____________ ________ ________ 115,000

The committee has been concerned for the past several years about the anomalous position of the zoo. The Dis trict of Columbia hears the entire cost of 

operation and maintenance but the zoo is under the control and adm inistration 

of the Smithsonian Institu tion. While the District has been flnancinng the entire 

cost of operation for over 30 years very litt le progress has been made in the way 

of capital improvements. This year the Distric t Commissioners included $65,000
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 249

in the capital outlay budget of the zoo for preliminary studies and plans for a 

new Adm inistration Building and a new Antelope Building, the total cost of 

these two projects being estim ated at $1,164,000. In addition, $.>0,000 was 

included for renovation of the animal paddocks. These two projects were the 

first major cap ital projects proposed for the zoo since the 1930’s.

The joint fiscal subcommittee of the District of Columbia Committeess recently 

approved a revised capital outlay program for the District. In the ir report on 

the legislation the Dis trict of Columbia Committees recommended the deletion 

of funds for capital improvements at the zoo. In view of the D istric t’s apparen t 

willingness to embark on a capital outlay program for the zoo and its subsequent 

deletion by the Congress, the committee recommends that the District Commissioners bring this question of future financing—not only of cap ital improvements but also the cost of operating expenses—to the attention of the Board of 

Regents of the Smithsonian Institu tion.

(Justification of increases appears on p. 347.)

A NIM A L PADDOCK S

Senator Pastore. Permanent improvements?

Dr. Reed. Yes. We had in our original House budget request three 

capital improvement items: money for the plans, preliminary studies, 

and definite plans for the Administration Building; money for plans 

of the Antelope B uilding: and money for the renovation and restoration of paddocks. All three items were denied by the House. We 

have received permission from the District Commissioners to request 

the restoration of the $50,000 for the renovation and restoration of 

the animal paddocks. These paddocks which we wish to restore are 

now abandoned or in very poor condition.

Here are some photographs taken of them. These paddocks have 

been in existence for approximately 40 years and in constant use.

During this period of time the money for proper maintenance and 

repa ir has been inadequate, resulting in the fact that we have had to 

abandon 6 paddocks and 7 enclosures.

The loss of these paddocks causes the overcrowding of the animals. 

We have to move them to other paddocks; there is a death loss in 

the animals due to overcrowding and a possible condition of collapse 

of parts of the enclosure, resulting in perhaps injury to the animals, 

employees, and also the visiting public.

Senator Pastore. Why woidd they cause injury to the visiting 

public ?

Dr. Reed. If there was a bull elk running down the street, he could 

cause quite a 1 ittle bit of damage.

Senator Pastore. You mean that bull elks are in these paddocks 

that are out of repair ?

Dr. Reed. No, sir. We have abandoned the dangerously weak paddocks and we have other paddocks th at are facing the possibility of 

abandonment. When the paddocks got bad enough, we could not 

trust them, we had to abandon them. That is why in the middle of 

the park we have fallen down fences and paddocks with nothing in 

them. We cannot even hold a goat in them much less an animal that 

is worth looking at. We have made repairs at the curtailment of 

other activities.

No, we will never let the paddocks become bad enough that we 

expect the animal to get out. We will abandon it. We do have 

paddocks that do need rehabilitation.

Senator Pastore. What does your problem develop into once you 

have abandoned paddocks ? What has been the result ?
25 0 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

Dr. Reed. We have to find suitab le q ua rte rs for the animal or elim ina te the species. You can see here thes e pad docks have been ab an ­

done d. They are j us t there. Once a pad doc k is aba ndoned, no thing 

more can be done w ith it.

Se nator P astore. Did you make this presen tat ion in the House?

Dr . Reed. Yes. Th is was presen ted to the H ouse . Th e e ntire c apital outlay pro gra m was denied.

STATUS OF CAPITAL IMPROVEM ENT S

I believe you understand, sir, th at the op erating expenses were 

granted . We are very appre cia tive of th e op erating expenses. It 

was a capital outlay wh ich was cut.

Senator Pastore (re ading .)

The joint fiscal subcommittee of the District of Columbia Committees recently 

approved a revised cap ital outlay program for the District. In the ir report on 

the legislation the Dis trict of Columbia Committees recommended the deletion 

of funds for capital improvements a t the zoo.

In view of the District’s app arent willingness to embark on a cap ital outlay 

program for the zoo and its subsequent deletion by the Congress, the committee 

recommends tha t the Distric t Commissioners bring th is question of fu tur e financing—not only of capital improvements but also of cost of operating expenses— 

to the atte ntio n of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institu tion.

Mr. K arric k, do you w ant to say so me thing abo ut th is ?

Mr. Karrick. I wa nt to say th at Mr. McL aughlin h as in pursu anc e 

of thi s pa ragr ap h discu ssed this general broad m atter wi th the head 

of the Sm ithson ian I ns titution, but the y were unable to reach any conclusion, m erely a preli mi nary discussion.

REASON FOR RESTORATION REQUEST

Senat or P astore. W hy did the Com mission ers feel th at this sho uld 

be restored and why did it tak e the m so lon g to reach th is conclusion ? 1 th ink 1 want to develop th is fo r th e record.

Mr. F owler. Over the years , the Distri ct of Columbia has n ot been 

called upon to pro vid e capital outlay fo r the Zoological Pa rk . We 

believed it to be a Fe deral ins tituti on, pu re and simple. We hav e 

fou nd help over the yea rs and the Fe de ral Gov ernment has pa id fo r 

the. c apital outlay.

We have pro vid ed in the pas t seve ral years some lit tle money fo r 

capit al outlay. Bu t here is the s itu ati on t hat the C omm issio ners have 

con sidered: No tw ith sta nd ing the fac t that it is a capit al outlay, the y 

felt because of danger connected with it, the possibility of loss of life, 

even, tha t they have to take some affirmative action even before we can 

conc ur with the officials of th e Sm ithsonia n In sti tutio n and s tart someth in g p erh aps for the nex t y ear or th e year af ter .

I t seems to us at this time, pa rti cu larly , to be a critical item th at 

the Commissioners would like fo r you to consid er now.

Dr. Keddy is the Assistan t Secre tary of the Sm ithson ian and pe rhaps he can tell you how critical the situatio n is.

Senator P astore. All rig ht.

HOUSE TESTIMONY

Dr. Keddy. I think the Direc tor, Dr. Reed, has pointed th at out. 

Th e only testim ony th at I believe I need to give is in connection with
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 251

the statement at the bottom of page 12 here, the second sentence below the little table which say s:

W hile th e D is tr ic t has be en fin an cing th e en ti re co st of op er at io n fo r ov er 

30 ye ar s, ve ry li tt le pr og re ss ha s been mad e in th e w ay of ca pital im prov em en ts.

We made a study of the record for the last 30 years as to what the 

District of Columbia government and the Congress lias done. I would 

like to put this list of construction appropriation items in the record.

Senator Pastore. All right, sir.

Dr. Keddy. I would just like to bring it up to date a little bit.

The total is $1,647,420 of which $870,920 constituted Public Works 

Administration funds back in the thirties.

But it does show tha t the Federal Government and the District 

have been providing a certain number of dollars in order to build 

some modern buildings there.

(The information referred to follows:)

N a tio n a l Zool ogic al P ark

Construction appropriations, 1927-58

C o n st ru cti o n Y ea r( s) A ppro pri ation

B uil din g (or bir ds . . . . . ........... ._ ............................ ............................. . ................. .. 1927-28

1930-31

1932

1936-37

$127, (XX)

248, (XX) 

4,500

286, 450 

311,808 

149,950 

122, 720

870, 920

90,000 

12,000 

63,000 

35,0 00 

197,000

1,647,420

B uildin g for re ptile s, etc _____ ____ ____ _________________ ____________

P la n s for buil din g for sm al l m am m als............. ........................................................ ..

B uildin gs (P W A fu nds) :

Sm al l m am m als a n d g re at ap es________ ____ ____ _________ ____________

P ach y d e rm s___________________ _____________ ________ . _______ . .

M ec han ic al sh o p s______ _____ _______ . ......................................................

A d d it io n to b ir d house ...................................... ............... ............................... ...........

T o ta l, P W A co n str u cti o n ........................................................ ..................... .........

R esta u ra n t b u il d in g _____________________________ ____ ____ 1939

1946

1951

1954

1955

In cin era to r_________________ _________ ______ . . . . . . .

P ach y d erm ho us e ro of _____________________________________________________

In st all ati o n of ste am line fr om c en tr al heati n g p la n t to b ir d h o u s e .. . _______

B uil din g fo r Po lic e H ead q u art ers , e tc ............... ............... .............................. .. .

G ra n d to ta l, 1927-58....................................................................... ...........................

DANGER INVOLVED

Senator P astore. Point up to me, sir, this m atter of the danger involved. I thought I understood you to say, sir tha t all you do is 

abandon these paddocks and you do not use them, which gives you a 

crowded condition and maybe an elimination of the species but naturally does not create this element of danger that we are talking about, 

or is it there ?

Dr. Reed. Here we have a picture of a red deer. He is in velvet. 

His antlers are in velvet, but we have the possibility of intimate contact 

there. This fence will hold the deer in. But as you can see, the 

keeper is illustrating how close you can come to this red deer.

Here also are the walks. This is the highway. This is the walk 

tha t people are on right next to the fence. Here we have a path going 

down by this red deer. Here, again, it is on the side of the red deer. 

This is an illegal path that people have created coming into rather 

close contact with the animals.

We want the people to see the animals but we do not want them to 

come in close contact with them.
252 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Now, then, down in the beav er valley, th at of course has been 

aba ndo ned. Th ere is nothi ng utilize d in th is entire area.

Se nator P astoke. Where are yo ur beavers now '?

Dr. Reed. We do n ot have any. Th is is to me a very s hoc king conditio n since the beaver has m eant so much to the economy of the early 

histo ry of this cou ntry . Dr. Mann did have one of the finest beav er 

colle ctions in the world. The beav er were constan tly bu ild ing dam s 

in it, but it has been abandoned sometim e du rin g the war and has not 

been resto red.

U SE OF FU NDS

Senat or P astoke. Now this $50,000 will do all th at you were talking 

abo ut, these fences and every thi ng ?

Dr. Reed. We expect the $50,000 to reh ab ilitat e and restore the 

beaver area, the red deer area and the fallo w deer pens. We an tic ipa te 

th at it will bring back the pen which is next to the red deer pen that 

was abandoned. Here is a picture of it.

Th is pen, as you can see, is abandoned. We can not even hold goa ts 

in it.

Here is another one.

Th is will reha bilitate the red deer pen.

You see the two pens ri ght together.

The whole acreage involves perha ps between 15 and 20 acres on the 

paddocks, and be aver valley .

Senator P astoke. Do you wan t to leave th at grou p of ph otog rap hs 

with the committee?

1 )r. Reed. If you would care to have them .

Senator P asture. We will inc orporat e them by reference.

We m igh t hav e to r efer to them .

Th at fence th at was b uilt at th at lion ’s cage, who bu ilt tha t?

Dr. Reed. The fence th at had been put up at the lio n’s cage 

pre sently ?

Senator P astoke. Yes.

Dr. Reed. The new one? You mean the Cyclone fence? We pu t 

th at up, sir. Th e ori gin al fence was bu ilt back in 1893 I believe it 

was. We have had 115 million v isitor s since the n. Th ere had never 

been a vis itor in jur y.

Mr. Karrick. Mr. Chairma n, might I add th at alt hough this is 

classified as a c ap ita l outlay, this item would just as ap pr op riately be 

considered as repa iri ng or rev am pin g existing paddocks. It s simply 

pu tti ng back int o service wha t is alr eady there which is no t being 

used.

Senator P astoke. Ha ve you done th at in the pa st also? Has the 

Dist ric t sustaine d t ha t so rt of a p rog ram ?

Mr. Lowe. Yes, si r; we have trie d to pro vid e money for, shall 

I say, m inim um m aintenan ce.

Dr. Reed. Th at is rig ht.

Mr. Lowe. Occasio nally we have even financed new con struction .

ZOO AS NATI ONAL RES PON SIB IL IT Y

Mr. K arrick. I feel as Mr. Fo wl er has expressed it, th is is a na ­

tio nal zoo and should lie a natio nally financed instituti on. It should 

not lie imposed upon the Di str ict tax pa ye rs eit he r for capit al outlay 

or fo r operat ing , bu t we are facing an actua lity.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 253

Senator Pastore. I am one Senator who agrees with Mr. Fowler. 

I said tha t last time and before all this happened. I have had my 

family at the zoo and 1 have recommended to a lot of visitors to go 

there. I tell you very frankly I was very much surprised when I 

learned as a member of this committee that it was not strictly a national responsibility.

I had always assumed and 1 guess its a natu ral thing to assume that 

it is maintained by the National Government when in fact it is not.

Mr. Karrick. With title of ‘‘National Zoological Par k.’’

Senator Pastore. I read it as clear as day. Anything further on 

this?

1 understand the Commissioners are in favor of this restoration.

Mr. Karrick. Yes, sir.

Senator Pastore. All right.

I understand that there are some people here who want to discuss 

this Youth Center bu ilding; is that so ?

Mr. Herman. Mr. Donald Clemmer, if the committee wishes to 

discuss it with him, sir.

Senator Pastore. It has been called to my attention.

Youth Center

STATEMENT OE DONALD CLEMMER, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS

NO APP EA L FOR RE ST OR AT ION

Mr. Fowler. Mr. Clemmer is director of Department of Corrections.

No cuts are being appealed.

Senator Pastore. Will you review it for us, please? Tell us how 

much it is, what it is about ?

Mr. Clemmer. Mr. Chairman, this department has made no appeal for funds. We believe we can live within what the House 

allowed. I would like to say also tha t all capital outlay was given 

considerable study by many, many people, as you know. Just in 

these modest items that we have, the Commissioner’s Public Works 

Committee spent many days with us. For example, the vice president of the telephone company, the telephone chief engineers, Mrs. 

Bazelon, who is an informed person. It went through their minds. 

Then it went through the minds of our budget officers, and they are 

not always as nice as they seem here. They went through the minds 

of the Commissioners, naturally, by the time it gets through the 

House, and if we don't appeal it, why, you know we are fairly well 

satisfied.

ORI GI NAL ESTIM A TE OF COSTS

In 1950, I first corresponded with a District Board of Commissioners about the need of a youth center for young adult prisoners. 

There was discussion, and in 1954, 4 years later, we were given 

$30,000 for preliminary sketches. At this time Mr. Blaser’s predecessor, Mr. A. G. Hutson, guessed, and it wasn't a firm estimate, that 

the Youth Center would cost $6 million.

In 1955 money for plans were given for this development in the 

amount of $295,000. It was given for plans and specifications and 

the private architect worked for some time.
254 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 19 59

In 1956 we asked the C ongress for $3,441,000 as sort of a first incre ­

me nt to begin the bui lding. Th e Congress refuse d this amount, but 

did give us $600,000 for uti lities in 1956. Then in 1957 we asked 

fo r $3,550,000 and we obtained $3 million .

Al l the time th ere was consultation between Bu ild ing s and Grounds 

and my de pa rtm en t and we are tryi ng to see where we can save the 

money. Th e Congress, pr im arily the House, wants us to do it by 

inc rem ents: 1 bite for utilitie s and 1 bite of $3 millio n fo r construction.

Senator P astore. Could n’t th at cost you more money when you do 

it t hat way ?

COST OF YO UT H CEN TER

Mr. Clemmer. 1 cou ldn’t say. I wou ld certainl y ra th er ge t the 

money to build it. Th e way it's going on now, it ’s gone on now for 

6 ye ars. So this year, in orde r to build an insti tutio n fo r 300, we ask 

fo r $1,560,000 and the H ouse gave it to us.

Senator P astore. I s th at added to y ou r $3 millio n ?

Mr. Clemm er. That is ad ded to our $3 millio n.

Senator P astore. W ill the to tal cost be $4,560,000 now ?

Mr. Clemmer. Th e total cost to build fo r 300 w ill be $5,147,000.

Th is pro jec t has been cooking fo r a long time. Now in orde r to 

build to hold 300 young ad ult felons we need the $1,560,000 which 

the H ous e has a lre ady app rov ed. As I said b efore, t his is an estimate 

of man y peop le, many com petent peop le, inc lud ing Mr. Blase r and 

his d epart me nt.

W ith t he amount of money th at we ha d before, $3,587,000, and this 

$1,560,000 in this year's estimate, we will st ar t to build in S eptember. 

Th e pro jec t will be ready fo r occupan cy, let me say, rou ghly, in the 

sp ring of 1960. The gr ad in g is four-fifth s done ri ght now, the 

gro undw ork . Th ere is a prime need throug ho ut th is com mu nity and 

elsewhere in the cou ntry to have some pa rti cu la r facilit y to care 

fo r the youngsters who get in tro uble and mak e an earne st effort to 

try and keep them fro m becom ing m atu re criminals.

REASON FOR DELAYED USE OF FU NDS

Se nator P astore. Will you expla in, sir , why the money ap pr op riated h ere tofore ha d not been u tilized ?

Mr. Clemm er. I t h ad not been uti lized because there was a c onception on the part of the build ing s and grou nd s people th at we would 

develop the proje ct in increme nts. The ut ilitie s wou ld be one inc rement of work . Fir st of all the gr ad in g of the site would be one 

increm ent of work. The second would be the lan d an d utilitie s, the 

power, and so fo rth . An d the th ird increm ent would be th e stru ctures 

fo r a c ertai n number.

But in 1956 we asked for $3,400,000 and the Congress in its wisdom 

gave us $600,000. So the re has been some dillydally ing . Th ere has 

been some uncertaint y. We hop e to open an insti tutio n in the s pring 

or ear ly sum mer of 1960 an d be o perat ing .

Se na tor P astore. W hat was the justifi cation f or the $3 m illion tha t 

was ap prop riated la st year ? T hat d id n’t ge t you anywhere ?

Mr. Clemmer. The money is ava ilab le. Th e plan s we ren ’t quite 

done. If you wa nt to know th e item s t hat w ill be b uilt wi th t hat -----
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 255

Senator Pastore. No; I am merely being curious. I was wondering why we had to do th is in steps if nothing was happening. You 

said the $3 million was approp riated last time. Yet it stayed there 

and stayed there but you couldn’t use it because it wasn’t enough.

REVISION IN PLA NS

Mr. Clemmer. Tha t is pa rt of the answer. Then there is also a 

switch in the plan. With p art of this $3 million we are going to put 

in the utilities and then use the balance plus what we are asking for 

this year for the structures. But the plans switched. Why they 

switched, I don’t know exactly. I think they thought it was wise and 

better prices would develop.

SUFF ICIEN CY OF FUN DS

Senator Pastore. Now, you have all of the money to do the job?

Mr. Clemmer. We have all of the money to build for 300 and in 

another year we will come up for additional funds.

Senator Pastore. Have you all the plans and specifications?

Mr. Clemmer. I believe they are 08 or 99 percent completed.

Mr. Blaser. They are 100 percent.

ADVERTISEMENT OF BIDS

Senator Pastore. When are you going to put out the bids on this ?

Mr. Blaser. We advertised the job June 9. It is under advertisement at the present time.

Mr. Clemmer. The bids will be opened July 22.

Senator Pastore. Apparently you had a good idea th at the Senate 

wasn’t going to take it aw ay from you ?

Mr. Blaser. We always, Mr. Chairman, have the prerogative of 

canceling any bid openings if funds are not available and we were 

certain, having the bid openings scheduled for the 25th of J uly, by 

tha t time we w ould know if the funds were available.

SUFF ICIEN CY OF ESTIMATED CAPACITY

Senator P astore. Tell me if 300 is big enough.

Mr. Clemmer. We think it should be GOO, but, once again, the way 

the funds have been appropriated we don’t have the funds to build 

for 600.

Senator Pastore. Don’t go over tha t too quickly. What are you 

going to do about the other 300 ?

Mr. Clemmer. We have it planned out pretty carefully. I have 

to name the particular building to make it clear. In substance when 

w’e build the culinary facility, the kitchen and dining hall, we know 

w’e are going to build for 600 eventually. We will build for 600. 

The same with the school, the library, and auditorium. We have 

money to build those for 600; the same with the engineering facilities ; the same with the diagnostic depot in the hos pita l; the same with 

one of the work areas.

The only thing we are not building for 600 now are living facilities. 

We are building for 300.

27235— 51 17
256 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION’S, 1959

LANGUAGE AUTHORITY

Senator P astore. What is the authorization on this ?

Mr. Clemmer. The authorization is congressional language to build 

an institution for young adult offenders under the National Youth 

Corrections Act.

Senator P astore. To what extent ?

Mr. Clemmer. To the extent of 600.

Senator Pastore. Does it say tha t in the authorization ?

Mr. Clemmer. It says that in the justifications, yes.

Senator P astore. Do you confirm that, Mr. Fowler ?

Mr. Fowler. Yes, sir; it says 600.

Senator P astore. The reason why I asked that is because you build 

a kitchen for 600 because that is a desirable thing to do if you have 

the authority. Then you would be in trouble if you didn’t have the 

authority for it. But you say you have the authority to build this 

correctional institution for 600.

Mr. Clemmer. Certainly there is testimony in the House tha t we 

wanted to build for 600 over the years. I do not believe the language, 

the official appropriation bill, specifies the number and I had better 

check on that before I am too affirmative.

Senator Pastore. I caution the Commissioners to look at this very 

closely. I am not being critical here because this was an item tha t 

was allowed in the House. It was called to my attention and impression had, of course, in this sort of thing. That is why I thought 

you should come in and spread it on the record for the benefit of 

the Senators.

But here we are, we are building a kitchen and other utilities there 

for an installation that will house 600. If you never get tha t extra 

money for the other 300 you have wasted in building a kitchen that 

is too large, at the present time.

Mr. Clemmer. Mr. Chairman, we are confident we are getting it.

Senator Pastore. It isn’t a matter of confidence. You don’t determine the need. The Congress determines the need.

Mr. Clemmer. I report the need.

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, could we do this fo r this situation ? The 

last time tha t I was pa rticipatin g in a review of this matter, what 

we have done up to then is in strict conformance with the justification 

record. You see our appropriation acts do not delineate that precisely. But may we insert in the record at this point appropriate 

extracts from old records to bring out the picture as to what was 

presented to the Congress ?

PRESENT INMATE POPULATION

Senator Pastore. Let me ask you this: All of this has been presented to the House ?

Mr. Clemmer. Everything.

Senator P astore. They are satisfied with it?

Mr. Clemmer. They are satisfied.

Senator Pastore. Because I question the point of 300. How many 

inmates do we have at the present time at this institution ?

Mr. Clemmer. We have, Mr. Chairman, no institution of this type 

now. We have what we call reformatory loosely, i t’s a penitentiary
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 257

with 1,860. We have a workhouse for male misdemeanants, of which 

half are alcoholics, that runs 1,100,1,200,1,400.

In our city jail in town we are running around a thousand population, and then we have a women’s reform atory with around 200. Our 

population runs 4,300 and sometimes goes to 4,400 and 4,500.

TRA NSFER OF YOUTH OFFENDER S

Senator Pastore. You are going to tran sfer this 300 for the time 

being?

Mr. Clemmer. Yes, sir; the young adults who appear before the 

courts and some that we have now would go under this facility. You 

see this will be a progressive and also scientific sort of an approach 

to try to correct the attitudes and the character of these young men 

so that crime will be less likely in the future.

We do that now in all our institutions.

Senator Pastore. I s there a crying need fo r the 600-youth institution now ?

Mr. Clemmer. There is a crying need, Mr. Chairman, and it could 

be a crying need for a thousand.

FUT URE COSTS OF YO UTH CENTER

Senator Pastore. Well I think myself later on it is going to cost 

you more money to build the other half for the 300.

Mr. Clemmer. We do, and that, of course, has been predicted not 

to the penny but we anticipate there is going to be another $2 million 

expenditure.

Senator Pastore. In addition?

Mr. Clemmer. In addition.

Senator Pastore. You mean over and above what it would cost 

you now ?

Mr. Clemmer. Yes, sir. Over and above what we have now and 

what we anticipate will be given this year. The total cost of this 

institution $7,459,000. This sounds big. It is big. But prisons over 

the country are tremendously expensive.

Senator Pastore. But when you get around to doing it later on 

it is going to cost you more, isn’t it ?

Mr. Clemmer. We hope it will be less.

Senator Pastore. You hope it will be less ?

Mr. Clemmer. Because I think tha t the Department of Buildings 

and Grounds has been a little high in their estimates. I think the 

bids may come in a little less than what they have said, and 1 hope 

they will. In fact, Mr. Blaser said a little bit ago that prices were 

pretty competitive.

Senator Pastore. We have an engineer here. Do you think it is 

going to be cheaper to build 10 years from today than i t is today ?

Mr. Blaser. I don’t say 10 years.

Senator Pastore. All righ t, 2 years or next year.

Mr. Blaser. This price of the $2 million tha t Mr. Clemmer has 

referred to is based upon our best figures today. The structures that 

we are anticipating for the future to take care of 300 people is prob-
258 DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

ably going to remain constant in price, depending upon the material 

and the labor market, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Pastore. Of course, the tendency over the past decade is 

tha t prices have gone up and not come down.

Mr. Karrick. I don't believe tha t engineers or penologists are the 

proper experts on price trends.

Senator P astore. I don’t think an engineer is.

Mr. Karrick. He may know what construction is going to do. 

Senator Pastore. That is what I meant. That is what I am talkingk about. I am merely saying this : That if you build your institution today to house 600 people at tha t Youth Center, as of today, 

it would cost you less than when you build tha t same institution in 

2 parts in a year or 2 from now.

Mr. Karrick. Definitely.

Senator Pastore. If there is a need for this and you are going to 

do it jiext year all I am questioning is why don’t you do the whole 

thing now ?

Mr. Ceemmer. I would like to know myself.

Mr. Karrick. We would agree but definitely.

Mr. Herman. May I make a statement, Mr. Chairman ?

Senator Pastore. Yes.

Mr. Herman. At the time when we reviewed this project we determined that $5 million was the minimum amount available fo r a usable 

facility. Of course when we delay a project we always estimate we 

will save so much in operating costs. So any increase in costs that 

occurs with the delay will be more than offset by the savings in operating costs. So in the long run in a delay of several years, we will 

save money.

Senator Pastore. If you never build i t at all look a t all the money 

you would save. That is where you are logically led. I mean if you 

take it by natural progression and if you are taking the logic you 

are giving to me you take the point, “why build it? ” Look at the 

money you save.

Mr. Clemmer. In the meantime crime marches on.

Senator P astore. I am not tryin g to be funny.

LEGAL AUTHORITY FOR IN ST IT UT IO N

Mr. F owler. Mr. Chairman, the point th at you raised about building for 600 unless it appears in the language itself is a very good 

point.

Would it be sufficient to say tha t the record shows that everyone 

understood it to be eventually a 600 capacity institution.

Senator Pastore. I think Mr. Fowler you are out to get your legal 

department to get into tha t a little. Because you might find yourself in a position of some day saying this is all right it might have 

been desirable for 600 b ut there is never been an authorization but 

your building a big kitchen that may never come to be.

You don’t know that. I would personally, if I were you I would 

want some kind of assurance that you were proceeding correctly. I 

quite understand with you its a wise way to do it if you are going to 

get to ultimately get to 600, you might as well build a boiler and 

kitchen to account for it.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 259

If you are authorized to do so by legal authority. You had better 

be pretty sure on that. I don’t thin k we ought to belabor it here. 1 

just raised it. For the moment its not my immediate concern. I 

think it is the responsibility of Commissioners.

Mr. Lowe. Mr. Chairman, we will review the matter carefully.

Senator Pastore. I think you would be on safe ground to explore 

that.

Do you have anything fur ther ?

PERS ONAL SERVICES

Mr. Lowe. We have one other item. Several times during the 

course of these hearings you have commented and been puzzled about 

this problem of vacant positions and in tha t connection I would like 

to call your attention to page 2 of the House report under an item 

headed “Personal services.”

The House also has been concerned with this matter of vacant positions and afte r discussing the matter as to the apparent contradiction of having auhorized positions that are vacant in these different 

departments and then coming up and asking for more positions, they 

concluded in this brief discussion tha t star ts on page 2 with this: 

“Future financial requirements for personal services will include the 

cost of within-grade promotions and any other costs that are essential 

in order to give the Congress a true picture of the District’s personnel 

requirements.”

We are going to go to work on this immediately, and starting with 

some of the budgets for fiscal year 1960 we will have eliminated the 

various positions tha t do lead to this confusion and the budget will 

reflect a realistic number of positions with the money to amply pay 

for th at number of positions.

We doubt that we can do the entire job in the few’ months remaining 

before we have to compile the 1960 budget, but we will at least have 

a good start for 1960.

Motor Vehicle Park ing F und

Senator Pastore. Commissioner Karrick, yesterday we discussed 

rath er fully the estimated surpluses in the five funds. I am pa rticularly interested now in what you contemplate doing with this recurring annual increase in the surplus of the motor vehicle parking fund 

which you estimate w ill reach $1,747,648 by June 30,1959.

Commissioner Karrick. The Commissioners feel tha t it would be 

advisable to w ait for the completion of the mass transportation study 

and to see w hether Congress desires to implement any or all of the 

recommendations contained therein, before considering any disposition 

of the surplus money in the Motor Vehicle Parking Agency fund. 

The financial responsibility of the Commissioners, in the parking field, 

would vary greatly depending on what type of mass transportation 

system was finally approved. An automobile-dominant city would 

require vast numbers of parking spaces for all day worker-parkers.

The present fringe parking program, together with some pay lots 

under the inner belt loop as such spaces become available, is not of 

sufficient magnitude to eat into the surplus money. The annual income from parking meters and from District-owned lots leased to pri-
260 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59

vat e ind ustry is more than enough to tak e care of this prog ram at the 

prese nt time. We m ust realize, however , th at the stea dily inc rea sin g 

traffic load on ou r cit y streets will, in t he next f ew y ears, forc e a drastic 

cut in on-street pa rk in g in dow ntown Wash ing ton . Th is will au toma tically force a s tep ped -up f rin ge -p ar king pr ogram .

Before Congress at the prese nt tim e is bil l S. 3827 which, if ap ­

proved, would perm it the ex pend itu re of mo tor vehicle p ar ki ng fu nd s 

to correct traffic-congested condition s a t v arious stre et loca tions, wh ere 

the congestion is caused basically by parking .

COM M EN TS ON HEA RIN G

Senator P astore. I wa nt to say, Mr. Lowe, Mr. Fowler, Mr. H er ­

man, a nd yo u too, sir, M r. Kar ric k, of course, i t’s alw ays a pleasur e to 

work wi th you.

Mr. Karrick. We would like to than k you fo r he ari ng us.

Senator P astore. I have always looked forw ard to it. I t is alw ays 

a pleasu re to have you. I hav e seen rea l ded ication and dev otio n of 

du ty on the part of the gen tlem en who hav e come here on behalf of 

the Distri ct and presen ted the bu dget to me and the mem bers of the 

subcommittee. Whil e I may have disagree d wi th you fro m tim e to 

time on some of our item s I th ink our objective has been the same.

I think our conc ern has been the same. I think we hav e worked 

tog eth er in a fri en dly atm osphere . Indeed it h as been a pleasure.

(W her eup on, at 4:30 p.m., the com mittee recessed to reconvene at 

7: 30 p. m., the same day.)

After Recess—7: 30 P. M. (Wednesday, J une 18, 1958) 

Department of H ealth

Medical Society of the District of Columbia

STATEMENT OF DR. WILLIAM P. HERBST, CHAIRMAN, MEDICAL 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

General Statement.

Se na tor P astore. I t is now exa ctly 7: 30. The meeting w ill please 

come to ord er. We are rea dy fo r our first witness.

I t is Dr . W illiam He rbst, who rep res ent s the District of Columb ia 

Medica l S ociety on health needs of th e area.

Se na tor P astore. Al l rig ht , Doctor.

Le t me say at the outse t we are honored to have y ou here this evenin g, and we wa it with an tic ipation to hear your words of wisdom.

Dr . H erbst. Senator, first of all I wa nt to express my appre cia tio n 

and the appre cia tio n of the med ical society fo r the privi leg e of being 

here th is even ing. An d no t only th at , bu t per son ally I rememb er 

very ple asantly the cordial ity , courtes y, and the interest th at you 

showed at ou r appear ance l as t ye ar.

Se na tor P astore. Th an k yo u very much.

Dr . H erbst. I am de eply grate fu l fo r it.

Se na tor P astore. Th an k yo u, D octor.

Dr . H erbst. I might say th at ou r testimo ny last year, at which 

tim e we predicted th at the ap prop ria tio n fo r med ical chari tie s was
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 261

inadequate, has been borne out by the fact tha t the appropriation ran 

out for the voluntary hospitals about 3 months ago.

I am presenting this prepared statement, which I presented before 

the House, which I am not going to read because it contains all of the 

pertinent data with the exception of 1 or 2 additional bits of information which I should like to have the privilege of presenting to you. 

Senator P astore. You may proceed, Doctor.

FUN DS FOR MEDICAL CHAR ITIES

Dr. H erbst. The first item is in relation to the request of the medical charities this year by the Director of Health. The figure which 

he requested was $1,692,800. The figure as presented to you from the 

House is $1,652,800, which is $400,000 less than requested.

We feel that this full amount is very sorely needed to carry out a 

minimum service for this particu lar item.

GENERAL HOSPITAL

The request by the District of Columbia General Hospital, which 

was for 108 additional badly needed personnel and for the replacement of obsolete equipment, was $775,000, which was cut from tha t 

specific request.

If I may, I should like to present a rather personal observation in 

view of the fact tha t I go over there once a week and have for the 

last 25 years.

Last Thursday when I was over in our own activity, which is the 

genitourinary section, the nurses available had been decreased 50 percent in the last 2 months. This was not due solely to the unavailability of funds, but partia lly due to th e terrific fatigue involved in their 

work over there. This leaves th at specific item and that specific activity in pretty bad shape.

COOPERATION OF MEDICAL GROUPS

I should like to say to you, and I am sure you would be interested 

in knowing tha t currently the medical society, the hospital council, 

and the Health Department are working hand in hand, glove in glove 

on a cooperative basis so tha t we may jointly and cooperatively do 

the best we can for the medical services available in the city.

Another personal observation relating to equipment is I have been 

trying to get some modern equipment in the way of cystoscopic tables 

in our department now for 3 years, and that comes under the item of 

replacement of obsolete equipment.

This is all that I have to present in the way of a statement. If 

there are any specific questions that you are interested in I shall do 

my best to answer them in an informative and constructive way.

Senator Pastore. No, Doctor. It might please you to know that 

we went into these items quite thoroughly this afternoon and th at we 

more or less ventured with a different approach. We discussed with 

the hospital authorities some of the antiquated X-ray machinery that 

they have there in the way of replacement. We went into it quite 

thoroughly, and I do hope that chances are we will be able to do a little better than has been done.
262 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

But it is very refreshing to have you here, and, knowing of your 

devotion and dedication, it is always an honor to have you.

Dr. H erbst. It is a great privilege to be here.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very much.

Dr. H erbst. Thank you.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Stateme nt by Dr. William P. H erbst, Cha ir man of th e Medical Advisory

Com mittee to th e Depa rtm ent of H ea lth of th e Medical Society of th e

Dist rict of Columbia

First of all, I wish to express the appreciation of the Medical Society of the 

District of Columbia for being allowed time to app ear to present data on the 

subject before your subcommittee. In o rder to provide evidence of the extent of 

the society’s interest in all medical and public hea lth services in the District, I 

should like to present the list of the membership of our various public health 

committees which a re continuously active.

The inadequacies of the available health resources in the District of Columbia year after year have been of most serious concern to the medical society. 

We know that the Members of Congress have also been very concerned as evidenced by the ir authorization of a survey which was carrie d out and reported 

under the title of “Mileposts to Health " in 1953. Another fact is t ha t due to the 

lack of available financial resources medical service ava ilab le to the people in 

Washington hospitals has been and is being adversely affected.

With out furth er deta iled comment on the various fac tor s involved, we should 

like to be very specific in regard to certain figures. For the fiscal yea r 1958, the 

amount requested for the medical cha ritie s program of the Health Departm ent 

was $1,721,248. The figure as submitted to your subcom mittee was $1,045,000. 

Congress contributed, in addition to the above, $439,800, so th at the final figure 

was $1,484,800. This fund has alre ady been used up.

Because of the reduction of the amount originally requested, local volu ntary 

hospitals showed a deficit of $1,545 in 1956 and $29,510.68 in 1957 for the care 

of patients who were eligible for treatm ent at public expense.

P ublic H ealth Committees, th e Medical Society of th e Dist rict of Colu mbia

COMM ITTEE ON BLOOD

Dr. Frank W. Konzelmann 

Dr. John A. Reisinger 

Dr. J. Roscoe Creer 

Dr. Raymond O. Dart

Dr. Thomas F. McDermott 

Dr. Jack J. Rheingold 

Dr. Robert L. Simpson

COMMITT EE ON CAN CER CONTROL

Dr. J. Keith Cromer 

Dr. Lloyd G. Lewis 

Dr. E. Osmun B arr 

Dr. Jean ne C. Bateman 

Dr. P eter D. Comanduras 

Dr. M urray M. Copeland 

Dr. Frederick Y. Donn, Jr. 

Dr. Benedict J. Duffy 

Dr. Herbert M. Giffin

Dr. Pea rl B. Holly 

Dr. Benjamin Golden 

Dr. William R. Hyde 

Dr. Norman H. Isaacson 

Dr. Calvin T. Klopp 

Dr. John A. Long 

Dr. Lois I. Pl att 

Dr. Lawrence A. Rapee

PUBLIC HEA LT H COMMITT EE

Dr. Clifton R. Gruver 

Dr. Jack Kleh 

Dr. Charles G. Aronstein 

Dr. E rnest H. Aschenbach 

Dr. F ran k S. Bacon 

Dr. Josephine J. Buchanan 

Dr. W. Montague Cobb 

Dr. Milton M. Greenberg

Dr. Robert B. Havell 

Dr. Merwin L. Hummel 

Dr. Howard S. Madigan 

Dr. G. Foard McGinnes 

Dr. Beveridge Miller 

Dr. Monroe J. Romansky 

Dr. Saul Zukerman
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 263

SUBCOMMITT EE ON CH ILD WELFARE

Dr. Ha rold McC. H ob art 

Dr. D oro thy D. Dowd 

Dr. Wi lliam P. Argy 

Dr. Morris Chase 

Dr. Hu gh G. Clark

Dr. Sa nder E. Lachma n 

Dr. V. S. Lambros 

Dr. Jo hn O. Nestor 

Dr. M arga ret M. Nicholson 

Dr. R ola nd B. Scott

SUB COM MITTEE ON DIABETES

Dr. Lou is K . Alper t 

Dr. Kem p H amm ond Misli 

Dr. Adolph A. F rie dm an 

Dr. W. Lu ther Hall 

Dr. Sam uel D. Loube

Dr. Ma urice Pro ta s 

Dr. No rman H. Ru benstein 

Dr. Aa ron G. Saidm an 

Dr. Max G. Sh erer 

Dr. Alma J an e Speer

SUBCOMMITT EE

Dr. Ja me s J. Fef fer 

Dr. Milton Gusack 

Dr. Lew is B. Biben 

Dr. Ri ch ard E . d eB utts 

Dr. Owen G wathmey 

Dr. Sol K atz 

Dr. Jo hn M. K eshishian

Dr. R obert B. N elson, J r. 

Dr. James C. Wa lsh 

Dr. R. A. Dean e 

Dr. Ho wa rd A. Don ald 

Dr. Coleridge Gill 

Dr. Jame s P. Kane 

Dr. D avi d H. Ku shne r

ON DIS EASES OF TH E CH EST

Dr. Roy G. Klepser 

Dr. Ma rvin L. Kolkin 

Dr. Benjam in Ma nchester 

Dr. Ja m es P. Mann 

Dr. Joh n J. N olan 

I >r. George Tievsky 

Dr. George W. Ware

E ON MATER NAL WELFARE

Dr. Ho wa rd P. P ar ke r 

Dr. Ju lius S. Pive r 

Dr. E. C larenc e Ric e 

Dr. M elchior F. Savar ese 

Dr. Joseph B. Slieffery 

Dr. Ja mes C. W aters 

Dr. Allen Widome

SUBCOM MITTEE ON VENEREAL DISEASE

Dr. Ed ward E. Fergu son 

Dr. S. Ross Ta gg art 

Dr. Ja mes W. Choate 

Dr. Par ke r S. Do rman 

Dr. Herbe rt Goldberg

Dr. Leroy E. Hoeck 

Dr. R. Fra nk Jo nes 

Dr. Em mett H. Mark wood 

Dr. Gi lbert Otten berg 

Dr. Harold II. Whitte d

COUN CIL ON REHA BIL ITA TIO N

Dr. P resto n A. McLendon 

Dr. Ch arl es D. S hields 

Dr. Jo hn P. Adams 

Dr. Hill Ca rte r 

Dr. Th omas F. Collins 

Dr. H ugh H. Husse y 

Dr. Zigmond A. L eben sohn 

Dr. Ro be rt E. Moran

Dr. How ard M arshall Payne 

Dr. W. Ro be rt Perki ns, Jr . 

Dr. G. Victo r Simpson 

Dr. Harold Steven s 

Dr. S. Ross T ag ga rt 

Dr. A llan E . W alk er, J r.

Dr. Ch arles S. W ise

MEDICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO T HE DEPART MEN T OF HE AL TH

Dr. William P. H er bs t 

Dr. R. L omax Wo lls 

Dr. C rensha w B riggs 

Dr. W arwick T. Brow n 

Dr. P au l B. Comely 

Dr. F ranc is M. Fo rste r

Dr. H ugh H . H ussey 

Dr. George Maksim 

Dr. W infre d O verholser 

Dr. J oh n L. Pa rk s 

Dr. H er be rt P. Ra mse y
264 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

MEN TAL H EA LT H COMMITT EE

Dr. Zigmond M. Lebeusohn 

Dr. Robert T. Morse 

Dr. Christopher T. Bever 

Dr. Maxwell Boverman 

Dr. Joh n R. Cavanagh 

Dr. Robert H. Groh

Dr. John A. Kneipp 

Dr. Robert P. Odenwald 

Dr. Marvin E. Perk ins 

Dr. George N. Raines 

Dr. Isadore Rodis 

Dr. Marshall deG. Ruffin

SUB COM MITTEE ON ALCOH OLISM

Dr. E arl H. Mitchell 

Dr. Anthony Zappala 

Dr. Armand B. Gordon 

Dr. Willis B. Morse 

Dr. James A. O’Keeffe

Dr. Manson B. Pe ttit 

Dr. John D. Schultz, Jr. 

Dr. Sylvan A. Steiner 

Dr. Russell M. Tilley

CO MM ITl'EE ON POLIO MY ELITIS

Dr. William F. B urdick 

Dr. Daniel L. Finucane 

Dr. Wm. S. Anderson 

Dr. Milton C. Cobey 

Dr. W. Montague Cobb 

Dr. H erb ert S. Gates

Dr. Milton M. Greenberg 

Dr. George Maksim 

Dr. Michael J. McInerney 

Dr. Preston A. McLendon 

Dr. Robert B. Nelson, Jr .

For the 1959 budget which we are discussing now, the Directo r of Public 

Health, supported by th e Medical Society an d Hospital Council requested $1,099,- 

983 more than the budget as presented to you in the categories of medical cha rities, Distric t of Columbia General Hospital, and Public Health. Fif ty percent, or 

$104,000, was cut from the additional $208,000 medical cha rities request. Over 

25 percent, or $765,484, w as cut from the $2,929,484 additional District of Columbia General Hospital request. Over 30 percent, or $230,499, was cut from the 

additional $675,560 requested for Public H ealth.

It is the opinion of the medical society:

1. T hat the deficits for 1956 and 1957 should be made up.

2. That the amount app ropriated for District of Columbia General Hospital 

and Public Health is inadequa te and that it is unfair to expect the Distric t 

Director of Health to satisfa ctorily discharge his responsibilities with inadequa te financial support.

3. That the deficiency in the per diem remuneration and total fund s allotted 

for the c are of the indigent in the voluntary hosp itals of the Distr ict of Columbia 

should be restored.

4. That the continuous objective of these appropriation’s should be to improve 

the caliber of medical service made available by official Government and voluntary inst itutional facilities.

Increases over 1958 budget of Department of Public Health requested by

Department of Public Health

Public He alt h_______________________________________________ $675,560

D. C. General Hospital_______________________________________ 2, 929, 484

Medical charities_____________________________________________ 208, 000

Total----------------------------------------------------------------------------3, 813,044

BEQ UES TS AS PRESENTED TO YOU

Public He alth________________________________________________ 445, 061

D. C. General Hospital_______________________________________ 2, 164, 000

Medical charities_____________________________________________ 104, 000

Total_________________________ , _______________________ 2, 713, 061

Tota l reduction, $1,099,983—less t han requested by the D irector of H ealth .
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Hospital Council of the National Capital Area, Inc.

265

STATEMENT OF JAMES H. LEMON, REPRESEN TATIVE, ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM M. BUCHER, EXECU TIVE DIRECTOR

Prepared Statement

Mrs. Mizen. Next is Mr. James Lemon from the District Hospital 

Council for medical charities.

Mr. Lemon. Senator Pastore, nice to see you again.

Senator P astore. It is nice to have you.

Mr. Lemon. This is Mr. William Bucher, executive director of the 

National Hospital Council.

Mr. Chairman, this is our formal statement and I won’t go into that. 

Senator Pastore. We will put it into the record in its entirety. 

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement of P osition, Hospital Council of the National Capital Area, I nc.

1. The rates of reimbursement for hospital care rendered certified indigent 

patients under the District of Columbia medical cha rities program should be 

identical with those present costs at Distric t of Columbia General Hospital.

2. Sufficient funds should be made available in the budget to approximate the 

cost of discha rging the responsibility of the District Government for the medical 

care of the tax eligible indigent by the volu ntary contract hospitals.

In recognition and support of the above position, the Distric t of Columbia 

Hea lth Departm ent recommended that the 1959 budget provide the following 

increased ra te s:

1959 1958

Days w ard care . ___ ___ _____________ ______________________________ $19.33 $18

Clinic visits and emergency room v isits....... ................. ............. ........ ............................ 3.50 3

The Hea lth Departm ent requested an increased budget for 1959 of .$1,692,800, 

an incre ase of $208,000 over the present fiscal 1958 app ropriation of $1,484,800.

The House Appropriations District of Columbia Subcommittee under Chairman Louis C. Rabau t in considera tion of the above position included the following 

in the House re po rt:

(1) Inp atient reimbursement rate increase from $18 to $20 per day.

(2) An increase of $168,000 to meet the increased reimbursem ent rate.

The voluntary con trac t hosp itals app reciate the District of Columbia Commissioner’s support of an appropriation increase, but we sincerely believe that 

reimbursement should be at least the same amount as it costs the District governm ent to perform the same service at the District General Hospital.

The stated cost of District of Columbia General Hospital as of Jun e 30, 1957, 

was $19.99 per inp atient day a nd $3.50 per clinic visit.

Audited average costs of con trac t hosp itals for 1956 amounted to over $28 

per inpatient day an d over $6 per clinic visit.

Partic ipa ting nonprofit community hosp ital costs have increased similar to 

those of Dis trict of Columbia General Hospital. The losses presently being 

absorbed by these ins titu tions are sub stantial and in the case of Children’s 

alone amount to $246,000 for the fiscal 1957 program.

The con tract hosp itals wish to contin ue to do their pa rt in this indigent 

program. This is a community service, but it also means a sub stan tial saving 

of the taxpay er’s dollar because it reduces the necessity of extensive cap ital 

expe nditures on the pa rt of the District government, which would duplicate the 

presen t facilities of the voluntary hospitals.

In summary, the con trac t hosp itals are in a precarious financial position because of the ir participation in the tax-eligible indigent program. We, therefore, ask your help in obta ining more adeq uate reimbursement rat es and sufti-
266 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959

cien t funds for the fiscal 1959 program in orde r to continue to provide thi s 

vital community service.

Warwick T. Brown, M. D.,

Vice Admiral, Retired, Administrator, Washington Hospital Center.

William M. Bucher,

Exe cutive Director, Hospital Council.

Daniel W. O’Donoghue,

Legal Counsel, Providence Hospital.

J ames H. Lemon,

Chairman, Vice President, Children's Hospital.

The following District of Columbia institu tions are now par ticipating in the 

medical cha ritie s program :

Children’s Convalescent Hospital 

Children’s Hospital of the District of 

Columbia

Christ Child Home for Convalescent 

Children

Eastern Dispensary and Casualty Hospita l

Georgetown University Hospital 

George Washington University Hospital 

Providence Hospital

Washington Home for Incurables 

Washington Hos pital Center

EX CE RP T FROM CO NG RE SS IO NA L RECORD

Mr. Lemon. Before we put that in the record, 1 want to take this 

opportunity to express our sincere appreciation of what you did for 

the participating hospitals last year. It was a tremendous help here. 

Another thing tha t I would like to put in the record, if I may, is a 

copy of the remarks of the Honorable John W. McCormack which 

he entered in the June 9, issue of the Congressional Record.

Senator Pastore. Without objection, that will be done.

(The material referred to follows:)

[Congressional Record, Appendix, June 9, 1958, p. A5250]

Unfair to Hospitals

Extension of rem arks of Hon. Joh n W. McCormack of Massachusetts in the 

House of Representatives, Monday, June 9,1958

Mr. McCormack. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my rema rks, I 

include a n editorial entitled “Unfair to Hospitals,” appea ring in the Washington 

Sta r of Jun e 4, 1958, and a column relating to the same subject matt er written 

by Charles G. Brooks, and appe aring in the same issue of the Washington Star.

Congressman Rabaut, of Michigan, and the members of his subcommittee 

have been cooperative in the past to the justifiable petition of the hosp itals of 

the Distric t in the rend ering of the hosp ital and medical services connected 

therewith to those receiving indigent care, and in a manner highly commendable. 

The hospitals are entitle d to at lea st the amount they request. I hope the subcommittee, as in the past, will continue to recognize in this field the problem 

of the District hospitals, and in making the appropriations relating thereto, 

gra nt the requ est the hospitals, through their spokesmen, have subm itted to the 

subcommittee.

The editorial and article follow:

[From the Washington Evening Sta r of June 4, 1958]

Unfair to Hospitals

Hospitaliz ation cost figures cited to a House Appropriations Subcommittee by 

the Washington Hospital Council show clearly the inadequacy of the rate for 

indigent care recommended by the Commissioners. The council disclosed that 

the average cost to private hosp itals of gra nting free care to patients unable to 

pay have now reached $28 a day. Yet the hosp itals pa rtic ipating in the indigent 

program are being paid only $18 a day by the District. And the Commissioners 

have suggested a daily rate of only $18.65 for th e next fiscal year.

“The private hospitals are not asking for full reimbursement of their costs 

in treating indigent patients, however. They have agreed to accept $19.99 a 

day—which is the cost of care at the Distric t General Hospital. Rev. Thomas
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 267

J. O’Donnell, regent of Georgetown University Medical School, told the subcommittee it is unrealistic to pay priva te hosp itals less than the cost of hospitalizing indigents at the m unicipal institution. We agree.”

“Congress Gets H ospita l Plea on I ndigents

“ (By Charles G. Brooks)

“Washington’s private hospitals and the District Medical Society yesterday appealed to Congress over the heads of the Commissioners for a sharp increase in 

payments for the care of indigeDts

“Dr. William P. Herb st, chairman of the medical society’s advisory committee to the Health Department, called on Congress to raise the payments because 

‘the lack of available financial resources is adversely affecting the people in 

Washington hospitals.’

“He testified at a public hearing before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on the District budget.

“Jam es Lemon, representing the Washington Ho spital Council, told t he subcommittee, headed by Represe ntative Rab aut, Democrat, of Michigan, th at :

“ ‘We of the con trac t ho spitals are in a precarious financial position because of 

our supp ort of the tax-eligible indigent program and we need your help.’

“GEORGETOWN REPRESENTED

“The Reverend Edw ard B. Bunn, president of the Georgetown University 

Medical School, declared that ‘app ropriations and reimbursem ent rates must be 

more in line w ith existing and recognized needs and the present-day costs.’

“The Reverend Thomas J. O’Donnell, rege nt of the Georgetown school, added 

that it is unr ealistic for the District to place indigents in private hospitals for 

less money tha n it costs in District General Hospital, the city’s municipal institution.

“Dr. Herbst pointed out that the Hea lth Departm ent for fiscal 1958 requested 

$1,721,248 for th e medical-charities program, much of which is used to reimburse 

the private hosp itals for participation. The Commissioners cut this figure to 

$1,045,000. Congress raised it to $1,484,800.

“But, he said, because of the reduction from the amount requested, the money 

has been nearly used up, forcing many of the private hosp itals to eith er slash 

the ir indigent-care programs or suffer fu rth er losses.

“cites sla sh

“Dr. Herbst recalled th at for fiscal 1959 the Departm ent, supported by the 

medical society and the h ospital council, asked for a medical-charities budget of 

$1,797,800 but tha t the Commissioners cut the request to $1,692,800.

“Mr. Lemon pointed out that the Commissioners would raise the rate per 

inpatient day from $18 to $18.65 as compared to the Health Departmen t request of 

$19.99, the cost per day at the Distric t General Hospital. The average cost per 

inpatie nt day to private hospitals was cited at $28.

“He said Children’s Hospital alone lost $246,(MX) for the fiscal 1957 program, according to au ditors.

“Fa the r Bunn decla red the ‘annual and historical shortage of fund s is the only 

thing we can be emb arra ssed about in the indigent-care program.’ He termed 

it a shortage which ‘subjects us all to much criticism.’

“ ‘This s hortage of funds,’ he added, ‘becomes more acute each year and might 

well force one or several of the volu ntary hosp itals to withdraw from the program for financial reasons, thereby necessitating extensive capital exi>enditures 

on the pa rt of the Distr ict government.

“ ‘PROBLEM S RAISE D

“ ‘In spite of the huma nitarian att itu de of the volu ntary hospitals, the fac t 

rema ins th at we are sustaining large financial losses in caring for the indigent 

sick at the present inadequa te rates of reimbursement, and these losses pose 

problems in several directio ns.’

“These include, he said, the fact th at hosp itals must increase charges to private patients in o rder to remain solvent and absorb these losses. But, he added,
268 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

the charg es have been increased to the ‘near maximum of the average nonfndigent’s ability to pay.’ A serious burden is being placed, in addition, on prepayment plans such as Group Hospitalization, Inc., as charges go up.

“Furthe rmo re, he added, the present fiscal policy has an ‘unfortuna te effect 

on medical education,’ inte rrupting the program of continuous c are as fund s are 

depleted.”

HO SPITAL COSTS

Mr. Lemon. Mr. Chairman, this is our basic position : We believe 

tha t the contract hospitals should receive rates of reimbursement 

identical to the stated costs at District of Columbia General Hospital 

for performing the same medical service. We believe there should 

be sufficient funds made available so that the District government can 

discharge its responsibility for the medical care of the tax-eligible 

indigent.

Here is a little breakdown on this : Audited average costs of the 

contract hospitals for fiscal 1957 amounted to over $6 per clinic visit 

and $28 per inpatient day. The stated cost for a clinic visit at Distric t of Columbia General on July 1, 1957, was $3.50, and for an 

inpatient day was $19.99.

These partic ipating nonprofit community hospitals have suffered 

substantial losses under this program. For example, Children’s Hospital, where I have been a director for 17 years and have been the 

president for 5 years, audited loss of $246,000, and we have a policy 

there which we stick to, tha t no child has ever been turned away 

because of race, creed, or color or ability to pay.

HOUSE ATTITUDE

Congressman Louis C. Rabaut, chairman of the House Appropriations District of Columbia Subcommittee, in recognition of our 

position, recommended an increase from $18 to $20 per inpatient day, 

and an additional $168,000 to meet this rate. With the exception 

of the outpatient reimbursement rate of $3.50 per visit, as requested 

by the Health Department, the House met in full our position as 

outlined above.

CLINI C SITUA TIO N

Speaking to the clinic situation, we believe it is very important to 

recognize tha t the need for additional outpatient service is increasing, and if this is adequately provided for it would mean a substantial 

saving of the taxpayer’s dollar by reducing the need for inpatient 

days at a much higher cost. We are hopeful, Mr. Chairman, tha t 

your committee will see fit to increase the rate from $3 to $3.50. We 

would hope that there might be additional funds to cover it. If there 

isn’t, we would also hope that we could work it out with the Health 

Department to cover the program, even with the increased rate.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very much. We will take it under 

advisement.

Mr. Lemon. Yes, si r; all right.

I want to thank you again for your real interest in this, Senator 

Pastore.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very much.

Mrs. Mizen. Next is Mrs. Richard T. McDonnell, for Washington 

Home for Incurables.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 269

The Washington Home fob I ncurables

STATEMENT OF MRS. RICHARD T. McDONNELL, PR ES IDEN T, BOARD 

OF MANAGER S

General Statement

Se nator P astore. I t is an ho no r t o have you he re, Mrs. McDon nell. 

Mrs. McDonnell. Th an k you, Se nator , and I appreciat e th at , an d 

1 will only ta ke2 min ute s; I promise.

present rate of reimbursement

Se na tor Pas tore an d m embe rs of th e co mmittee , I am M aud M cDo nnell, Pr esiden t of the Bo ard of Ma nagers of the Washing ton Home 

fo r Incurab les . I w ould like to tha nk y ou r com mittee on th ei r be ha lf 

and the House of Re prese nta tives fo r ou r incr eased ap pr op riat io n 

which began Ju ly 1 in 1957. We now receive pay me nts fo r the 33 

medically indige nt District pa tie nts at the daily rate of $7.65 pe r 

pa tie nt, an increase o f $1.25 over the da ily ra te o f our ap prop riations 

of the 5 pre cedin g years.

present deficit

W hil e I fe ar we cannot hop e fo r an increase this year, fiscal 1959, 

I w ould like to b rin g to yo ur a tte ntion the f ac t t hat th e presen t gra nt 

of $88,500—pay me nts at $7.65 p er p atient-d ay —fall s short b y $13,000 

of th e actual $8.43 cost to the home of these 33 pati ents. For the las t 

9 mo nths o ur av era ge cost wa s $8.43 p er p atient-day , an increase of 13 

cents over our av era ge as of March 1957; th e $8.30 figure I su bm itted to 

you last year at that time.

INC REASE NEEDED

We do feel th at an increase o f only 13 cen ts, 1.5 perce nt, in the pa st 

ye ar shows a concrete end eavor by the home m ana gem ent to keep the 

costs as low as possible. An example is in ou r May food cost of only 

64.7 cents p er p erson pe r day.

Since any defic its h ave to be m ade up by har d wo rk of the B oa rd o f 

Managers or fro m legacies fro m ou r fri en ds, we sinc erely hope th at 

some tim e you will mak e it p ossible fo r us to receive rea l cost of care 

fo r these Distric t pa tie nts .

Ag ain I wish to th an k you fo r the conside ration you have always 

given to the W ashing ton Hom e fo r Incurab les , a W ashing ton ch aritab le in stitu tio n over 70 years old, ca rin g fo r 182 aged a nd chro nic ally 

ill members of this com munity , all of whom need constan t nursin g care.

Se na tor P astore. Tha nk you very much, Mrs. McDonnell.

communication

Se na tor P astore. We will place in the record at this po int a lette r 

fro m th e V isi tin g N urs e Assoc iatio n.

(T he le tte r r eferred to follows :)
270 DIS TRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 19 5 9

Visiting Nurse Association, 

Washington, D. C., Jane 5,1958.

Senator J ohn O. Pastore,

Chairman, Senate District Appropriations Subcommittee,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

My Dear Senator Pastore: May we ask that you will act favorably on the 

budget item of $35,000 for the Visiting Nurse Association of Washington, D. C. 

This amount was received las t year and is in the present District of Columbia 

Health Departmen t budget fo r fiscal 1959.

The work of this voluntary agency is vita l to the city of Washington. Our 

nurses in 1957 made 106,495 visits to 13,394 patients, 643 more patients tha n in 

1956. Fifty-two registered public health nurses under 6 branch office supe rvisors, 2 physical therapists, 1 rehabilitation consultant, 1 mental hea lth consultant, and 3 practical nurses carry on this work. Actually, we are short of 

nurses. For the population of this city, the service should be expanded. When 

patients can be cared for at home, there is a gre at saving over hospitaliz ation 

costs; also, the family units are kept together and thus suffer far less from the 

effects of illness.

The money allotted to us by th e Government pays most of the cost for the care 

of public-assistance patients only. Our total estimated budget for the calendar 

yea r 1958 is $341,440. Of this amount, $35,000 came (la st yea r) from the He alth 

Department contract and $50,000 is expected from paid visits. Therefore, 76 

percent of our work is done free of charge. We receive the largest sha re of our 

money from the United Givers Fund. The American Cancer Society, Multiple 

Sclerosis Association, and Inf antile P ara lysis Foundation pay pa rt of the cost of 

nursing service to patients with these respective illnesses. A small amount 

comes as interest from endowments.

If and when you have hearings in rega rd to the District of Columbia institutions, we should be honored and pleased to testify before you. But, if your time 

schedule is alre ady very crowded, we ask that this statement be included in the 

record.

Very sincerely yours,

Mrs. Neville Miller, President.

mental health

Senator Pastore. We shall insert in the record at this point the 

statement of Mr. Milton Denbo of the District of Columbia Association for Mental H ealth, who was unable to be here this evening.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement op Milton C. Denbo, Chairman, Legislative Committee, District

of Columbia Association for Mental Health

Gentlemen, I am Milton C. Denbo, chairman of the legislative committee of 

the District of Columbia Association for Mental Health. This association, like 

its fellow mental health associations in many of the States and other cities of 

the country, is devoted to (a) the prevention of mental illness—the Nation’s 

No. 1 h ealth problem; (ft) the improvement of the care and treatm ent of those 

mentally ill; and (c) the promotion and main tenance of good mental health. 

Our membership numbers some 3,000.

We are here to supp ort all budget requests for mental hea lth services and 

needs in the Dis tric t, believing th at the expenditure of these amounts will contribute materially toward preventing crime, juvenile delinquency, broken homes 

and the like—all of which are difficult to measure in term s of dollars. We are 

sorely distressed th at many of these requests were eliminated or cut before the 

budget reached you.

In partic ula r we believe th at the following budget requests should be allowed 

in full (for purposes of simplicity we have rounded off all figures).

1. The request of the Public Health Departm ent of some $175,000 for the 

legal psyc hiatric services division, child guidance, the adu lt clinic of the mental 

health division, and to establish a central mental hea lth unit in the Public 

Health Department. The House committee has allowed only $85,000 for these 

purposes. The existing facilitie s both for child guidance and adu lt diagnosis 

and treatm ent are pitifully inad equate to care for demands. The wa it for care
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 271

sometimes extends 12 months or longer, and the waiting lists are constantly 

increasing. We urge the inclusion in the budget of the full amounts requested 

to help alleviate this critical situation.

Included in the $175,000 request is $10,000 to provide medical consultation in 

the home in emergency situations involving mentally ill persons whose families 

cannot afford the usual fees for thi s type of consultation. None of this $10,000 

is now in the budget. Our association is vitally inte rested in the program and 

stan ds ready to cooperate in some measure financially with the Public Health 

Departm ent if the pro ject is authorized.

2. The Public Health Department’s requ est of $44,000 to help restore the 

alcoholic rehabilitation program to the same level of operation as before 1955.

3. The Board of Educatio n’s requ est for $98,500 for the employment of additiona l personnel, chiefly psychologists, to partic ipa te in the schools’ testing 

program and rela ted psychiatric and psychological services and thus determine 

pupil needs. It is only by an adeq uate te sting program that the special problems 

of stud ents can be detected and app ropriate and least expensive remedial programs worked out. The Commissioners cut the request for this item to $66,000 

and the House committee has reduced the figure still fur ther. While we believe 

the fu ll $98,500 should be allowed, we requ est th at at leas t the House committee 

cut be restored.

The fu nds requested would also permit the establishment of a psychiatric tea m 

to cope with severe cases of the emotionally disturbed who must be excluded 

from the normal classroom. The House committee has allowed funds for such 

team and we urge this committee to do the same.

4. The Public Welfare Department’s requests for the following: (a) $350,000 

for more professional workers for the prevention of dependency and delinquency. 

Only $100,000 has thus far been allowed ; and (b) $480,000 for specialized stafftreatm ent personnel of all types, including clinical psychologists and psychiatric 

social workers. The budget before you has reduced this item substantially.

Our association urges the inclusion in the budget of all the foregoing and 

the other requests for mental health services and needs, which we have not 

specifically mentioned, as a st ar t in the direction of seeking to cope adequ ately 

with mental illness.

General B udget Matters

League of Women Voters of th e District of Columbia

STATEMENT OF MRS. RICHARD C. SIMONSON, REPRESENTATIVE

General Statement

Mrs. Mizen. Next we will hear Mrs. Richard Simonson, on general 

budget matters.

Senator P astore. You may sit right there.

Mrs. Simonson. I am Mrs. Richard Simonson. I am replacing Mrs. 

Dunn who was unable to be present.

I am filing this statement, if I may, Senator. And, since I have 

sat through 2 full days of these hearings, I would like to cover the 

same points. But, in the light of what you have been hearing for these 

2 days, if I may for just a moment, I want to say on behalf of the 

citizens here who have not been privileged to sit through these hearings, I think that we are extremely fortunate in our voteless condition 

to have a legislature which gives the time and thoughtful effort to 

our concerns that I have seen you give. I am tremendously impressed 

by your concern for our people and our Government programs, and 

I say, lacking the vote, I think we are fortunate to have you in this 

capacity.

Senator Pastore. Thank you, and I do hope th at I will have your 

continued confidence.
272 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mrs. Simonson. I would like to touch on a few selected items out 

of this large budget, those to which the members of the League of 

Women Voters have given thought and study and have reached 

agreement.

CENTRA L ME NT AL HE ALT H U N IT

The first items are in the area of public health. The Department, 

unfortunately, I feel, did not request restoration of the $26,000 that 

was cut by the House from their mental health request. The House 

granted $85,000, but cut out $26,000 which would be used for staffing 

a central unit tha t would coordinate the work of the various mental 

health programs now in existence. This central unit would also give 

leadership and coordination to public and private mental health programs in the city, and it seems to us in the league that when we are 

spending over $11 million a year for treatm ent of mental illnesses at 

St. Elizabeths we should invest more in preventive work, and a cut 

from $111,000 to $85,000 may not sound like much, bu t it is a step in 

the wrong direction. We feel the request was too small to start with.

SOCIAL SERVICE AT HO SP IT AL

The next point is also a small one, but we consider it important in 

terms of human need. This is $19,000 which was originally requested 

for the Social Service Department of the District of Columbia General Hospital. In all the large sums th at you heard today I didn’t 

hear a word about this small department which helps the low-income 

people who come to the hospital not only sick but with home problems.

This small Social Service Department is terribly overburdened and 

they ask for $19,000, which was cut by the House, and we feel th is 

modest request would more than pay for itself in terms of helping 

suffering human beings.

RINGWO RM CONTROL PROGRAM

The third item is the ringwork control program which was mentioned to you today. This program has made some headway, but we, 

as mothers of schoolchildren, have first-hand acquaintance with the 

problem and can see t hat the funds are sorely needed, and we hope 

you will reinstate this small program.

Senator Pastore. I do not think that the program will be abandoned 

no matter what we do on it. You need have no fear of that. Didn ’t 

you get tha t impression today ?

Mrs. Simonson. We feel it will be another case of robbing Peter to 

pay Paul. If they have to pay Paul over here, we don’t know where 

they will rob Peter.

Senator P astore. Tha t is just what they said, but I would hope that 

you would look at tha t a little bit askance.

Mrs. Simonson. We know th at it is a worthwhile program and is 

still required.

HO ME CARE PROGRAM

The final health item I would like to mention is another one that 

was not brought to you or to the House in the budget, but we feel this 

is a place to give it public notice, and this is the home care program. 

This is a small program which returns long-term indigent patients to 

their homes and provides medical care at city expense. This is a
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 273

worthwhile progr am because it frees hospital beds, which, as you 

know, are in great demand. It saves money because it is cheaper to 

send a doctor occasionally to a home than to pay for a bed patient, 

And it also reunites families. I have personally been privileged to 

see a few of these families, and I can see how this modest program is 

really helping them, and it should be expanded. It would save money 

as well as help people.

ADDITIONAL TEA CHE RS

In the field of education, the League of Women Voters has a long 

history of study and interest. I will just mention briefly this matter 

of the 48 teachers which was discussed at length today.

You mentioned several times the 30 vacancies in relation to the 48. 

Our feeling is t hat with a teaching staff of 3,900, 30 vacancies looks 

extremely small, and if the additional 48 positions are not authorized 

they will not be in a position to go out and try to fill them. Also, 

this is a vital matter of principle to us. This is a small step in the 

direction of our greatly needed goal, which you know about, of the 

pupil-teacher ratio, and we feel th at recognition of this goal by a few 

more teachers each year is most essential.

Senator Pastore. The thing tha t amazed me today, if you recall 

when Dr. Hansen testified, was the presentation made before the 

House tha t if they were given this appropriation—I think in the 

neighborhood of $287,000; I do not know exactly how much it was, 

but it was slightly less than $300,000—that would provide for the 48 

teachers they would run up to part time of 361 classes, and then they 

revised those figures.

NEED FOR FU RT HE R STUDY

It strikes me that there ought to be more study made with relation 

to what can be done with respect to th is part-time procedure, because 

I think myself tha t if they would devote a little more time and study 

to it we could do a lot more with possibly fewer teachers.

When I say fewer I am talking now within the sphere of the 30 

vacancies against the 48 that they are asking for.

One of the amazing things to me is this, tha t they have an average 

vacancy of about 30 schoolteachers at any time in the school year and 

they do not seem to be able to fill those, and yet they come in and 

ask for 48 more.

Mrs. Simonson. You need a small amount of leeway for turnover 

and for administrative discretion.

Senator Pastore. However, there is nothing tha t prohibits them 

from going out and hirin g teachers. They can still hire these teachers. They have the money for it. If you have 30 vacancies you 

have the money available.

Mrs. Simonson. It is not my understanding tha t the same 30 

vacancies remain vacant throughout the year.

Senator Pastore. No, but there is nothing in our budget tha t says 

for what they must spend their money. It is their discretion. We 

make a lump-sum appropriation. We do not say tha t this goes for 

a mathematics teacher, and this goes for a physics teacher, and this 

goes for tha t teacher. We give them all the money and they have 

the money. If you have 30 vacancies that means there are 30 teachers
274 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROPRIATION’S, 1959

you can go out and hire. Why ask for 48 more? Ask for 18 more. 

That is logical.

Mrs. Simonson. It does seem logical, and we hope you will give 

at least the 18.

Senator Pastore. I think we provoked the thinking here today that 

at least will produce some results.

RECONSIDER ATIO N OF SPA CE AVA ILABLE

Mrs. Simonson. I believe the House action has been beneficial in 

one respect, that the schools reconsidered their space requirements 

and can reduce the number of part-time classes. We certainly don't 

like part-time classes for our children, but we recognize tha t the educators have found that, of the two, the part time is the lesser evil.

Senator Pastore. I am inclined to go along with tha t thought and 

I think myself that fundamentally we have to work out both problems 

almost simultaneously, more facilities and possibly more teachers. 

I recognize that, but I must say, and I think in fairness to the Members of the House, tha t it looks as if they looked over tha t school 

budget with a great deal of care and they were, if I must say, rather 

generous this year.

Mrs. Simonson. Certainly in the capital outlay we feel quite gratified, and we do appreciate tha t veiy much.

PSYCHO LOGISTS AN D CLE RKS

I would like to mention another item which was discussed today, 

and that is the psychologists and the supporting clerks for the Department of Pupil Appraisal. We have followed the development 

of this program with a great deal of interest. Last year a number 

of the psychologists were granted and this enabled the Department 

to bring its backlog down from about 3,000 to a current figure of 

approximately 1,000.

I believe you asked today about the need for the additional five 

psychologists, and our information is th at there still was at the end 

of the school year a backlog of about 1,000 individual testing. This 

is not the mass group program but the individual testing, and, of 

course, when a teacher decides a child needs a psychological test it 

is frustrating for her and obviously bad for the child to have to wait 

several months while a backlog of 1,000 is worked down.

PROGRAM AT WORK

Senator Pastore. Could I ask you a question on th at point ?

I would assume tha t you have exhibited a great deal of interest in 

this program. Have you seen the program at work? I am not too 

familiar with it, and I am quite anxious to find out from a disinterested party what they think of it. Have you seen the program at 

work ?

Mi's. Simonson. Generally I have seen the group testing at schools. 

My own particular children have not gone through the individual 

testing, but some of the children whom I know have, and they have 

had beneficial results; for example, being placed in a different section of a class if it were merely that they should be in a faster section 

or a slower section; and then sometimes, of course, more drastic read-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 275

justments are required. But these kinds of tests should be kept on a 

current basis if they are to lie of maximum value to the child and to 

the teacher.

Senator Pastore. In other words, this program has not to do with 

misbehavior? You mean it is a program t hat envelops, too, the seeking out of the talent of the student ? Did I understand you correctly 

on that?

Mrs. Simonson. It can result in that. It does quite often result in 

that. Tha t isn’t one of the original aims of it.

Senator Pastore. I understand from the presentation here tha t 

usually the cases referred would be the cases referred by the teacher 

herself or himself, who felt that the child had not acted as might be 

expected. That is the impression I get.

Mrs. Simonson. That happens very often; yes. This is one of the 

first resources to which a teacher turns although, as I say, if she has 

to wait a long time it is not a very useful resource. But she does turn 

there for an analysis by the psychologists, as f ar as they can go. Also, in the group test they often do uncover the gifted child through 

these testings and through the intelligence test programs which are 

given at certain levels in the school system.

We haven’t gotten a program to serve these children adequately, 

but at least we have the mechanism for discovering them, and this is 

a first step. If these additional five psychologists are granted this 

Department, this will bring their program up to the level tha t is 

required.

This is not something th at will come every year, 5 and 5 and 5. This 

is the staff they felt they needed to cope with the numbers expected 

in the next few years. So we would like very much to see th is program staffed up so it may be current.

CLERKS FOR S PECIA L TEACHE RS

You yourself noted the need for the clerks to support these professionals who do a lot of clerical work unnecessarily. Along with that 

I would like to submit for your consideration a report which you may 

have read about in the Washington Post the last 3 days, entitled “A 

Study of Teachers’ Classroom Problems and Needs.” It highlights 

the emotional problems of children and how they are or are not being 

met in our schools today, and mentions particu larly the need for p ersonnel psychologists in the Department of Pupil Appraisal.

This is a brandnew repo rt and extremely well done, and we commend it to your attention.

Senator ’Pastore. We will not put it in the record, but we will refer 

to it bv reference, and you can leave it here for the file so it will be 

identified in the record. It is rather voluminous and we won’t want 

to make the record too voluminous.

Mrs. Simonson. One of the points mentioned in this report, and 

one which the League of Women Voters has already studied and 

highly endorsed, is not in the budget; unfortunately, it fell by the 

wayside in pruning earlier. It is elementary school counselors. And 

these elementary school counselors don’t tell Johnny at age 10 tha t 

he should be a plumber or college professor. They work on these 

problems of early stages of maladjustment, and this report feels tha t
276 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

this is one of the great needs of the Washington school system, and 

this program works very well in other cities, we know.

PL ANNIN G COORDINATOR

Finally I would like to mention a few specific items in the areas 

of the physical well-being of our community. One of these is the 

planning coordinator who was requested by Colonel Matlie yesterday. 

The League of Women Voters investigates the public-works program 

every time it is revised, and we certainly see the need of a professional 

man to give his full time and attention to this public-works program 

to keep it coordinated and up to date, and we feel this position certainly merits your approval.

ENFORCEMENT OF ZONIN G

We also endorse the restoration of $14,000 fo r personnel to enforce 

the zoning code. The League of Women Voters studied the zoning 

code at the time it was revised, and we are firmly convinced that 

without adequate enforcement personnel, all this w ork, all the money 

and the effort will have been wasted.

BOARD OF ELE CTIONS

The final item I would like to mention is the $73,000 requested for 

the Board of Elections. Mr. Levy testified yesterday, and the League 

of Women Voters, as much as any group in the city, knows the work 

tha t this Board went through in the last primary. Our women volunteered thousands of hours. They worked all through the night and 

they are prepared to do tha t again when the need for volunteers 

arises. But in between these peak loads we feel the need of one professional fulltime employee at the District Building.

You asked Mr. Levy about keeping the records up, and we have 

been told tha t not even the cards on the last voting have been processed. And, as I say, we are prepared to work at the next election, 

but in between times we think one employee isn’t asking too much.

Senator Pastore. Do you recall tha t I asked them to submit data 

on just what the backlog is and what is not being processed so that 

we can point it up a little better in conference ?

Mrs. Simonson. Yes. I am delighted and I hope you will be able 

to restore this item.

Senator P astore. Thank you very much.

Mrs. Simonson. Thank you.

Mrs. Mizen. Next is Mr. Morris Kanfer of the Federation of Citizens Associations.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 277

Federation of Citizens Associations

STATEMENT OF MORRIS KANFER

General Statement

Mr. Kanfer. Senator Pastore, I represent the Federation of Citizens Associations, which consists of 55 member associations throughout the voteless District of Columbia.

We are grateful for the opportunity of supporting the Commissioners’ proposed budget.

Senator P astore. This has nothing to do with this hearing, but you 

all kept saying “voteless.” Do you really want the right to vote here?

Mr. Kanfer. I would say “Yes.”

Senator P astore. Why do you hesitate ?

Mr. Kanfer. Senator Pastore, we hope that when the time comes for 

you to retire voluntarily from your State of Rhode Island tha t you 

might become a citizen and the mayor of Washington. I think it would 

have unanimous approval.

Senator Pastore. I don’t know. When the time comes for me to 

retire voluntarily, I want to go home.

Mr. Kanfer. The word “voteless” does not appear in the statement, which is the same statement I read before the House subcommittee, but I injected it at this time for a very specific reason.

Senator P astore. Just to needle Pastore.

Mr. Kanfer. No; i t’s not that. I think th at the citizens of the Distric t of Columbia would have some reason to regret the Commissioners 

backing down on the request for a $25 million Federal payment. 

While the Federation of Citizens Associations nearly always seeks 

to support the Commissioners, in this instance it is my personal view 

tha t the Commissioners’ backdown on the request for a Federal payment, does not represent the views of the citizens of Washington, that 

it is the residents of Washington. In a sense the Commissioners do not 

represent the Federation of Citizens or any of the residents of Washington since the Commissioners really represent the executive department of the Federal Government.

federal paymen t

And, so, I want to go on record and state that insofar as I am 

personally concerned, and I believe I speak for the federation, we still 

hope t hat your committee will restore the Federal payment, the $25 

million, in line with the President’s request, and hope that in the future 

we can have $32 million which the Federal Budget Bureau has finally 

authorized for the first time.

Senator Pastore. I do not want to rise at this moment to defend 

the Commissioners, b ut let me say this, and I have no bone to pick 

one way or the other or no reason to be paying any tribute to anyone. 

Of course, if you sat in my position and had to assume my responsibility and had to deal with these Commissioners, I think you would 

quite understand their enthusiasm and their spirit and their vigor 

on behalf of the District. Colonel Welling happens to be here at 

the moment, but I can say tha t for all three Commissioners. They 

are very enthusiastic and very, very aggressive in promoting the 

interests of the District.
278 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIA TIO NS, 1959

Coming back to contribution of the $25 million as against the 

$20 million-----

Mr. Kanfer. Payment; not contribution.

Senator Pastore. Well, the payment.

Would you like to have $20 million as a payment or $25 million 

as a contribution ? Which one would you like ?

Mr. Kanfer. I believe tha t the Commissioners are frequently reduced to the role of begging Congress for $20 million, and on the 

basis of a part of the loaf is better than none, they probably are 

content to take $21% million. But tha t is not what we are entitled 

to.

Senator Pastore. That is not what they said. They present us 

with a tremendous dilemma. They said, ‘‘We are asking for $21% 

million now, but come January we are going to ask for the whole 

$32 million.” They have said that. I think they are playing a 

little bit of the congressional game here. They are being a little 

clever and exercising a little diplomatic in trigue here.

Mr. Kanfer. I think they have become better in the years than 

they have been in the past.

Senator Pastore. They reduced the $25 million to $21% million. 

They have given us notice. They have placed the Congress on notice 

that come January they are going to ask for the whole loaf.

Mr. K anfer. Why not be sporting about it and give us the whole 

loaf now and save us coming down again ?

TRIBUTE TO CITY

Senator Pastore. If you had Pastore to deal with, I suppose the 

situation would be slightly different, and I do not think or say this 

in disrespect to the viewpoint of anyone else. I feel that the C apital 

of the United States should be the showplace of the world. We 

spend millions and millions of dollars, which we do not begrudge, 

to help people throughout the entire world, which we must do because 

of the tension and what have you, and I do not have to go into detail 

on that. You do have a very, very lovely city. You have a marvelously beautiful city and it is hard to find anything else that compares 

with it. You have many, many cities tha t have landmarks and 

historic places that are legend and beautiful to see, but they are not 

so clean and refreshing as the natu ral beauty of Washington, D. C. 

It is a beautiful city, and anyone who is privileged to live here and 

to make this their home ought to consider themselves blessed.

I think tha t we in the Congress sometimes maybe are thought in 

terms of not showing the interest, but I think righ t down deep we 

do love the city. If we didn’t I don’t think we would run for the 

offices that we clo. I do not think that the full compensation of being 

a United States Senator or Congressman lies in the fact that you 

come here and just participate in the Capitol. There are many other 

things th at we enjoy and th at we like here in the city of Washington.

NEED FOR ADEQUATE FORMULA

I do hope, and I said this today, tha t the day will come when we 

will get a formula tha t makes sense and make our payment or contribution, whatever you want to call it, as any other taxpayer makes
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 279

it, and allow the people who pay the bulk of the taxes to run thenown fiscal affairs. I have said tha t a hundred times before. And I 

think then things will begin to change here. People will think more 

in terms of what their responsibility is in paying taxes rather than 

how much the Federal payment is going to be. And I think, all 

around, everybody else is going to be much better off for it.

But I will say this to you : I will say tha t sometimes I think maybe 

we could be a little more generous on the payment. There is a lot 

of talk here about what does the real-estate taxpayer pay. Here you 

have all the forms of taxes. You have real-estate tax, you have an income tax, you have a sales tax. I do not know what other tax you 

could have. You have about all of them. I think tha t the people 

of this country meet the ir responsibility, but there is one thin g t hat 

I must say for the city of Washington, and it is as exhilarating an 

experience as I have had over the past several year s: I have never 

seen such a fine group of devoted citizens who will come in and show 

the interest in their city like I have seen here in the city of Washington, and I say that as sincerely as I can say anything.

Mr. Kanfer. Thank you, Senator.

If I may, I will continue with my statement.

Senator Pastore. I hope I have rendered you almost breathless.

Mr. Kanfer. I will say that you have given me reason to hope that 

our cause has not been lost in the next 24 hours. There may be a 

change in the attitudes.

NEW FA CI LI TI ES AT D. C. VILLA GE

I have been instructed by the federation to say a word specifically in 

favor of the requested appropriation of $50,000 by the District of 

Columbia Welfare Department for planning new facilities for the 

aged at D. C. Village.

In this age of speed and space we are apt to overlook the needs of 

the indigent fathers and mothers of America. This problem of 

taking care of the aged has become acute in recent years with the advancement in medical science which has lengthened the normal span 

of life. However, we lag in providing suitable facilities for those who 

are fortunate to live to a ripe old age. I understand tha t there are 

only two licensed nursing homes in the District of Columbia where 

those who can afford to pay can spend the few declining years of their 

lives in reasonable comfort.

The Welfare Department proposes to construct under the public 

works program 10 new 1-story brick buildings as replacement of the 

existing dormitories at Blue Plains, and the $50,000 appropriation is 

required to defray the cost of planning for these new facilities, which, 

upon completion, will increase the capacity from 650 to 800.

In view of the recent congressional authorization to increase future 

Federal payments to $32 million, it is not necessary, I hope, to belabor 

the current request of only $25 million as contained in the President’s 

message of January 8. The $25 million figure is composed of the $23 

million authorized last year plus $2 million as a portion of the auth orized but not appro priated previous request.

I will not burden this committee with statistics going back to the 

time when Congress more equitably met the burden of running the
280 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Distric t gov ernment by ap pr op riating an nu all y 50 perce nt of the 

cost, an d the n how, in successive years, the perce nta ge has dw ind led 

dow n to 8 perc ent.

I shall tak e this op po rtu nity, however, to rec ite the changes in the 

Distric t which necessitated the eve r-in cre asing cost of gov ern me nt 

en tirely ap ar t fro m the inflation ary im pact upo n costs gene rally.

Th e city in a sense is like a l ivi ng organ ism . W hil e the re is grow th 

on one end the re is deter ior ati on on th e oth er, n ot on ly in its physical 

prop ert ies but also in its popula tion.

INCREASED NEEDS

There has been a substan tia l increase in the po pu lat ion of people 

in the age bracke ts over 65 and also in the youth population under 

18. The problem of addit ion al we lfa re obviously increases the cost 

in the brac ket o f the eld erly and the my sterious behavio r o f juveniles 

increased th e cost of policing and reha bilitation prog ram s.

The urban renewal prog ram necessa rily involved ad ditio na l expense of enf orcement of the hou sing code resu lting in the retard ation 

of the rate o f deter ior ati on o f bu ild ings and area s. Co nsultants have 

been employed who, wi th the aid of rea l estate appra ise rs, are now 

engaged in the reassessmen t of realty valu es abou t the city. Pu blic 

healt h dem ands hav e increased. Th e we lfa re req uir em ents hav e expanded whi ch requires the addit ion of 700 peo ple on the Distri ct of 

Colu mbia pa yrolls.

Increased costs of welfare insti tutio ns and even collecting and 

disp osing of garbage in expanded incin erato rs all req uir e ad ditio na l 

expense.

The city has bu ilt wi thin the last 3 years 3 new lib rar ies , which 

I am sure no one in Con gress would den y has a sa lutary influence on 

both the young and old fo r an inform ed citize nry is esse ntial to the 

pre ser vat ion of our dem ocratic way of life .

The Distri ct has imp rov ed its rec rea tio nal are as and impro ved its 

system of collection of traffic fines, an d now we are on the verge of 

pa rti cipa tin g in the m etr opoli tan region al conference to help solve the 

pressing problem s of polution of ou r rivers , tra ns po rta tio n, and to 

pro vide wa ter in Washing ton an d environs fo r the ne xt 50 yea rs. 

3,411 personnel were ad ded to our Di strict of Colum bia force, o f w hich 

881 were increases to our school system.

SELF-GO VERN MEN T

If the city o f W ashing ton ha d self-governm ent an d was no t limited 

in its pla ns to the need of the Fe de ral Government, it could balanc e 

its own budget and provide its own fund s fo r public works ju st as 

oth er cities do in metr op oli tan area s. But in such cases our bu ild ­

ings would no t be lim ite d to 8 o r 10 stories in he ig ht ; our pa rks and 

zoo, which are po ints of interest to the millio ns of people who visit 

Wash ing ton thro ug ho ut the years, wou ld be res tricte d in size, ou r 

tax base could be increased thro ug h more gen erous zonin g to pe rm it 

16-story build ing s fo r both ap artm en ts and business; bu t then W as hing ton wou ld no t be a showpl ace of th e Nation. As the Na tio n’s 

Ca pit al, it is des irable to retain a comp ara tively low sky line in ou r 

building s an d to maintain be au tiful park s, mon ume nts, museum s, and 

his tor ic places f or the va cat ion ists and visitors.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS. 19 59 281

I respectfully submit tha t the Federal Government can afford the 

luxury of maintaining Washington as a showplace of the Nation, 

which requires, however, an annual appropriation between $30 million and $40 million toward defraying the cost of operating District 

government.

If we are to consider the cost to the District of the services it renders 

to the Federal buildings, in the nature of water and sewer supplies, 

street lighting, and police and fire protection, and municipal services 

generally, and the astounding fact that approximately 50 percent of 

the land in the District of Columbia is occupied by Federal and foreign governments, tax free, we come to the conclusion th at the Commissioners’ request for a $32 million annual appropria tion is very 

fair and reasonable.

BUDGET BU RE AU APPROVED

It is significant that the Federal Bureau of the Budget has approved 

the Commissioners’ request for permission to obtain $32 million, Apparently the Budget Bureau is now satisfied tha t the annual payment 

•currently received is inadequate.

It was my privilege to appear before the Federal Bureau of the 

Budget in behalf of the Federation of Citizens Associations more than 

a year ago in support of the almost unanimous wishes of the citizens 

of the District tha t the Federal payment should be substantially increased. I recall tha t the former Budget Director, Mr. Brundage, 

asked whether the citizens of the Distric t of Columbia were carrying a 

taxload comparable to tha t of our neighboring States. I had at the 

time some statistics which were assembled by the W ashington Board 

of Trade which demonstrated conclusively tha t the taxload of the 

citizens of the District of Columbia was on a comparable basis, and 

I believe tha t this showing was an important factor in the subsequent 

change of attitude on the part of the Federal Bureau of the Budget 

toward the Commissioners’ request for a higher annual Federal 

payment.

FEDERAL GOVE RNMENT OPERATION OF ZOO

The federation further recommends that the Federal Government 

should assume the entire cost of operating the National Zoological 

Park. The park serves millions of people from all parts of the U nited 

States and other countries. There appears to be no justification for 

imposing upon the District of Columbia the financial burden of operating a facility which belongs to and serves the Nation as a whole. The 

estimated cost for operating the National Zoological Park for 1959 

is about $900,000, and the budget allotment for capital outlay is 

$115,500.

In conclusion permit me to thank you for the privilege of expressing 

our views in the hope th at we are helpful in your efforts to maintain 

for Washington, its environs worldwide reputation as one of the cleanest, finest, most stimulating, and cultural cities to visit and in which 

to live. We are also proud of our Commissioners’ achievements in 

maintaining a high standard of integrity and efficiency among the 

District personnel, who likewise are dedicated to the cause of good 

government.

Senator P artoke. Thank you very much.
282 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Mr. Kanfer. Thank you, Senator.

Senator Pastore. I do not see how I can quarrel with you very much.

Mr. Kanfer. Thank you.

Crime Situation in District

Senator Pastore. At this point, let us place in the record some 

resolutions of the Federation of Citizens Associations dealing with 

the crime situation in the District and with, the public-works program. 

In addition, we shall include resolutions from the Manor Park Citizens Association which advocate the merging of funds into a general 

fund. These resolutions were sent the committee by Mrs. Mabel E. 

Morris for the citizens associations.

(The resolutions referred to follow:)

Resolutions op Federation op Citiz ens Associations of the District of

Columbia

Whereas the FBI uniform crim e report of April 1957 showed that there were 

1,600 major crimes committed in the District of Columbia last year;

Whereas due to this increase in crime there has been an incre ase in the 

Distric t prison population, bringing it up to an alltime high average during 

the first quarter of 1957 ; and

Whereas during July, August, and September 1957, the inm ates of the District’s 

4 prisons exceeded 4,700 and these institu tions were bui lt only for a total of 

3,400 inm ate s: The refore be it

Resolved, That the Fed eration of Citizens Associations of the Distric t of 

Columbia in regular meeting on Feb ruary 13, 1958, earnestly petitions the Congress of the United States to reduce this congestion in our penal institu tions 

by appropriating the sum of $6,086,000 requested by the Public Works Prog ram 

Review Committee of which Mr. Richard P. Dunn was chairman, and also 

by the Director of the District of Columbia Dep artm ent of Corrections, Mr. 

Donald Clemmer.

Approved by the federation February 13,1958.

Mabel E. Morris

Mrs. Edw ard B. Morris,

Secretary.

(The sum of $6,086,000 requested by the Public Works Program Review Committee is a long-range cap ital outlay intended to extend over 6 years, to cope 

with the ever-increasing prison population which even now is 1,300 beyond 

present capacity. This sum will also provide for more sleeping space, training, 

and recreational facilities for the prisoners, a new dormitory at the Women's 

Reformatory, and a new Youth Center at the Lorton Reformatory.)

Resolution of Federation of Citiz ens Associations of th e District of

Columbia

Whereas the Commissioners of the District of Columbia have, on February 

24, 1958, presented a report to the Congress on the Sta te of the Nation’s C apital, 

which has been favorably received ; and

Whereas the report contained a summary of the general fund public works 

projects for years 1959-64 which requ ire an increased Federal payment of $9 

million instead of $7,500,000 as recommended by the Public Works Program 

Review Committee and an increase in Tre asu ry loans from $97 million to $100 

million ; and

Whereas the Federation of Citizens Associations, on October 10. 1957, concurred in the recommendations of the Public Works Review Committee for an 

increase in the Federal payment and a Federal lo an : It is therefore

Resolved at a meeting of the Federation of Citizens Associations on February

27, 1958, That the fede ration support the D istrict Commissioners’ request for an 

increase in the Federal payment to the District of Columbia to $32 million and
DI.STRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 283

authorization to borrow from the United States Treas ury $100 million to meet 

the financial needs of the District of Columbia ; and it is fu rth er

Resolved, Th at the federation supports the Commissioners’ suggestion th at 

the amount of the annual Federal payment to the District of Columbia should 

equal such amount as the Distric t of Columbia requ ires to meet the operating 

expenses of government over and above the amount of tax reven ue it receives, 

providing the taxes imposed upon the citizens of the District of Columbia are as 

large as the prevailing tax burden in the adjace nt counties of the District of 

Columbia.

Approved by the federatio n February 27,1958.

Morris Kanfee,

Chairman, Fiscal Relations and T axation Committee.

Mrs. Edward B. Morris,

Secretary.

Manor Park Citiz ens’ Association,

'Washington, D. C., March Jh

 1958.

Commissio ners of th e District of Columbia,

Washington, D. C.

Gentlemen : At a regular meeting of the Manor P ark Citizens’ Association on 

March 3,1958, the following resolution was ado pted:

Resolved by the Manor Park Citizens' Association, Th at as present restric ted 

revenues in the w ater fund, motor vehicle parking fund, highway fund, san itary 

sewage works fund, and other such funds bear too gre at a proportion—20 percent—to the general fund of the District, and may be used for other purposes 

and co ntribute to meet the general expenses of the District.

Th at Congress be requested to merge all such revenue funds into one general 

fund from which shall be disbursed all appropriately authorized expenses for 

the Distr ict of Columbia.

Your favorable consideration of the foregoing recommendation is respectfully 

requested.

In support of this recommendation it was noted tha t the press recently repo rted 

th at the Commissioners are considering the diversion of motor vehicie parking 

fund s for street improvements.

Very tru ly yours,

Ernest H. P ullman, 

Corresponding Secretary.

INTR ODU CTION OF W IT NESS

Mrs. Mizen. Next will be Mr. Charles Duncan, of the Washington 

Urban League, and following Mr. Duncan will be Miss Riebl, of the 

Americans for Democratic Action.

This is Mr. Duncan, of the Washington Urban League.

Washington Urban League

STATEMENT OF CHARLES T. DUNCAN, THE WASHINGTON URBAN 

LEAGUE

General Statement

Mr. Duncan. Senator Pastore, it is a pleasure to appear before you, 

sir. The Urban lea gu e appreciates this opportunity to make a statement in connection with this. I am president of the league, and in 

tha t capacity represent them.

The Washington Urban League has a continuing concern for community problems of health, welfare, and education. It is to these 

areas of the budget tha t we would like to direct our comments.
284 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 195 9

HE AL TH

Th e leagu e was g rav ely concerned when the D istric t Commissioners 

reduced the proposed mental health budget of the Hea lth D ep artm en t 

fro m $220,000 to $110,979. Ou r reaction shift ed fro m concern to 

genuine ala rm when the Ho use District Com mittee fu rthe r redu ced 

th is amount to $85,000, or app roximate ly a tw o- third s cut in the initia l 

request. This, in our opinion, does no t rep resent prop er rega rd of 

one of the most serious p roblem s f acing the Na tio n and o ur comm unity 

today.

The fai lure to recognize , classif y, and place un de r th erap y pa tie nts 

exhib iting ear ly menta l ma lad jus tm ents increases the like liho od of 

severe me ntal illness developing. An d when one realiz es t ha t, acc ord ­

ing to the best in form ati on available , the re a re more pa tie nts ho sp ita lized for menta l illness th an for all othe r causes, the ram ificatio ns of 

delayed t reatmen t are ap pa rent. The advanta ges to be accrued fro m 

ear ly detection and tre atmen t of me nta l dis orders are clear, and to 

delay will only compound the fu ture costs an d suffering for the 

serio usly disturbed.

The league str ongly urge s th at t he original req ues t of $220,000 fo r 

menta l h ealth care m ade by the H ea lth D ep artm en t be restored .

We also believe th at the fund s cut by the House for public healt h 

services should be restored. The program s affected by th is c ut concern 

the preven tion and con trol of illnesses with in ou r schools and with 

pro vid ing adequate med ical att en tio n fo r perso ns who would ot he rwise be unable to affo rd tre atm ent. To ign ore these h ealth needs is to 

invite the occurrence of acute med ical pro blems both in our schools 

and in th e total com munity.

WEL FARE

I t is well establish ed th at th e res ponsibility fo r m eeting problems of 

financial ad jus tm en t res ts with th e indiv idua l himself. But our 

Governm ent, t hrou gh p ublic assistan ce, comes to h is aid when ill fo rtun e and untow ard circum stance combine to th w ar t his efforts.

We were gra tified to see th at the House District Com mittee ap ­

proved the full amounts of $610,000 and $722,000 to provid e f or a ntic ipa ted increase in the public assistance load an d to br ing the payme nts 

up to the low, low-cost fam ily plan of the Uni ted State s De pa rtm en t 

of Ag ric ult ure . We wou ld hope th at in th e fu ture these paym ents 

will be based on the Agr iculture Dep artm en t’s low-cost pl an and 

not t he lowest one wh ich even t hey cons ider to be subsistent.

Th e House cut in th e Ch ild W elfare Division is an area we p artic ularly wish to call to yo ur atten tio n.

Th e work of the pro tec tive services division, which is greatel y 

affected by this bu dg et cut, is a most needed service. The prog ram 

of these workers is th at of correction an d pre ven tion. They pro vid e 

the city with an op po rtu nity to tr y to impro ve de trimen tal actions 

and habits of pa ren ts, and, whe re th at fails , to see th at the children 

will be place d in an envir onme nt be tte r suited t o their cound develop ­

ment. A t pre sen t th is divisio n has alm ost twice the caseload pe r 

wor ker recommended by the Children’s Bu rea u, and when this is 

compounded by ina dequate clerica l and ste nographic servic es, the
k

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 285

hardships and reduced effectiveness of the workers is tha t much 

greater.

When we testified before the House District Committee we were 

urging the restoration of the $184,000 th at had been cut by the Commissioners from the Department of Welfare’s original request of 

$396,000 for the Child Welfare Division. Now, with the additional 

trimming by the House committee, we feel it is imperative for the 

Senate D istrict Committee to correct this woefully inadequate appropriation as it presently stands.

Edu cation: Outside of the family the schools are the chief custodian 

of our children. It is axiomatic tha t the schools of today foretell the 

citizenry of tomorrow. That our schools are in an awkward, agonizing period of growth is recognized by all. Senator Pastore, the need 

for an increase in the school budget is twofold actually. One, the 

school population itself is increasing, and that naturally creates and 

produces problems. Secondly and more important, and I say this 

with some humility, but, nevertheless, with a great deal of sincerity, 

we are still making deferred payments on the mortgage which was 

segregated education here in the District.

As a result of integration, the country for the first time is facing 

the school problem as a whole, and substantial parts of tha t problem 

cannot longer be swept under the rug as division 2. It is for that 

reason that we support with all our vigor the increases in this area.

We cannot permit the present situation to continue in its existing 

state. The schools are faced with real challenges, raising achievement 

levels, strengthening counseling, reducing pupil-teacher ratio. These 

are but a few of them—challenges which require intelligent and 

imaginative planning, planning which requires funds so tha t these 

program needs can be effected.

BA SIS OF GRANTS OF FUND S

The House justifiably approved funds for the projected increases 

in school attendance. However, this increase ignores the need for 

reducing the pupil-teacher ratio in our classrooms. This point, of 

course, has already been touched on. If we are to realistically and 

earnestly take on the task of improving our educational standards, 

this is one aspect of the budget which must be given priority. The 

pupil-teacher ratio affects the ability of the District to attract teachers, to provide them with the time to devote special attention to 

certain children and affects the pace at which our children may be 

taught.

We were surprised to note t hat the House approved the request for 

a psychiatric team for the Pup il Appraisal Division without providing the funds for 4 clerks and 5 psychologists. Since it is the responsibility of the psychologists to help in the detection of disturbed 

children and recommend their referral to proper sources for help, 

it appears tha t the House has accepted the need for psychiatric help 

of such children but has not provided sufficient means by which they 

can be detected in the school population. We urge tha t this cut in 

the Pupil A ppraisal Division be restored.
286 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

COUNSELORS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

The princ ipal disast er me t in the pa rin g of th e b ud ge t of t he B oard 

of Ed ucati on by the Distri ct Com missioners was the eli mination of 

the $501,435 fo r 100 counselors in the eleme nta ry schools’ pro gra m. 

Ev en tho ugh the Hou se did no t res tor e th is amount, we feel it is of 

such crucial importance to ou r schools th at we would like to fu rthe r 

discuss this need.

Ou r 20 years of experience in ad jus tm en t a ctivit ies lead to the p ositive conviction th at counseling is ne ith er a fr ill no r an auxil iar y 

service, bu t it is trul y basic to a sound home- an d com mu nity-related 

edu cational pro gra m.

We know also th at if fu ll benefits are to be derived fro m such ser vices th ey m ust no t be d eferred to the j un ior high-scho ol level. Im mediate benefits to be expected fro m a sound realistic prog ram of c oun ­

seling will be lower drop -out r ate s, red uctio n in pro blems of t ruan cy 

and und esirable beh avior, and sound achievement goals.

A sincere appeal is made here fo r the resto ratio n of the $501,435 

for the modern counsel prog ram.

In conclusion, we recognize th at, alt ho ug h it is impossible to solve 

all of the problem s of the Distri ct now, co nti nu all y de ferrin g solutions is ill-ad vise d economy. We u rge t hat we a ll str ive to solve wh at 

we can tod ay so th at ou r com munity may actua lly pro gre ss instea d 

of find ing itself ove rbu rde ned tom orrow by the spa wn of things we 

mi gh t have faced in ou r time.

Th an k you very much.

Senator Pastore. Tha nk you.

Mrs. Wizen. Next is Miss Rie dl, fo r the Am erican fo r Dem ocratic 

Action. Fo llowing M iss Riedl , Mrs. Cox, of the PT A, will have her 

repres ent atives read y to c ar ry forw ard t he ir p res entat ion .

Washing ton C ha pter of Ame ric an s for Democratic Action

STATEMENT OF BEATRICE C0GAN RIEDL, DISTRICT AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE

General Stateme nt

Miss Riedl. Mr. Ch air man and mem bers of the subcommittee, the 

Wash ing ton ch ap ter of the Am erican s fo r Democratic Action draw s 

our mem bers hip fro m the Washin gto n me tro po litan area, with the 

bulk of our mem bers res ide nts of the Di str ict. On behalf of our 

chapter, I r espectf ull y reques t t hat the subcom mittee tak e the follow ­

ing into conside ration :

HEALTH

A t the same tim e th at much pu bli cit y has been gen era ted on the 

subject of m ent al healt h, and i t is a pp ar en t th at e xpenditure s mad e in 

time serve a vita l social need and a re o f good p ractica l effect, the House 

has cut the proposed me nta l-h ealth budget proposed by the Distri ct 

of Colum bia.

We urg e th at the full am ount of $111,000 be ap prop ria ted. We 

fu rthe r urge th at the $19,000 incl ude d in the proposed bud get fo r 

the Social Services De partm ent at Distri ct of Colu mbia General be 

restored .
DISTRIC T OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959 287

We strongly feel tha t expenditures made now will end ceaseless 

suffering by individuals needing assistance, and that it will save money 

for the D istrict of Columbia in the years to come.

SCHOOL S

We are pleased to learn tha t the House left in the proposed budget 

provision for 74 new elementary school teachers. This number of 

new teachers is needed merely to keep the present teacher-pupil ratio 

since it is anticipated that enrollment will greatly increase next year.

We ask that the provision for 48 teachers additional, deleted by the 

House, be restored. We also ask that funds for additional supervisors, supervising directors, and assistant principals be restored.

The request by the District for a psychiatric team was approved and 

this is a much needed innovation. However, with 5 psychologists and 

3 clerks deleted from the Department of Pupil Appraisal, we are 

afraid that the psychiatric team will be forced to perform unnecessary services, services which should properly be done by the understaffed Department of P upil Appraisal.

We feel that pupils need all of the diagnostic and treatment service 

which can be made available and urge tha t these deletions be restored.

We also urge that the $41,000 deleted which was to be used for textbooks and supplies be restored. With the increased enrollment expected, many of our needy students may be required to purchase their 

own textbooks and supplies and this is contrary to the entire concept 

of a free, public education.

We thank you for this opportunity to testify and for your attention.

May I take advantage of you one moment, sir ?

Senator Pastore. All right.

Miss Riedl. This is not the most beautiful city. This is a city 

which I have to be ashamed of very often.

Senator Pastore. Why?

Miss Riedl. I have a family down here and you take them to the 

nicest sections of Washington. It is beautiful. 1 came up here and 

this is a picture book. This is magnificent.

And my family, however, went shopping and they went through 

15 th Street and 14th Street down from where I live and they came 

back and they said: “This is worse than anything we have ever seen 

anywhere.”

Senator Pastore. We have some bad spots of course. There is 

nothing that gives you goose bumps when you see it like Washington.

Miss Riedl. No. And yet why slums ?

Senator Pastore. I gran t you there is an evolution taking place 

here, both in our school structure, and possibly in our habitations 

here th at will be corrected in time. But I am speaking about the city 

as a whole. I mean it is an inspiration really to be in Washington 

and to see the beautiful things here tha t have a meaning, have a 

meaning even beyond the granite tha t goes to make some of our 

monuments.

Miss Riedl. We have clay feet. And I wish we did not.

Senator Pastore. That is the reason why we have such beautiful 

people like you, devoted people, tha t will come here and show this 

interest.

27235—5! 19
288 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROP RIATION’S, 1959

I am not tryin g to indulge in cliches because unless the people of 

this community have the interest—and I am glad to see tha t they 

do—a lot of these things will fall by the wayside. It is a continuing effort.

We haven’t achieved Utopia here. But where have you ?

But I mean by comparison, if you see some of the places tha t I have 

seen—now I am not wholly satisfied with everything here. As a 

matter of fact, the contrast here sometimes is horrible, in some respects. But on the whole-----

Miss Riedl. It. is beau tifu l.

Senator P astore. Of course it is beautiful.

ZONIN G AND REGULATION OF COLLECTIONS FOR CH AR ITIES

Senator P astore. We have here a letter from Air. Joseph Donohue, 

a former Commissioner of the District, in which he discusses some of 

the zoning problems, and also the work of checking on collections for 

charitable organizations. We shall insert it in the record at this 

point.

(The letter referred to follows:)

D o no h ue & K a u fm a n n , 

Washington, D. C., June 17,1958.

H o n . J oh n O. P as to re,

Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator : I am taking the liberty of writing to you with respect to two 

items in the pending D istrict of Columbia appropriation.

As a former presiden t of the Board of Commissioners and also as a prac ticing 

attorney with some considerable experience in zoning matters, I am inte rested 

in the appropriation for enforcement of the new zoning regulations. These new 

regulations were adopted after a long and expensive study, most of which I fea r 

will be lost unless an adeq uate enforcement program is made possible. Of the 

$61,000 actually requested new money, the House allowed $47,000. The restor ation of the $14,000 deleted by the House is, in my judgment, essential to the 

success of the program.

After many years of study, an act of Congress regulates the solicitatio n for 

charitable purposes in the Distric t of Columbia. An appropriation of $25,000 

was sought to adm inister this act. The House cut the request to $10,000. I 

think the $15,000 should be restored. The regu lations under which this act 

would be enforced are expected to be promulgated on Jul y 1. They will cover 

a very broad field of cha rita ble solicitation. A pa rtial or haphazard enforcement can create more problems, in my opinion, tha n no reegulation or no enforcement a t all. I think it would be in the public inte res t to resto re the a mount 

deleted by the House in order to assure full protection to the public from the 

unscruplous charity rack eteer.

I am sorry to bother you with these problems and I do so only because of the 

importance I attach to these m atters.

With kind personal regards to you, I am,

Sincerely,

F. J o se ph D o n o h u e.

LIC EN SIN G, ZONING, AND NEED FOR A PL AN NING COORDINATOR

Senator P astore. Air. Charles Horsky notified us that he would not 

be able to be here to give his statement, so we shall put it in the record 

at this point. It has to do with licensing and inspections, zoning, and 

the need for a planning coordinator.

(The statement referred to follows:)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 289

Statement of Charles A. Horsky, President, Washington Housing Association, on the Budget of the District of Columbia

The Wash ington Housing Association is a citizens’ organization, almost a 

quart er century old, created to improve housing conditions by all practicable 

means. Our stateme nt deals with those budget items which we believe essentia l to the District’s efforts to clear slums, prevent blight, and save sound 

neighborhoods. We also testified at the public hearings held Jun e 3 by the Subcommittee on District of Columbia Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

I. My first comments relate to the budget requests of the Housing Division 

of the De partment of Licenses and Inspections.

(a) We strongly suppo rt the requ est of this Division for restoration of funds 

for the position of community relations adviser. Housing code enforcement 

cannot be effective without full-fledged citizen cooperation. Such cooperation is 

based on citizen understanding of the objectives of housing code enforcement, the 

provisions of the code, awareness of the official enforcement machinery and how 

it functions, and knowledge of what citizens, as individuals and working together, can and should do to keep their neighborhoods decent and pleasant 

places in which to live. The community rela tions adviser, working on the grassroots, neighborhood level, directly with groups, is a vita l instrum ent in eliciting 

citizen intere st and cooperation—in other words, voluntary compliance with 

the housing code. He does this by speaking to gro ups; advising them how to 

set up the ir own block system to get the code enforced; preparing necessary 

information pieces in nontechnical language, taking photos, etc. Coming from 

a citizens’ housing association, we are partic ula rly aware of the necessity for 

this work, which will also help to insure th at the good results of departm enta l 

code enforcement are not lost or jeopardized as soon as the inspectors leave an 

area. Since we must accept the fact th at we can never have enough inspectors 

to cover thoroughly all are as and dwellings needing atten tion, this program is 

all the more important.

(5) To say th at we can never have an adequate staff of inspectors, however, 

is not to concede th at we must make do w ith the inad equate staff we now have. 

We find it incomprehensible, frankly, that the budget submitted by the District 

officials does not reflect the need for add itional personnel in this area . We think 

it should. Five more inspectors are a rockbottom minimum.

1 assure you th at this is not mere wishful thinking. I.et me sta te, summarily, 

because time is short, the bases for my statement.

(1) Las t spring, in hearings before this committee and the House committee, 

the Washington Housing Association strongly supported the request of the Department of Licenses and Inspections for additional inspectors. Five inspectors 

were cut from the number requested at th at time because the justification advanced—the additio nal inspectional duties involved in extending the housing 

code to apartme nt houses in the proposed apartmen t-house regulations—were 

still prospective. Those regulations have since been approved by the Commissioners, and these additional duties are not now prospective, but current. If 

live inspectors were thought necessary last year, they certainly are still necessary 

to do this extra work. We point out that annual licensing inspection is now 

required of 10,000 buildings containing countless thousands of individual ap ar tment units.

(2) Enforcement, with the small present staff of 61, th us fa r has been modest 

indeed. The pioneer enforcement area , in the northeast, covers 130 city blocks. 

Afte r over 2% years, only 84 blocks have been worked in.1

 Thirty-eight blocks in Marshall Heights SE., have been surveyed. Three inspectors have worked in 

11 squares of 85 to be covered in the northwest are a near Cardozo High School 

There are plans, but no inspectors, for 3 other areas, in Deanwood, B arry Farm s 

and a nearby southeast area. While the Housing Division has been working 

conscientiously, we believe thi s record could be considerably improved upon, 

with adequate staff.

‘ W he n I testifi ed be fore Con gr es sm an R abau t’s co mmitt ee , he aske d me how nmnv 

dw ellin g unit s th er e ar e in th es e 84 blo cks . The Hou sin g Division ad vise d th a t thev ha ve 

in sp ec ted 2.806 ho us es in th es e 84 blo cks sin ce Se ptem be r 1956. (T he re ar e oth er ho us es 

in th is se ction wh ich do n t com e un de r th e ju ri sd ic ti on of th e Hou sing Di visio n, such as 

lic ensed pr em ises .) In th es e 2,80 6 ho us es th er e ar e ap pr ox im at el y 5,50 0 dw el ling unit s 

A “d wellin g unit is defined in D is tr ic t of Co lum bia re gul at io ns as “a nv ha bi ta bl e gr ou p of hab itab le room s lo ca ted w ithi n a re si den tial bu ild ing an d fo rm in g V s ii ir te u n R ro o m n r

which is in te nd ed to be use d fo r liv ing, sle eping, an d pre par at io n of m ea ls.’’ 8
290 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

II. We support the request of the Department of Licenses and Inspections 

for restora tion of funds for thre e plumbing inspectors. All 10 requested are 

needed in the proposed program for inspection of thousand s of commercial buildings, as well as dwelling units, to eliminate defects which can be serious health 

hazards.

II I. We are glad to support the request of the Zoning Adm inistration of the 

Departm ent of Licenses and Inspections for restora tion of $14,000 so that the 

supplemental appropriation will enable the hiring of 10 additional employees, 

needed to administer the new zoning regulations which went into effect on May 

12 last. Our association was among those which strongly supported the muchneeded zoning revision. But we realize that unless properly enforced and administered, even the best regulations are doomed to failure.

IV. Finally, the Washington Housing Association w armly endorses the request 

of the Executive Office for restoration of funds for a planning coordinator. We 

ar e very much aware of the enormous difficulties inherent in properly coordinating the many activ ities of our public-works program, vita l to the renewal 

of our city. The planning coordinator would be responsible for pulling together 

the already established elements of our public-works prog ram; for setting up 

priorities for each year's budget, for refining costs, estim ates, and other essentials. We emphasize th at proper coordination of the many facets of urba n renewal remains one of the most challenging problems our city faces. In addition 

to these activities, the planning coordinator will serve the Commissioners’ Pla nning Advisory Council, whose worth and effectiveness require staff help to develop 

necessary data and to serve as a liaison with the many agencies involved.

We appreciate this opportunity to make our views known to you.

Public Schools

Mrs. Mizen. Mrs. C. Rhodes Cox, president of the District of 

Columbia Congress of Parents and Teachers, will here have her representatives speak in an ordered presentation, area by area. They have 

very kindly consented to cut it down to an 8-person presentation to 

represent the 200 schools of the District.

Mrs. Cox. I will read the names of the persons who will follow 

me.

Major Brooks, president of area 5 council; Mrs. Edwin Snell, legislation chairman, area 6 council, second; next, Dr. Robert Martin, 

legislation chairman, McKinley High School; afte r him All’s. Gordon 

VanSanford, legislation chairman.

You can either sit or rise in the place where you happen to be and 

make your presentation.

I will present a general statement for the District of Columbia 

Congress. And these people who follow me will go into more details 

on specific phases.

Senator P astore. All right, Mrs. Cox.

Dist rict of Columbia Congress of P arent s and Teac her s

STATEM ENT OF MRS. C. RHODES COX, PRESIDENT

Genera l Sta tem ent

Mrs. Cox. The District of Columbia Congress of Pare nts and 

Teachers is an organization of nearly 45,000 members representing 

the parents and teachers of 136 public schools in the District of 

Columbia.

We are deeply concerned with the 1959 school budget which so 

greatly affects the welfare of our children.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 291

We are pleased tha t the House has recognized the importance of a 

building program to relieve overcrowded classes, and we urge tha t 

the school-construction program geared to a 30-to-l ratio in the 

elementary schools be made a top priority item.

We are gratified tha t the 27 special teachers, 7 kindergarten 

teachers, and the 74 additional teachers needed to maintain the present ratio have been approved by the House.

CUT IN TEA CHE RS

However, we deplore the cut by the House of the 48 additional 

teachers required to reduce the ratio to 32 to 1.

We feel that this step toward our goal of 30 to 1 is of vital importance to the education of our children, and we urge that it be restored 

to the budget.

The reason advanced by the House Appropriations Committee for 

the deletion of this necessary item, the belief that it would cause an 

increase in the number of part-time classes, is no longer valid in view 

of the testimony of the Superintendent of Schools tha t there will be 

fewer part-time classes than expected next year—that in fact the 

figure may be below that of this year.

PSY CHOLO GISTS AND CLERKS

We are glad tha t the psychiatric team was granted, but think it is 

shortsighted to cut the psychologists and clerks whose work preceeds 

tha t of the team.

Although the clerks granted last year have reduced the backlog, I 

understand tha t there are still 1,367 referrals unable to be tested at 

the close of the school year.

TEACHERS COLLEGE

We hope that the amounts granted by the House for transportation 

of handicapped children, maintenance and repairs, furn iture and 

equipment replacement, and the District of Columbia Teachers College 

will be retained.

This latter amount fo r the Teachers College is hardly a drop in the 

bucket compared with the need. The District of Columbia Congress 

supports the expansion of the Teachers College into a city general 

college to include a Department of Education and a graduate program.

TEXTBOOKS AND SU PP LIES

We ask that the amount cut by the House for textbooks and supplies 

be restored and tha t the administration positions also be restored.

These needs will be discussed further by other PTA speakers.

Some time ago we stated tha t we were willing to pay increased 

taxes for greater educational opportunities for our children provided 

the Federal payments were brought more in line with the services 

rendered the Federal Government by the District of Columbia.

As a result the District teachers are shouldering a greatly increased 

tax load and the Federal payment authorized was not appropriated.

Again this year the $32 million approved by the Joi nt Fiscal Subcommittee has been drastically reduced by the House. A $32 million
292 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Federal payment is certainly not excessive for services rendered. Our 

national congress legislation committee has found tha t the Federal 

Government would pay $54 million if it were taxed at the same rate 

as private business in the District.

The battle for the free world is being fought in the classroom. In 

Russia, teaching is an honorable and well-paid profession. And I 

would like to interject we might have those 30 teachers if they were 

paid a salary on which they could live adequately and support 

families.

RU SSIA N ED UC AT ION

No expense is spared for education of the children and young people 

in Russia.

They are already turning out 4 doctors to our 1, and more scientists 

and technicians. Lawrence G. Derthick, United States Commissioner 

of Education, had this to say on his return from his recent trip to 

Russia, and I quote:

They are convinced th at time is on their side, and they can win world supremacy through education and hard work.

This conviction is basic to all the ir efforts and all of their plans for the 

fut ure * * * it is a kind of grand passion—this conviction that children, schools, 

and hard work will win them their place in the sun and on the moon.

We come back convinced that we cann ot as a nation afford to disregard the 

challenge imposed upon us by the Russian race f or knowledge.

With Russia bending every effort to win this race for knowledge 

and survival with small classes, highly trained and well-paid teachers 

who enjoy a position of prestige, we cannot afford to do less.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF MAJ. WILLIAM D. BROOKS, JR., PRESIDENT, 

AREA V, PTA

Gen er al State m ent

Major Brooks. It is my privilege to be here again, Senator Pastore.

I am Major Brooks, president of area V council. I was here last 

year. I was going to say just a word: That we have appreciated 

very much the way you have made us all feel at home. And I think 

that we have quite a friend in you.

For this I think we are all gratefu l. We are taking this opportunity to publicly express th at fact to you, for your splendid cooperation 

and your work on the committee.

My subject this afternoon is capital outlay. I have a rath er formidable report which I would ask, sir, that you place in the record.

Senator P astore. How long is your report?

Major Brooks. Four pages. It deals, of course, with the specifics 

of quite a sum of money.

Senator P astore. That is a reasonable request. It will be placed 

in the record.

(The report referred to follows:)

Mr. Chairman and members of the Senate District Appropriations Subcommittee, my name is Maj. William D. Brooks, Jr., I am president of the Area V 

Council of the District of Columbia Congress of Paren ts and Teachers.

In past appearances before this committee I presented material relating specifically to are a V, but in the int ere st of a more unified hearing the PTA has
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 293

assigned specific subjects. I will discuss the subject of cap ital outlay in the 

pending budget on a citywide basis.

The original request for cap ital outlay from the board of education was 

$11,010,000. The item of the joint warehouse (th e school share is $1,262,000 of 

the total) was removed from the school section of the budget. I will discuss 

this in detail late r. This lowered the total figure to $9,748,000. The House 

Appropriations Subcommittee voted the sum of $8,920,300. This represe nts a 

cut of $827,700 from the original figure less the wareh ouse funds.

In arriving at this figure they made cer tain deletions, reductions, and in one 

instance added funds. The District of Columbia Congress of Paren ts and 

Teachers endorses this figure and strongly urges th at you retain this provision 

for capital outlay when you establish your version of the budget. A study of 

the items represented by the figure reveals th at this sum is the absolute minimum necessary to complete the first step in the new public works program as it 

rela tes to the public-school system.

We do stre ss this. Additional funds would provide additional facilitie s to 

rectify the deplorable conditions now existing in so many areas of our city and 

we ask th at you not limit yourselves to this basic amount during your deliberations if a t a ll possible.

The volu ntary deferring of the purchase of sites a t :

1. Alabama and Wheeler SE. (fo r an elem entary school of 16 rooms) ; 

and

2. 53d and C Stre ets SE. (fo r an elem entary school of 31 rooms) :

We recognize though, we feel th at they could well be added into this budget 

in view of the a rea needs.

With respect to oth er reductions :

1. We feel that the reduction of fund s for the Lenox site so that the four lots 

will not be pu rchased in view of the anticip ated highw ay program is w arra nted.

2. We feel th at the 58th and Dix Streets compromise involving the 11 houses 

on the northw est corner is sound.

These obviously reflect sound reev alua tions on the pa rt of the school author ­

ities.

The House committee recognized the need for the purchase of the following 

si te s:

1. 15th and Rosedale NE., elementary school, 24 roo ms;

2. 49th and Foote NE., elem entary school, 31 rooms ;

3. 6th and K Stre ets NE., elementary school, 29 room s;

4. 49th and Lee NE., elementary school, 31 rooms ;

5. Maury (addition) NE., elementary school, 8 room s;

6. Lenox (addition) SE., eleme ntary school, 8 ro om s;

7. 58th and Dix NE., junior high school, 35 roo ms;

and voted fund s for the ir acquisition. Any cuts or delays in this step could 

cost the taxpay ers a loss since the value s of land are spiraling upward and 

furth er construction on the land needed would probably force condemnation proceedings.

The House comm ittee also provided planning funds for these s ites :

1. 15tli and Rosedale NE. (see No. 1 above) ;

2. Maury NE. (see No. 5 above) ;

3. Lenox SE. (see No. 6 above) ;

and we agree this is another significant step forward.

Further, they provided the full scope of funds necessary for site purchase, 

planning, construction, and equipping of the building a t :

1. 49th and Foote NE. (see No. 2 in par. 2 above).

This, obviously, will do much to alle viate school overcrowding in this par ticula r 

northeast area.

Other budget provisions for new buildings which we endorse and strongly 

recommend that you continue to lis t a re :

1. Amidon-Greenleaf SW. (elemen tary school replacement) 23 rooms;

2. Goding (10th and F) NE. (new elem enta ry school) 30 rooms.

Eight additions are asked for. This includes one conversion. It is necessary 

to convert the present health school back to the needs for regular pupils since 

it will no longer be used in this special way. These additions and changes ar e:

1. H. D. Cooke NW. (elem entary school), 9 rooms;

2. Powell NW. (elementary school), 12 rooms;

3. Richardson NE. (elem entary school), 8 rooms;

4. Burroughs NE. (elem entary school). 12 rooms;
294 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

5. Langdon NE. (elementary sch ool), 8 room s;

6. Drew NE. (elem entary school), 11 rooms;

7. Plummer (Texas and C) SE. (elementary school), 8 rooms;

8. Hea lth School (conversion) (elem entary school), 8 rooms ;

All of these sites and structures, with the exception of the site at 58th and 

Dix Streets NE., are for elem entary school construction. This is in direct accord 

with the plan to bring the elementary level construction up first. Actually there 

are 37 elementary projects on the first prio rity list, together with the warehouse 

and a junior high school as indicated. It is planned to bring these requests in 

stepped frequency to you so it is imperative th at you not delete or compromise 

a single item thereof

I must speak of the need for the warehouse also at this time. This replacement for the old Virginia Avenue fa cilities would have a new situ s and would 

provide necessary quarte rs for the food services, to include refrige ration which 

is so impo rtant. I need not remind you that this issue has been before the 

House and will probably become a greatly expanded activity before very long. 

In addition, necessary storage space will be provided here for central citywide 

operations. No longer will it be necessary to continue inefficient operations 

from widely scattered points if this becomes a reality. Of course you know th at 

a redevelopment plan will cause the loss of the present building in less tha n

4 years anyway and you will have to meet this item again if you do not make 

this prudent provision now.

We of the Distric t of Columbia Congress feel that the plan ners have done a 

sound job. True, it is difficult to estimate needs in term s of tren ds of population migration and to know where to place a new building or an addition * * * 

but constant checks and necessary revisions are reflected in these very budget 

figures since the first dra ft. Our trained leadership must have our unqualified 

support. Let us give it through agreement w ith this fiscal planning.

Capital outlay m ust of necessity be large and certainly words come high when

5 minutes’ worth must be divided into 9.7 million. The items of this segment 

of the budget are tangible—they represen t the real property investment of a 

school system. In turn, the degree of soundness of that system depends to a 

very large extent upon how well those who plan and are charged with the 

implementation of the planning, do the job and provide for this facet. Capital 

outlay is indeed the very foundation upon which the structur e is erected.

We are the parents of the children who become the products of this system. 

Our stake in this is of the highest order * * * and we believe th at nothing 

indeed is too good for our children.

Give us this just amount for capital outlay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CAPITAL OUTLAY

Major Brooks. In turn I would like to direct my remarks to several 

things in the report that I believe might be highlighted for your 

benefit.

Senator P astore. All right, sir.

Maj'or Brooks. The sum of money th at has been indicated for the 

capital outlay as it now stands from the House side, we certainly endorse to you, because we feel that capital outlay this year in the budget 

is the result of excellent planning, a lot of sound thinking, and a great 

deal of cooperation on the part of many people in order to arrive at 

this figure.

I believe, as you said just a bit earlier, the House had taken quite a 

keen look at this figure represented by capital outlay.

For this reason we feel that this sum couldn’t really be cut another 

penny. It represents, as you know, sir, the first step in the building of 

the public works program insofar as it relates to school construction. 

There were 37 items principally directed in the elementary level in the 

total priority—in the first priority list. These items, the acquisition 

of certain sites, which are documented in the report, and also the 2 

new building additions, and also 8 additions to buildings now existing,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 295

will represent for us a considerable increase in the number of classrooms which are absolutely essential if we are going to pu t this system 

on a very sound basis.

Now, we feel, really, tha t this figure, as I have indicated, has been 

screened. And we are reasonably certain th at you could do no wrong 

if you would go along with this in the recommendation of the committee.

WA REHO USE

The partic ular item I want to stress which has been moved out of 

the school aspect of the budget which is this warehouse. I was talking 

with several officials. We have been keenly interested in this item 

particularly in view of the fact tha t it is going to be of greater importance as the days or perhaps the next 2 or 3 years go on.

In the first place the present warehouse is down on Virginia Avenue, 

a building in rath er dilapidated condition. It does not provide the full 

usage of warehouse space tha t it should now because they can’t store 

heavy items above the first floor. It doesn’t provide for the most efficient operation. And perhaps the most important point is that within 

the next several years, that building is slated to be moved out because 

of the relocation situation down there.

Well, this warehouse item tha t has been placed over into another 

section of the budget is an important one because if we get this new 

building now with costs where they are, perhaps stabilized momentarily, we feel that you will get the best of the taxpayer’s dollar fo r it.

school’s sh ar e in wa re ho use

Now, the school’s share is quite a large sum. I think it is $1,262,000, 

which was assessed as the school share. But we must point out to 

you one im portant factor in th at: Not only will this be warehouse 

space, but it will also be the headquarters for food service. You know 

the House action on that.

We feel that this is going to be indeed an important affair or activity 

in the school life within the next couple of years.

Senator Pastore. I want to say this to you, Mr. Brooks. I think 

tha t th at will be given serious thought. It was pointed out today, if 

my memory serves me correctly, that originally the cost was stipulated 

at $2,214,000,1 think. It has now been reestimated that $1,886,000 will 

be the price. All this has been brought about, I understand, by the 

character of the topography that has to do with the foundation. These 

figures were only established yesterday. And I think that possibly 

tha t accounts for the attitude of the House with relation to this.

And I am hoping tha t we can talk about this again in the hope t hat 

possibly something can be done about it.

But everything you have said is true and carries tremendous weight. 

But I don’t think you can be critical of anyone on this item for the 

simple reason tha t these figures were only developed and given to us 

today, predicated upon the results of yesterday’s calculation.

So, you see, as I understand just by moving this a little bit in another 

location they are saving $330,000 alone in the foundation.

Now, tha t is a big item, and th at was only developed yesterday.

Major Brooks. Thank you for your comments, sir.
296 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

I was talking with Mr. Riecks at approx im ate ly lun ch-hour time 

today, and I was no tic ing a change in some of thes e figures; and 

certa inly I feel—and when I say th is I am su re that the rec ord will i nd icate th at I am speak ing for the Di str ict of Columbia Congress—th at 

the things th at a re necessary to the efficient o perat ion of a good school 

syste m we mu st have.

We con tinu ously—o r pe rhap s I am being quite str on g in my la nguage when I say “continuously”—bu t w’e quite often ha ve sidesteppe d 

these t hin gs. We say we will p ut them on the shelf un til next y ear or 

^he yea r a ft er; pe rhaps thin gs will look up a little bett er.

We are prone to do th at with our own mode of living . We wa nt 

som ething an d c an’t afford it ; and say 6 month s fro m now we wi ll look 

at i t again and see i f we can afford it.

I have fou nd th at rarely are you in a pos itio n six months or a 

ye ar from now in a be tte r position, to buy it.

Tha t is no t necessarily a plu g for the p res idential pro gra m. But I 

am say ing the re are some thing s you ju st have to str ike out and do. 

You have to tak e positive action on them . So T wante d to hi gh lig ht 

th e po int abo ut the warehouse, because the figu re runs hig h, bu t 

again I mu st po int out the fact th at a gr ea t deal of refriger ation 

equ ipm ent is go ing to be necessary fo r centr al service there.

So those things pa rtic ul ar ly are the reas on why we are ask ing for 

th is item of the warehouse in its en tir ety and ask ing th at it not be 

cut.

I am very mi ndful of the fact th at when we were before Re presen tative Sm ith ’s com mittee th at there was some discussio n abo ut 

this warehouse.

Bu t r egard les s of that pe rhaps we could give o r take a few dollars . 

But we feel th at it is an essential item.

Now, Senator , these things that I have mad e person al reference to, 

and as I hav e ind ica ted the things th at we are ask ing to be a part 

of the record in this repo rt, we feel represent a substan tia l bi t of 

pl an ning in capit al outlay.

Now, we fel t, as I have said we hav e been tre ated ra th er kind ly 

in reg ards to the figure of capit al ou tla y this ye ar ; and we are sure 

th at your com mittee and the Senate in tu rn will give us the benefit 

of an even kind lier, more fatherly, attit ud e on this ma tter.

I w ould like perso nally to say th an k you again , sir, fo r the privilege of ap pe aring before you.

An d as ha s been the custom, and I tr ust as will be the custom, I 

hope to see you next ye ar.

Th an k you.

STATEMENT OF MRS. EDW IN SNELL. LEGISLATIVE CHAIRMAN, 

AREA VI COUNCIL, PTA

General Statement

Mrs. Snel l. I am Mrs. Ed win Sne ll, legisla tive chairma n of area 

VI, Council of the Dist ric t of Columbia Congres s of Pa re nt s and 

Teachers. I rep resent 17 schools in No rth we st Wash ing ton .

You pro bably are familiar with th e old argu men t abou t which mu st 

come first, the chicken or the egg. Ou r Wash ing ton school system
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 297

seems to be for ever wa iting, because one year it is the egg th at we 

hav e to have, and the nex t ye ar it is the chicken we mu st have.

Th is ye ar we are denied teache rs to reduce class size because the 

House A pp ro pr iatio ns Subcom mm ittee fo r the District says we mu st 

have space first.

Years an d yea rs befo re this we have pleade d, begg ed, arg ued fo r 

space, and it was denied us. When will we get this space? We 

have pu lle d like workhorses—an d this is lit erally the tr uth —for a 

ye ar and a ha lf to get a borro wing prog ram for a bi" school constr uc tio n order.

I f all goes well, it will tak e 4 years to get ju st th e ele me nta ry space 

we need, p rovid ed we leave off alm ost ev ery thi ng else on the se con dary 

levels. Ea ch one of those 4 yea rs—a nd actua lly it is more th an th at , 

because it tak es 2 yea rs to complete a bu ild ing once the money is 

ap pr op riat ed —we will hav e en ter ing our schools each ye ar a new 

grou p of fir st- graders larg er by a thousan d or so t ha n the grou p the 

year before.

W ha t do we do wi th the m in this inter im before we have space? 

Do we pu t the m in larg e classes and in 3 y ear s hear com pla ints th at 

acc umulated achieve men t is no t wha t it oug ht to be ?

PA RT -TIM E CL AS SE S

Or do we tr y a lesser evil of ha lf- da y instr uctio n fo r pr im ary 

children ? Hal f-da y school does deny to children certain experiences 

and op po rtu nitie s fo r gro wth. Unf or tuna tely , it denies them to 

children who need them most, because overc row din g is most oft en 

foun d in low-income, hi gh -pop ulati on -den sit y areas.

However, because the ha lf- da y tea cher is on du ty a fu ll day, those 

children who need help most can ge t it. Ac tuall y, ha lf day means 

hal f day only to p art of such a class. Th e most needy come to school 

fo r some hours in add ition , an d th ei r te acher works w ith th em individually to tr y to remove th ei r stu mbling blocks to lea rning.

Often tim es th e te acher a nd h er small g roup , selected from her re gu ­

la r class, use a corne r of a ha ll, or p art o f an au dit orium , or a corner 

of the pr in ci pa l’s office, or any o ther space they can find. In fac t, the 

tea cher of a ha lf- da y class is par tly a re gu la r classroom teacher and 

par tly a specia l teach er.

Pe rh ap s the gr ap h whi ch I h ave here w ill help to show the rel ati ve 

me rits of the three categories. An d as you can see, we hav e a difficult 

learning sit ua tio n—a lar ge class with one tea cher, and the n a bette r 

lea rning sit ua tio n is h al f day wi th p art of these c hil dren coming back 

fo r th e re st of th e da y.

An d then the best sit ua tio n, the class with 30 wi th a tea cher all 

day long.

PU PI L-TE AC HE R RATIOS

Now, I wou ld like to talk briefly about the pupil -te acher ratios. 

Ma ny people ge t t he id ea th at re du cing th e ra tio fro m almost 34, as it 

is at pre sen t, to 32 means ju st 2 kid s less fo r each teac her. An d th at 

does not seem to be very sign ificant.

Th is is n ot a t all wh at it means. Th ey are f orge tti ng that th e ratio 

is a c itywide average . Ta ki ng the total num ber of elem entary chil dren 

and dividing them by the numb er of re gu lar classroom teache rs does
298 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

no t reflect rea lity any more th an a descr iption of the ave rage man 

describes any one of us here.

Al l it does is to tell wh at a classroom wou ld look like if all the 

child ren were divided into gro ups of equal size. Of cours e, the y are 

not, and th ey cannot be divide d in th at way.

I hope th at c ha rt will help to show the rea l me aning of 34 to 1, 32 

to 1, and 30 to 1.

We ha ve some erro rs on here. I h ope you will excuse them.

Across the top is 34 to 1. We have 72,500 ele me nta ry children. 

An d at pre sen t with abo ut a 34-to-l ave rage, you see th at we have 

3 blocs of classes. One of 24 percen t with 30 or less; anoth er of 40 

per cent of the childre n with 31 to 34; and a thi rd , 40 perce nt in classes 

over 35.

Wh en you reduce it, you p ut the teache rs where they are needed most. 

An d, in effect, you cut the size of the bloc in which the children hav e 

large classes. An d the y move over to the next catego ry. When you 

reduce it to 31, you eliminate the lar ge class size. I hop e th at is 

clear.

Senator P astore. H ow lon g did it tak e you to pr ep ar e yo ur sta tement ?

Mrs. Snell. W hy ?

Senator P astore. Because it is a ve ry, ve ry well org anize d statement.

Mrs. Snell. I am terribly flat tere d. Tha nk you, sir.

I h ope i t will be easy to see from th at , th at the 30-to-l overall ratio 

is necessary in ord er to eliminat e a prese ntly larg e bloc o f elementary 

classes that have between 35 an d 45 chil dren in them .

Th an k you very much, sir.

Se nator P astore. Th an k you.

Mrs. Cox. Dr. M artin.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT E. MARTIN, VICE PRESIDENT, McKINLEY 

HIGH SCHOOL PTA

TE ST ING AN D PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES

Mr. Martin. Mr. Ch airma n, members of th e committee, I am 

Ro bert E . M artin , vice p res ide nt of the McK inle y H ig h School P ar en tTe acher Associatio n re presentin g area I I I he re a nd sp eak ing in be ha lf 

of the r equest in the bu dget for tes tin g an d psycho logical services.

PSYCHOLO GICAL SERV ICES

Te sti ng and psychological services constitute one of the most impo rtan t aspects of any good school system. The se servic es are indispensable in bu ild ing educational prog ram s fo r all typ es of children .

Th e gifte d students , the average stu dents , the slow lea rne rs, the 

distu rbed and m ala dju ste d problem chil dren—ind eed th e entire school 

po pu lat ion need these services. Pe rh ap s th at might throw a littl e 

ligh t on a que stio n raised earlier here this aft ern oo n con cerning the 

fun ctions of these psyc holo gica l services and psychologists.

Se na tor P astore. The only reason I rai sed th at question, Doctor, 

is because of the rea din g of the ex pla na tio n he re; and y ou have raised 

a good po int. I am go ing to go into it a li ttle more deeply.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 299

This is what they said:

The 5 school psychologists requested are prim arily technicians. Their chief 

responsibility is the analysis and interp retation of individual and group 

psychometric tests, including educational tests and measurements as well as 

psychological tests and measurements. These school psychologists will receive 

reports on children needing help, make individual pupil studies, report the outcome of these studies, and make recommendations to the psychiatric team. 

These school psychologists, therefore, are urgently needed in order to provide one 

phase of the work involved in handling of these disturbed pupils.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Senator Pastore. You go beyond that.

Mr. Martin. Tha t is one of the main groups with which these 

people work. However, they are also involved in testing programs, 

discovering different types of students for purposes of enabling programs to be built for different kinds of students.

Senator Pastore. 1 am going to try to ask more of a detailed explanation on that. 1 think we need to know that.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

Senator Pastore. I raised the question today after you do find the 

student who is disturbed, what do you do with tha t pupil ? Does he 

still remain in the same environment? It is a good thing for the 

teacher to know’, but on the other hand she cannot do a great deal to 

deal with tha t pupil, especially if we run into this problem that has 

been raised about this ratio of 35 pupils to 1 teacher.

Mr. Martin. Yes.

One sentence more, and then I will return to the copy.

Of course, the prim ary purpose of discovering these difficulties is to 

provide a basis of treatm ent by the psychologist, detecting it in the 

early stages. Yet as vitally important as testing and psychological 

services admittedly are, this has been one of the areas of greatest weakness in the public schools of the District of Columbia.

LACK OF MENTAL HEA LTH FACILITIES

In its report published a few weeks ago, the Senate Subcommittee 

on Juvenile Delinquency found “th at right here in the Nation's 

Capital child guidance and mental health facilities available to the 

school system are almost totally lacking.

Recognizing the significance of this critical problem in the Washington schools, Congress in 1957 provided for about one-half of the 

additional personnel needed and requested by the Department of 

Pupil Appraisal, Study, and Attendance. This has resulted in some 

considerable improvement. But much more invaluable group testing 

and individual psychological study are now being done.

However, existing facilities are still patently inadequate. The 

additional personnel needed and requested last year is required even 

more this next year. This department is still working at a considerable extent against the overpowering odds revealed by the study of 

the Senate committee. As the subcommittee clearly pointed o ut : The 

staffing of this special services department has not been kept in line 

with the pupil expansion. The obvious weaknesses in the program 

are (1) the majority of the children cannot be handled, and (2) many 

recommendations made to the parents by this department are not 

acted upon. There are no followup facilities to determine if their 

recommendations have been carried out.
300 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 19 59

It is imperative, therefore, that the funds, $72,312 again requested 

for expanding and improving the testing and psychological services, 

be provided.

IBM MACHINE

An IBM machine is badly needed in order to handle quickly and 

efficiently the many citywide group test surveys which must be conducted to secure the necessary educational data. Defensible school

f

irograms can be developed and based only upon sound data, reguarly and systematically made available.

ADDITIONAL PSYCHOLOGISTS

Five additional school psychologists are necessary in order to provide more adequately for child guidance and mental health. There 

is still a backing of 1,000 students who have problems of maladjustment not to mention new cases which will surely develop.

Delay leads to intensification of the problem. Speedy assistance 

to this group may not only do much to help these pupils, but undoubtedly will help to prevent them from becoming a burden or a threat 

to society later.

School officials are anxious to provide 1 psychologist to each 5,000 

pupils—as is the general practice in most of the larger cities. This 

would require five additional psychologists. It is virtually certain 

that, at cu rrent pay scales, these five additional general psychologists 

could be secured. With them added to the existing staff, it would 

be possible to provide psychological services on a preventive basis 

rath er than the largely remedial and emergency basis as is now the 

case.

Danger signals could be detected more effectively and disruptive 

results prevented or at least reduced.

ADDITIONAL CLERKS

Three additional clerks are needed to perform the various clerical 

duties of the Department of Pupil Appraisal, Study, and Attendance. 

At present the entire staff—administrative, supervisory, and psychological—is required to do routine clerical chores. This is uneconomical, an obvious waste of specialized skills which are sorely needed in 

their professional capacities.

With respect to the additional clerks requested, it should be noted 

tha t 1 clerk is needed for every 3 or 4 psychologists. The existing 

ratio is 1 clerk to 10 psychologists. This prevents getting reports out 

on time and making services available at the time they are needed, 

and it results in trained psychologists having to divert their time to 

clerical duties—a poor use of professional skills.

PSYCHIATRIC TEAM

Finally, a psychiatric team (1 psychiatrist, 2 psychiatric social 

workers, 1 clinical psychologist) is necessary to work with the growing number of pupils needing psychiatric services. In our increasingly complex urban society, impressionable young people are subjected to more and greater stresses and strains. It is the responsi-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 301

bility of society to pro vide for th is socially con ditione d problem . In 

doing so, the en tire co mm unity stan ds to benefit.

It is a ra th er sob erin g th ou gh t to realize th at every 3 m inutes an ­

other person is admi tte d to a mental in stitu tio n and th at th e best evidence ind icates th at at least 10 p ercent o f ou r schoolchildre n are victims of ce rta in ty pes of p ers onality m ala dju stm ents.

Requests made here are modest, ind eed; the y rep res ent only wh at 

is requ ired to br ing the fac ilitie s in this are a u p to merely a min imu m 

level of adeq uacy. I close by earnestly re iter at in g the statem ent of 

the subcom mittee of your dis tin gu ish ed colleagu es which said:

The members of the subcommittee entre at the Congress of the United States 

to app ropriate the necessary money to make the school system of the Nation’s 

Capital one th at can be emulated rather tha n one th at is inadequa te in terms 

of personnel and ava ilable facilities.

I th an k you, sir , for the op po rtu nity of presentin g thi s statem ent.

Se na tor P astore. Tha nk you very much, s ir.

STATEM ENT 0E MRS. GORDON VAN SANFORD, LEGIS LATIV E 

CHAIR MAN, AREA COUNCIL 2A, PTA

• Gen er al State m ent

Mrs. Van Sanford. Mr. Ch airma n, since we ha d very good tr ea tme nt by the House and since there are three subjects th at I covered 

the re, the fu rn itur e and equ ipm ent, ma intenance and requirements, 

an d acc red itations, I will no t cover those this even ing. Because the y 

are items th at are necessary .

I will address myself to three subjec ts: Sum me r school supplies, te xt ­

books and sup plies generally, and cu rri culum pr intin g.

SU M MER SCHO OL SU PP LIE S

Las t summer a nd a ga in th is year, p aren ts m ust p ay $2 per child fo r 

sum mer school sup plie s. An act o f Con gress sta ted in the Di str ict of 

Columbia Code, section 31-1 01: “All books and s upplies to be prov ide d 

fre e of charg e.”

In requ iri ng or con doning a reques t th at stu dents pay fo r pa rt of 

th ei r own school ma ter ial s, there is a vio lation o f the law. The Bo ard 

of Ed uc ation can not supp ly these item s if there is no ap prop riation 

to cove r them . Th erefo re, we cha rge you, the App ro pr iatio ns Committee, w ith the re sponsib ility of pro viding these fun ds.

TEXTBOO KS AND SU PP LIE S

Be fore I go into th at , I wou ld like to say here th at we are op erating 

on such a tig ht ap pr op riatio n fo r textbooks and sup plie s th at the 

child ren in the e lem ent ary schools are no t allowed to tak e their te xt ­

books home because it is such a big c hore, an d we hav e to go th roug h 

so much pro ced ure in orde r to get the necessa ry ap prop ria tio ns fo r 

textbooks, th at if one is lost or des troyed or dama ged beyond use, we 

do no t have any w ay of rep lac ing the se books.

So, there for e, un til a child is in at lea st ju ni or high school, unless 

it is a ve ry special case and pa rents are ask ed to be sure and tak e care
302 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRIATION S, 1959

of the books and bring them back in, they are not allowed to take them 

home.

Fund s presently available for the purchase of textbooks and educational supplies contain no reserve of flexibility to absorb any part of 

the increased expenditures necessary to provide for the needs of the 

increase in school population which will occur the following year. 

Funds are now based on the previous year’s average daily membership 

for October, not total enrollment of pupils and with no regard for 

inevitable increase in enrollment.

The allotment should be based on a projected total pupil enrollment 

basis. Until this is done, we will never have the minimum requirements.

I would like to say here that T know for a fact that there was 1 

school here tha t has an enrollment of around 700 this year, but they 

had at least half of those children go out and another 350 come in. 

So, actually, they are handling over 1,000 children, closer to 1,200 

children.

And yet the textbooks and supplies tha t are given to them are 

based on the previous year's allotment, the previous October figure 

for the daily membership. That is Banc roft School. That is not 

the only one that is doing that. I mean t hat is’in a number of them. 

But I can vouch for that as a fact.

Senator P astore. Thev are askin g for what registr ati on ?

Mrs. Van Sanford. The amount that was allowed was only about 

9,000, which would keep us at the standard, meaning the books that 

we have at this point are way behind what they should be. We have 

some books that are being used that are 1926 versions.

Now, I saw those with my own eves. So I know that that is so.

Now, that does not mean that all of our books are tha t old, but 

many, many of our books are 10,15 years old, and older.

Senator Pastore. We would be interested, Mr. Lowe, in knowing a 

little something about that; I mean this idea tha t the allocation is 

predicated upon a certain school population and then a change is 

made where they increase it, and the textbook allowance remains the 

same. I mean is that the point you make ?

Mrs. Van Sanford. I believe I will bring tha t out later in my 

statement.

Mr. Lowe. We will supply information on that, Senator.

RESERVE FU NK FOR SU PP LIES

Mrs. Van Sanford. Tn addition there should he a general reserve 

fund for supplying schools which have unanticipated large increases 

in September enrollment and for use also to supplement the supplies 

for schools which have a heavy turnover during each year.

The number of items on the approved educational supply list has 

increased by approximately one-third since the end of World W ar TT. 

Tn spite of this from the 1930’s until last year the book and supply 

allotment remained $4.25 per child per year. The 1958 appropriation provided an increase to $4.60 per child per year. Surely no one 

can believe that the same school supplies tha t cost $4.25 in the 1930’s 

can be purchased for $4.60 per child per year today.

Since this allotm ent c ann ot cover t he c ur re nt needs, we c annot possibly m ake u p the backlo g needs.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 303

In other words, we keep falling farther and farthe r behind every 

year. So, it is not the fault of the school administration tha t we do 

not have the textbooks tha t we need. It is because we do not have the 

allotment necessary.

We keep getting this large influx of children, and we have no 

books to give them.

The ever-expanding curriculum requires increased amounts of 

teaching materials and increased numbers as well as frequent changes 

of textbooks. Thus the revision of courses of study, expanding curriculum, and continual price and pupil enrollment increases necessitate additional funds for textbooks, educational supplies, and printed 

courses of study. Therefore, we ask for the restoration of the textbook and supply item to the original amount requested by the Board 

of Education.

CU RRIC ULU M PR IN TIN G

Prin ted courses of study which should be given to each teacher. 

These represent blueprints of instruction. These outlines set forth 

the major components of each course or subject and contain guides 

for use in making effective presentations. They inform each teacher 

as to how much material she is expected to cover within a given 

period of time on a particular grade level, and within various instructional groups.

These guides are one of the methods by which the school administration attempts to assure a relatively uniform coverage of each 

subject in each of the schools where it is taught. These teaching aids 

are necessary for both new and experienced teachers in order th at all 

may be guided by the same standards in each field.

The need for curriculum guides increases in direct proportion to 

the expanding size of the enrollment because additional teachers are 

hired as enrollment increases. Courses of study must have frequent 

revisions and reprints if they are to be kept up to date. As more 

and more is discovered that needs to be taught, and as more and more 

is discovered about teaching methods and procedures, the school system w ill be able to do an increasingly better job if it is adequately 

financed.

As in industry, the field of education has made rapid strides during 

the past two decades in the development of new and improved techniques in teaching, testing and counseling. However, in the District 

of Columbia public schools a review of our courses of study shows 

tha t some have not been revised for as long as 15 years because there 

have not been sufficient funds to allocate to this purpose. Therefore, 

w’e are asking tha t you restore the curriculum printing item to the 

1959 budget as originally requested by the Board of Education.

CO NC LU SION

In conclusion the educational program aims a t training each individual student to the highest level of which he is capable. The trend 

is definitely in the direction of concentration upon the specific needs 

of the individual and aw ay from mass education.

The major operating needs of the District of Columbia public 

schools stem from the ever-increasing enrollment and from the attempts to gear the educational program to present-day requirements.

27235— 51 20
304 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Many school items are currently being paid for from personal funds 

of principals, teachers, custodians, and students and from limited 

PTA funds or the schools are doing without these items because 

appropriations for operating expenses simply are not sufficient to 

cover them.

I have attached the sheet showing some of these items. Of course, 

there are many, many more that I could put on there.

Senator Pastore. We will make the sheet a part of the record. 

(The information referred to follows:)

Some of th e Items foe Schools Bought by E mploye es of th e Schools, PTA 

or Studen ts

1. Accreditation fees for high schools and Teachers College (these fees have 

been paid by student fun ds ).

2. Reference hooks (such as World Book, dictionaries, etc.).

3. Bookshelves (for storing books during summer or for short time before 

ano ther class uses the same series).

4. Stamps (for mail from one school to another, from school to par ents or 

from school to adm inistration or atte ndance departmen t. All regular mail is 

sent by carrier truc k which sometimes takes 2 to 3 weeks to send mail and 

receive a reply even though the answer is sent the same day the mail is 

deliv ered).

5. Radios, TV’s, phonographs, and records (these are used for classroom teac hing of various subjects. Almost every school bought TV’s at the time that there 

were a number of subjects being presented by our local channels. The school 

authoritie s urged PTA’s and other people to help buy them for the schools. No 

appropriation money was used for the m).

6. Toilet tissue, soap, mops, cleansers of all types (these items were items 

in very short supply or of such inferior quality that they could not be use d).

7. Couch covers (there is no appropriation to cover the purchase or cleaning 

of covers or pillow ca ses; these are used by children who get sick or hu rt at 

school).

8. Linoleum rugs (kindergarten , first- and second-grade children do much 

work in groups on the ru gs ).

9. Emergency tax ifa re for hurt or sick children (when unable to walk home).

10. Money for emergency lunches (if for some reaso n child is strand ed at 

school).

11. Miscellaneous items needed for immediate use (e. g., mousetraps, screens, 

hinges, braces, wire, padlocks, light bulbs).

12. Flower seeds, grass seed.

13. Ropes, balls, etc. Almost all playground equipment.

14. Raincoats for safety patrol children (th eir ordinary rain coats are not 

heavy enough for such long periods of stan ding in the rain or snow while on 

dut y).

This is, of course, not a complete list of such items.

APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED

Mrs. Van Sanford. All of the citizens of the District of Columbia 

are asking that the Congress appropriate public funds to pay these 

public expenses so that the schools of the District of Columbia will 

no longer have to beg funds from its employees, the students, or their 

parents.

Thank you very much.

Senator P astore. Thank you very much.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 305

STATEMENT OF MRS. FLORENCE V. CRAVER, LEGIS LATIV E 

CHA IRMAN, AREA 2, COUNCIL B, PTA

General Stateme nt

Mrs. Graver. Senator Pastore, and members, I am legislative chairman of area 2B. We wish first to thank the Members of Congress 

who have appropriated salaries for 74 additional teachers, and for 

leaving intact the $26,791 for a psychiatric team in the pupil-appraisal 

department. We are very sorry that the $40,000 for further help in 

this department was deleted.

“Hope springs eternal in the human breast” so we are again calling 

to your attention the great need for a 30 to 1 pupil-teacher average 

in the near future.

need for more tea chers

The 74 added teachers may hold the average of 33.4 where i t is or 

possibly reduce it to 32, providing no more pupils join the waiting list 

of 1,210 as per the May 1958 count.

We need the other 48 teachers now. If we wait another year or two 

the bottleneck will be terrific. True, there are not enough classrooms, 

but why not relieve the high employment payroll and start building 

some now.

More teachers, elementary supervisors, counselors, assistant principals, all enter into the realization of th at goal of small classes. These 

are greatly needed to relieve the already overburdened principals of 

the many conferences, letters, record searching, et cetera, necessary 

for proper placement of emotionally unstable children of elementary 

ageIf we do not s tart to help w ith the young child, there will be no relief for anyone concerned with the delinquency problem in the foreseeable future.

A few weeks ago Congress appropriated $6 million plus for additional dormitory space and recreational center at Occoquan. I know 

it was needed. I was one of a group who voted to support the bill. 

But are we using plain commonsense to stifle educational needs and 

build more prisons and reformatories?

It is discouraging for educators and parents who see the need for 

smaller classes.

Five hours a day, 40 or more pupils in a class—how much individual help can be given ?

RESTORATION OF SP EC IAL TE AC HE RS REQUESTED

Yes, we need counselors, assistant principals, psychologists, school 

nurses, social workers, all the help we can get for these emotionally 

disturbed youngsters. Also the normal child is entitled to his share 

of the 5 hours.

We, therefore, earnestly request, gentlemen, tha t you restore the 

eliminations for counselors, assistant principals, the 48 t eache is, sevral more psychologists, and social workers.
306 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

We hope that you will agree with the House committee that in order 

to achieve a better educational program for the District of Columbia 

the construction plans should be pushed ahead rapidly.

Thank you for your kind attention.

MACFARLAND GUIDANCE C LIN IC

May I read one more letter from the chairman of the board of 

trustees, Macfarland Guidance Clinic, Mrs. Fern II. Jacobi. It may 

throw a little light on the question you asked some of the people 

about—emotionally disturbed children.

Dear Mr. P astore and Members: The board of trustees of Macfarland Guidance Clinic urge that school budget requests which directly affect the mental 

health of children be granted.

It is our understanding that the House Appropriations Committee has recommended the psychiatric team, including a psychiatrist, a clinical psychologist, 

and two psychiatric social workers for the Departm ent of Pupil Appraisal. 

Since psychiatric services for children a re such an imp orta nt need in the D istr ict 

of Columbia, with long waiting lists for all public services, we are pleased that 

the psychiatric team will be working the schools. We feel, however, that the 4 

additional psychologists and 2 clerks for the Department of Pupil Appraisal, 

which were omitted from the budget by the House committee, are urgently needed 

in order to honor the thousands of requests for individual study and testing which 

cannot now be accomplished with the present staff.

We also request respectfully that the Senate committee reinst ate the provision for elementary school counselors. These counselors are urgently needed 

to help with study and guidance of children of elementary school age. Counseling 

service beyond what the teachers of our overcrowded classes can do must now 

be done by har rassed principals in elementary schools without ass istant prin cipals or nurses. This one item should materially help to reduce delinquency.

We alo respectfully request that the Senate committee restore the 48 teacher 

sala ries needed to bring elementary school enrollment to 32 to 1. Increased enrollment next fall will cause an even more undesira ble ratio than the present 

33.4 to 1. Reduction of elementary class size to a 30 to 1 ratio by additional 

teacher salaries still rema ins the prime mental hea lth need in our schools. 

Sincerely yours,

Fern H. Jacobi,

Chairman, Board of Trustees, Macfarland Guidance Clinic.

I would like to add that this Macfarland Guidance Clinic has been 

in operation 3 years, and it has not had one cent from the school 

appropriations—it is not budgeted by the schools. Funds for its 

operation are contributed by the citizens organizations in the area 

and other charitably inclined organizations tha t give as much as they 

can afford each year. And the workers have all been volunteer workers; haven’t had one cent of pay for what they have done. I think 

they should be given a great deal of thanks for what they have done.

The psychiatrists and the psychologists and the nurses have all 

given their time, 1 day, 1 night a week, for 3 years.

That concludes my statement. Thank you.

Prepared Statement

I would like to have put in the record the Petworth Citizens Association statement.

Senator P astore. It may be included.

(The statement referred to follows:)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 307

Petworth Citizen’s Association, I nc.,

Washington, D. C., June 17,1958.

Hon. J ohn O. P astore,

Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee,

District of Columbia Appropriations.

Dear Mr. Pastore and Members of the Committee: The Petworth Citizens

Association has a present membership of between five and six hundred members. 

We are presently inte rested in the educatio nal budget for the Dis trict of

Columbia for 1959, and are pleased to note that the House committee has 

seen fit to speed up school co nstru ction a bit.

We feel strongly that the 48 new teac hers should be added to the budget. 

These were eliminated by the House committee—reasoning, as per newspaper— 

that every time the pupil-teacher ratio has been reduced, the number of parttime classes has increased. We feel th at this statem ent does not tell the story 

in its correct form. Perhap s some figures may help. In the 1958 budget— 

Congress provided for 143 new teach ers. The increase in school population 

for that same year was (in grad es 1 to 6 only) 2,095 pupils. The estim ated 

incre ase for the 1959-60 (grades 1 to 6) is 2,049—with an allotmen t of only 

74 new teachers. This will not reduce the rati o to any considerable extent. So 

there we have part-tim e classes again. (Somehow babies do not stop being 

born but it takes several years of training for them to become teach ers.)

We are urgently requesting the inclusion of 48 new teachers, 6 elementary 

supervisors and direc tors, 5 school psychologists, 4 clerks for the personnel 

department, 6 jun ior high assistan t principals, and we are also requesting the 

services of at least a pa rt of the 100 counselors for elementary schools which 

were eliminated by the Commissioners.

As to the District of Columbia Teachers’ College, we feel that steps should be 

taken and soon to get a new site and new buildings and make it into a 4-year 

city college with added courses and enough personnel for the g ranting of a master 

of ar ts degree.

We spend millions to reh abilitate our A.A.’s—more millions for prisons and 

reformatories, more millions for unemployment compensations and indigents.

Why do we not give more thought to the educational foundations of our youngsters. We might help at least to keep a larger percentage of human beings from 

becoming inma tes of our institution s.

As taxpay ers we would like to have a voice in our educational processes.

Thank you for listening.

Sincerely yours,

Florence V. Craver, Secretary.

Mrs. Harvey O. Craver.

Marion Weaver, President,

Mrs. Andrew G. Weaver, Sr.

STATEM ENT OF MRS. DONALD E. BA ILE Y, PRESIDENT, AREA IV 

COUNCIL, PTA

General Statement

Mrs. Bailey. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I am 

Mrs. Donald Bailey and I represent area IV, council of the PTA.

We have exactly 27 schools in the Southeast and Northeast sections 

of the city.

We of the Parent-Teacher Association are once again glad to meet 

with this committee to talk over some of the many problems, moneywise, that confront us as citizens of the District of Columbia and to 

point out what we think are some of the very urgent needs of our 

schools. We might wish, however, that th e problems were not so great 

and that the needs were not so urgent.

We appreciate the sympathy and understanding with which this 

committee has approached in the past the financial questions perta ining to the District. You were chosen by your people back home to
308 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

rep res ent them in the leg islative bra nch of our Gov ernment, no doubt, 

because they felt you would discha rge this res ponsibility with sin ­

cerity and integ rity. It mu st give you a gr ea t deal of pleasu re thu s 

to serve th e people of you r respective States.

We hope t hat in servin g the peop le of the D istric t of Columbia, al ­

tho ugh we c annot vote you eit he r into or out of office, you will derive 

as great a sense o f sa tisfaction.

Senator P astore. Why do yo u em phasize th e w ord “o ut” ?

Mrs. Bailey. We a re not inte res ted in vo tin g you out, I assure you.

Bu t we do hope you get a gr ea t deal of satisfac tio n out of servi ng 

the people of the Di str ict o f Colu mbia. You know we have no other 

shoulde rs to cry on except you rs.

RESTORATION OF FU ND S REQUESTED

To nigh t we are very much in the same position in which my 10- 

year old son oftent imes finds him self. Hav in g been ref used by one 

pa rent fun ds with which to buy ju st one more model, he pr om ptly 

approache s the oth er and pre sen ts his case wi th rene wed energ y and 

inte rest. In most cases he is high ly successful. We hop e th at our 

pleas to you to nigh t for res tor ati on of the fun ds so mercilessly s lash ed 

fro m o ur budget requ ests will meet w ith as m uch success.

Mr. Mc Laughlin and the other rep res entative s of the Bo ard of 

Commissioners ha ve alr ead y well pre sen ted th e case of th e c ity ’s fin ancial pli ght. Dr . Ha nsen and rep res entat ive s of the Bo ard of E ducation have pa inted an authe nti c picture of the sta tus of the schools 

to which we send our childr en.

Th e PTA speakers who have preced ed me have set fo rth ou r positio n on man y of the school budget issues. I should like at th is time 

fu rther to urg e th at you allow the Fe de ral paym ent of $25 millio n 

ori gin all y requested by the Bo ard of Com missioners. I t is difficult 

to see how the Dist ric t can meet its fina ncia l obligations and provide 

fo r the autho rized sal ary increases wi thou t at lea st th is am ount, inclu din g th e te acher sa lary increases.

TEACHERS TO EFFECT 30 TO 1 RATIO

We are greatly conc erned th at we hav e not been allowed the necessar y teachers to reduce the pu pil-teach er ratio in eleme nta ry schools 

to 32 to 1. To be sure, it h ad been our fer ve nt hop e t hat by now our 

elementary school princ ipals wou ld be setting u p th eir classrooms on 

a 30 to 1 basis, whereas, unless you do som eth ing about it, they are 

like ly to be worki ng with a ra tio of possibly 33 or 34 to 1.

We seem to be tre ad ing water. I t does not seem too much to ask 

th at in t his day when every e ffor t sh ould be m ade, and indeed in some 

areas is be ing made, to im prov e our e ducation al sta nd ards th roug ho ut 

the Na tion to beg in righ t here in the Nation’s Ca pital by supp lying 

enough teache rs, good teache rs fo r ou r children . For how can they 

be ta ug ht wi thou t a teacher?

For many years t here have been pa rt- tim e classes in the District of 

Columb ia. Th e past school ye ar closed with 35 schools h av ing pa rttim e classes in gra des 1 and 2. Th is rep res ents a total of 161 pa rttim e classes.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 309

PART-TIME CLASSES

By use of nonclassroom space, by use of facilities in other buildings, 

and by acquisition of the new classroom through completion of authorized construction, the predicted number of part-time classrooms 

can be substantially reduced during the next school year, 1958-59.

It has been estimated by Dr. Hansen, Superintendent of Schools, 

tha t in September 1958, there will be only 133 part-tim e classes, and 

tha t by the close of the term there will be only 72.

We of the Area IV Council of the Parent-Teacher Association are 

especially interested in these figures, since by far the greatest concentration of part-time classes is our area of the city, particularly in the 

far Northeast corner.

As you know, this section of the city has grown up tremendously 

within the last few years. Some of the schools of this area are very 

large elementary schools serving, in some cases, large low-cost residential areas. These children as much as any other, and I venture 

to say more than many other children, need the benefit of a w’ell-run, 

well-supplied, and uncrowded classroom.

NEED FOR SUPE RVISORY PER SON NEL

They need the expert help of well-trained and well-supervised 

teachers.

For tha t reason we have consistently asked, and even now continue 

to ask, tha t assistant principals be appointed in large or complex 

elementary schools. We do now urgently ask tha t the 48 new elementary teachers be allowed in order that our school authorities have 

the chance to give our children, all our children, the education that 

they so very much need.

We quite agree tha t the purpose of the schools is to educate the 

children. We doubt very much tha t a few part-time classes scattered 

over the city in the first grade, or possibly in the second grade, would 

detract markedly from our children’s education.

Certainly it would not be as serious as to take them from their 

mothers’ arms, so to speak, and set them down in the middle of a 

classroom crowded with 35 or more children with all the frustration 

tha t accompany first school days.

I recall that in my good little home town first graders in the public 

schools always went only a half day. I think they still do.

I am told, too, th at for many years here in the District of Columbia 

children went only one-half day in the first grade.

We do not for a minute think tha t this is ideal or desirable. We 

are not advocating going back to this practice permanently, but we 

submit tha t on a temporary basis it would be better than overcrowded classrooms.

FU ND S FOR TEXTBOOKS AND SU PP LIES

Next, we should very much like to see additional funds allowed 

for textbooks and supplies. Perhaps a good teacher might be able 

to teach without very many books and good teaching supplies. Yes, 

it would be possible to travel from Washington to the Hermitage 

in a horse-drawn carriage as did Andrew Jackson in his day and
310 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

take 30 days to do it. But when I leave for Tennessee next Monday 

morning, you may be very sure, indeed, that I shall not be going by 

horse-drawn carriage. I do not have the time. We do not have 

the time, we cannot afford to try to teach our children without the 

very best textbooks and supplies that our civilization offers today.

Surely a child might learn by writing on the back of a shovel with 

a piece of charcoal from the blazing fire that gives him light as well 

as warmth and perhaps grow up to be another great leader of people 

or President of his country. But would you want to risk it with 

your child ? I would not.

Whether or not books and supplies should be bought by the parents 

is not the question at this time. The law is tha t school books and 

supplies will be furnished by the school system. We feel tha t $5 

per child is not an exorbitant amount to supply necessary textbooks 

and supplies.

I would like to say here tha t T grew up in a family of 6 children, 

and I well remember the sum of money, which to me at that time 

was a very great sum of money, that my father had to put out for us 

6 children when it was time to buy textbooks.

In many cases throughout the city, parents are buying pencils, 

paste, crayons, and even workbooks for their children. In some cases, 

in most cases, teachers are reaching dowm into their own pockets to 

provide the necessary supplies. Parent-teacher associations make a 

practice of buying library books for the school, as well as records, and 

sometimes even testing materials in order th at their children may have 

what they need to help them gain a good education.

In my own school, Stanton, our annual budget provides a sum of 

$500 for use of the school library. Another item in our yearly budget 

is “School fund (teachers),” $300. Out of this allotment the teachers 

supplement their meager portion of teaching supplies. The principal, 

too, is given a contingent fund out of which she buys miscellaneous 

supplies needed around the school. Ours is not an isolated situation. 

The story could be repeated by almost every PTA local within the 

District. We urge the restoration of the full amount requested for 

textbooks and supplies.

We strongly feel about the needs of our schools th at we could talk 

on ad infinitum. I believe it was Mr. Tobriner. President of the 

Board of Education, who said that “we build our city when we build 

our schools.” We truly believe that. We cannot build good schools 

without good teachers, good supplies, and good buildings.

We cannot have good teachers, good supplies, and good buildings 

without money. It is in your hands. Thank you very much.

STATEMEN T 0E JOH N GILLILA ND. PAS T PRESIDEN T, DIS TRICT OP 

COLUMBIA CONGRESS OP PTA

Gen er al Sta te m ent

Mr. Gilliland. Senator Pastore, I shall have to say, like Major 

Brooks said, we appreciate the way you make us feel at home, and we 

feel that we have a friend in you.

Three years ago, when I started my office as the president of the 

PTA, and now have relinquished it to Airs. Cox, things were really
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 311

in a bad way with the schools, the shortage of teachers particularly.

We had available today some 40 speakers who were willing to talk 

on the subject, but we now’ have concentrated, at your request and 

w’ith your cooperation, to these 8 speakers. We do appreciate what 

you have done.

Senator Pastore. Don’t you see the point ? You are, in fact- repeating a lot of these items. While I do not mind tha t at all, I just 

thought that because of the lateness, if anyone has to repeat they could 

put that part of it in the record, and you could get into something new. 

That is satisfactory.

But, if it is going to make anyone feel here tha t they have been 

deprived of the opportunity to speak the way they would like to, I 

w’ould like to say th at they will have the full opportunity to express 

themselves here.

SM ALL CU TS H U R T SC HO OL S

Mr. Gilliland. As a matter of fact, the cuts tha t the House has 

made in this particular budget, percentagewise, are very small, not 

much more than 1 percent, but where it has been cut, the 48 teachers, 

is very important to our case. We do believe that tha t is the most 

important thing.

I will stop now’, if you will give serious thought to getting those 

48 teachers back.

Senator Pastore. I am thinking about it. I think, frankly, the 

educational pa rt of the budget was the one th at we devoted the most 

time to. It is not an easy matter.

I said here today when I was the Governor of my State, the State 

of Rhode Island, for the first time in its history they made a direct 

gran t to the various municipalities to give $600 in addition to 

teachers’ salaries, the responsibility tha t we had to meet because of 

the low pay that teachers were getting.

We had to institute a sales tax program th at was quite a new thing, 

and a hard thing to assimilate in the fiscal state at tha t time.

There are many facets tha t have to be considered. I realize that 

the House did grant some additional teachers, not all tha t the Superintendent asked for. You have about 4,000 teachers. You have 

vacancies of about 30.

They are revising this whole plan of part-time classes, and we are 

hoping tha t here and there the thin g can be reconciled in some satisfactory fashion. But it is not an easy problem.

It is not tha t we do not want to allow this, but, after all, we have 

to be quite panoramic in our thinking. We have to take all these 

various phases; I realize what it means to the families tha t have 

children in school. I think we all do. We all want to do the best 

we can.

I think there is a sincere desire on the part of Congress to cooperate in every possible way w’e can. It does not mean tha t you will 

always get everything you ask for, but we try to do everything we 

can.

Airs. Snell. I just wanted to ask a question.

Thi rty teachers; thirty vacancies—is tha t all levels or is it the 

elementary level?
312 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROP RIATION’S, 1959

VACANCIES

Senator Pastore. I do not know at what level but, on the average, 

I suppose tha t you would expect that where you have a teaching force 

of 4,000 active teachers, tha t for various reasons you have a certain 

amount of vacancies that perhaps can be filled in one form or another, 

that requires serious thought. All these things require a lot of consideration and a lot of cooperation.

I am not saying that you should have or should not have the 48. 

We have it under advisement. We have heard all the testimony here. 

But, like everything else, the House has eliminated it, and we have 

to consider it. Then we have to go to conference.

Mrs. Snell. The reason I asked tha t was because only a few 

months ago Mrs. Lyons, who is the elementary director, an assistant 

superintendent, said that there was only one vacancy in the elementary-school teaching staff.

These 48 teachers work for the elementary schools alone. The 30, 

I thought at first, might be the elementary level, but apparently they 

are not.

Senator P astore. I do not know what level. I cannot answer tha t 

question.

I asked for the overall picture. I asked Dr. Hansen how many 

teaching teachers he had, and how many vacancies, on the average, 

he might have. He said in the last few weeks he had about 30 vacancies. I asked him if that might be about average.

T do not want to be held to quoting him, but the impression I got 

was that th at was about average.

Mrs. Mizen. The next witness will be Mrs. Margaret McCane, from 

the American Association of University Women, who will be followed by Mrs. Robert Lowenstein.

American Association of University Women

STATEMENT OF MRS. MARGARET McCANE, REPRESENTATIVE

General Statement

Mrs. McCane. Senator, our statement is going to be very brief. I 

am Mrs. Margaret P. McCane, representing the Washington Branch 

of the American Association of University Women. I am the vice 

chairman. I represent the president, who is unable to be present this 

evening.

We would like to express our appreciation for the opportunity to 

appear before you on the items of the 1959 appropriation which pertain to the public schools.

Our association is composed of more than 450 people whose pri ­

mary interest in the community is education. We would like to offer 

some comment upon House action, and also to point out briefly some 

items in which we are specifically interested.

SPECIA L TEACIIERS

Before the House, we supported the school budget in its entirety. 

We are very happy to see tha t the funds for special teachers were 

granted by the House, for we feel that this will enable children who
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 313

need help in special classes to obtain this help in the early years of 

their educational training, when it is most effective.

We are greatly pleased tha t funds for a psychiatric team in the 

Pupil Appraisal Department were granted, for this will mean better 

and speedier sendee between referral, appraisal, and counseling of 

those concerned with the child, and treatment possibilities, where 

necessary.

We are sorry tha t the funds for additional psychologists and 

clerks in the Pupil Appraisal Department were deleted in the House, 

and hope that the Senate subcommittee will reinstate funds for this 

item.

LIBRARY IMPR OVEMEN TS

We should like to express our pleasure at the inclusion of $2,500, 

the item for library improvements at the District of Columbia Teachers College. We recognize tha t the $2,500 was the total amount 

requested by the Board of Educat ion.

However, in light of the fact th at the college does not meet accreditation standards, we had hoped tha t the House would increase tha t 

amount. We hope tha t the Senate will see fit to take other action and 

increase this amount, so th at the college library can meet accreditation standards.

We realize tha t the people of the Distric t are very much concerned 

about the picture of higher education, and tha t the Board of Education is concerned about the college, and probably will be planning 

for it.

However, during that period, it is necessary tha t there be an adequate library, wherever the college is. Therefore, we would like to ask 

for an increase in the funds.

May we thank you.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very much.

Mrs. Mizen. Mrs. Lowenstein.

Mrs. Shiffer. Mrs. Lowenstein could not come. I am Mrs. Benjamin Shiffer.

Lafayette Elementary Home and School Association

STATEMENT OF MRS. BEN JAMIN SHIFFER, REPRESENTATIVE

P re pa re Statem ent

Mrs. S hiffer. Since Mrs. Lowenstein’s statement covers primarily 

points that have already been made, I will file it.

(The statement referred to follows:)

I am Mrs. Rollee Lowenstein, represe nting the Home and School Association 

of the Lafayette School, one of the larges t elem entary schools in the northwest 

area.

Real progress has been made during the last few years to improve the Distri ct’s school system. We att rib ute thi s improvement in large part to an increasing awarene ss by Congress, and partic ula rly by this committee, that Congress is uniquely responsible for the qua lity of education the citizens of the 

Nation’s Capital receive. A rela tively small increase in school appropriations 

for the coming y ear’s operations will make possible considerable fu rth er progress.

You listened symp athetically las t yea r when group after group of parents and 

civic organizations told you th at efforts to raise achievement levels in our schools 

were severely handicapped by classrooms of 36 or more children to 1 teacher, 

and you approved app ropriations which enabled the District to lower the pupil-
314 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

teache r ratio to 33 to 1. Informed educators have long pointed out th at a sound 

working ratio is 30 to 1. A few months ago we had the sati sfaction of hearing 

that goal specifically endorsed by the Joint Congressional Committee on D istrict 

Fisc al Affairs. We realize that this goal will have to be approached in easy 

stages. A longstanding classroom shortage can’t be entirely alleviated in 1 

year. This y ear we wan t to bring the ratio down to 32 to 1. We need 122 new 

elementary-school teach ers this year as requested by the District Commissioners 

for the purpose. The House bill allows for only 74 additional elementary teachers, only enough to meet the increased enrollment at a ratio of 33 to 1. We 

ask the Senate to restore the fund s requested by the Commissioners for 48 

additional elementary teachers.

We recognize that 122 new teachers will mean almost 150 additional small 

part-tim e classes for first and second grad ers in some pa rts of the city. We 

accept the judgm ent of Dr. Hansen and his staff that part-tim e classes, while 

not desirable as a long-term solution, are nevertheless better tha n attempting to 

teach the three R ’s in severely overcrowded classrooms.

Our relu ctant acceptance of part-time classes attes ts to the dire shortage of 

classroom space. We need not belabor this point furthe r. School officials are 

prep ared to star t immediately acquiring new building sites to begin the school 

construction program approved las t April by the Joint Congressional Committee. 

We ask now that you app ropriate the entire amount requested by the Commissioners for school construction as did the House committee las t week.

We were gratified that the House committee granted funds for all 27 of our 

badly needed special teac hers for remedial reading and other special classes. 

We a re earn estly hoping that you will do the same.

We urge you to restore funds, deleted by the House, for 4 additonal psychologists and 3 clerks in the Pupil-Appraisal Department. This is the Department 

which helps the classroom teache r discover the potentialities of each schoolchild 

and cope effectively with his problems of learning. Our own parent-financed 

mental-health program at Lafayette has convinced us how essential it is to 

speedily recognize and deal with emotional problems if academic progress is to 

be fostered. Basic to the functioning of this Departm ent is a swiftly administered testin g program. Because of the shortage of personnel, however, there 

were 1,000 children referre d by their teachers because they needed help, still 

waiting to be seen at the end of the school year, according to Dr. Hypps, the 

Department head.

We feel that the school heads and in turn , the Commissioners, have worked 

hard to trim all the fa t off the budget subm itted to Congress this year. You 

have before you the bare minimum needed to produce a healthy educational program in the Dis trict for the next fiscal year. We respectfully urge th at you 

approve the Commissioners total budget request.

Thank you for your courtesy in listening to ou r views.

PSYC HOLOGIC AL GU IDA NC E SERV ICE

Mrs. Sitiffer. I would like to add something about a psychological 

guidance service which we have at Lafayette and which we feel is a 

contribution to the thinking on this subject. We have had this service 

for about 5 years. It is financed through money raised by the parents 

and through money which we have obtained from a private foundation.

We have a psychologist who comes to the school and who handles 

children who are referred to her either through the parents or through 

teachers.

It has been extremely successful, so successful tha t others schools 

in the area—we are in Chevy Chase—have been inspired to institute 

similar programs. There are psychological guidance services at the 

Alice Deal Jun ior High School, at Hardy School, and at other schools 

in the area.

The point I would like to make is that these services are available to 

children only in the northwest area because the parents are able to raise 

the money and to obtain it from other sources.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 315

We feel strongly that such a service should not be dependent upon 

the ability of parents to raise the money. It should be available to all 

children.

We would like to support the psychiatric team and the psychiatric 

clerks.

Thank you very much.

Mrs. Mizen. The next witness is Mr. William Rich from the Distric t of Columbia Health School.

D is tric t of Colu m bia H ea lth Sch oo l

STATEMENT OE WILLIAM RICH, REPRESENTATIVE

G en ek al Sta te m ent

Mr. Rich. Senator Pastore, my name is William A. Rich, and I 

represent the Health School of the District of Columbia which is the 

school fo r crippled children for the District of Columbia.

I want to say that you and your colleagues provided an appropriation for the construction of this new school for the handicapped children, which school is now in the process of being built.

I will say, too, that Colonel Welling who sits righ t across from me 

had a great help in digging the foundation last September. So we 

have saved some funds along that way in the construction of the school.

We are very grateful fo r having him there.

FURN ISH INGS FOR HEALTH SCHOOL

In any event, we are asking for the necessary items to furnish the 

school now th at we have it under construction. We expect it to be 

occupied in November of this year.

PERSONNEL AND TRANSPORTATION

Generally, we are asking for the personnel to staff it. We are asking for the staff for the transportation of children to and from the 

school. We are asking for the occupational therapists tha t will be 

necessary to assist the children in regaining the necessary functions 

that they should have in order to become valuable citizens in the Distric t of Columbia.

FIELDHOUSE AT DAY CAMP

I am also vice president of the United Cerebral Palsy Association 

of Washington, D. C. In tha t capacity, as well as vice president of 

the Health School-Visiting Instructio n PTA, would like to emphasize the need for $25,000 for grading, surfacing, and constructing a 

small fieldhouse for the site of the summer day camp for crippled 

children, now being planned in connection with the new Health 

School.

I understand that this is a small item of $1,261 for the transportation of crippled children to the summer camp which has been eliminated by the House; $1,261 has been eliminated for the transportation of these crippled children.

I cannot express myself more strongly about tha t small figure 

which apparently has been lifted. I feel strongly about that. I think
316 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

they are entitled to the same things tha t normal children are entitled 

to during the summer months for their recreation.

Senator Pastore. Do you know what reason they gave for tha t 

deletion ?

Mr. Rich. I could not say that, sir. That comes under the Recreation Department, I believe. The Recreation Department has assumed the responsibility.

Senator Pastore. Did they identify the deletion of th at or did they 

make a general cut that has been allocated to this?

Mr. Rich. I cannot say. All I know is tha t the item has been deleted. This is the gist of my testimony, Senator.

I would like to say in closing that we wish to thank the committee 

for its great help and cooperation in obtaining the appropriation f or 

the construction of the new Health School now nearing completion 

as I have already stated.

Its program for education and rehabilitation will provide opportunities for crippled children never before realized in the Nation’s 

Capital.

1 would like to say this: I have heard the testimony of people concerning the school situation here in the District of Columbia. I feel 

it is a perfect tribute to those who have stayed here in the District 

rather than going to the bordering States where they might feel it 

would be easier for them to educate their children. They are staying 

here, Senator; they are being heard here, and I think they are fighting for the things that they want.

They feel as you do. They want to remain in this city and keep it as 

beautiful as you have said it is.

One more thing, Senator. I feel th at the future of this city lies in 

your hands. Along that line, I would like to say tha t I certainly appreciate the fa ct that you have foregone your dinner to listen to us.

HO US E COM MIT TEE REPORT

Senator Pastore. Mr. Rich, before you get off tha t subject, I would 

like to read what the House report has to say.

The committee has made a very minor reduction of $8,OX) in the estimate and 

suggests that it be applied to the requ est for two additional clerk -typists for 

the adm inistration activity. The committee recommends an appropriation 

of .$2,250,000 for this departmen t, an increase of $89,000 above the 1958 

appropriation.

Are you sure about that ?

Mr. Rich. So I have been informed. If I have been misinformed, 

I apologize to the committee. But it is my understanding and I am 

the vice president of the United Cerebral Palsy Association for 

Washington, D. C., who started this program. I know we are going 

to make an outlay for these children because we are going to see that 

they get there if we have to make this expenditure ourselves.

Senator Pastore. I realize the enthusiasm on this but I do not feel 

for a moment th at the Members of Congress do not feel as you do.

Mr. Rich. I am sure that they do.

Senator Pastore. I do not think they would deliberately have cut 

tha t item out. I think we ought to find out about this. Perhaps there 

is an allocation here, or some other alternative for transpo rtation that 

is provided for.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 317

Mr. Rich. There is not.

Senator Pastore. I cannot imagine tha t the people of the caliber 

on the House committee would do that intentionally.

Mr. Rich. Thanks again.

Note.—The transporta tion item of $1,261 was not included in the 

1959 budget of the Recreation Department as the coordinated plans 

of the day camp and new health school had not been finalized; item 

to be included in 1960 estimates.)

(The statement referred to follows:) 

lion. J ohn O. Pastore,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Appropriations for the District of

Columbia,

United States Senate.

From : Health School-Visiting Instruction Pa rent-Teacher Association 

1959 Budget Appropriations for Crippled Children

The Pa rent Teacher Association of the Hea lth School for Crippled Children 

and the Visiting Ins truction for Honiebound and Hospitalized Children supports the District school budget as a whole, and in p articu lar the following items 

in the school, health, and recreation budgets, which are essential for the welfare 

of the District’s crippled children.

1. Personnel for the new Health School, to be completed this fall, included 

in the school-budget.

This personnel, including an assis tan t principal, a counselor, 11 teachers, a 

clerk -stenographer, engineer-custodian, assis tan t engineer-custodian, atte nda nts, 

laborers and helper, is essential for the opening of the new school with its increased enrollment and enlarg ed program.

This appropriation, which was included in the 1958 budget, was postponed for 

a year by the committee on account of the delay in the school-construction program. At the present time there is no doubt that the new school building will 

be ready as scheduled this fall.

2. $70,796 for transp ort ation of children of all types of handicaps to various 

District schools.

This item has been requested in the school budget for the increased enrollment of 85 crippled child ren at the new Health School anticipated with the 

enlargement of the school to include a kindergarten and senior high school 

classes.

The appropriation will also provide for an increased number of children in 

the sigh t and hearing conservation classes and for Military Road School pupils 

who are severely re tarded mentally.

3. Two GS-7 occupational the rap ists for the new Hea lth School, included in 

the Health Departm ent budget in a sum of $35,701 for school health , the balance 

being fo r detection of sigh t and hearing defects.

Provision of these the rap ists is essential for the rehabilitation of the Health 

School’s crippled children. Severe lim itations of space has prevented the ir request up to th is time.

4. $25,000 for grading, surfacing, and construction of a small fieldhouse for 

the site of the summer day camp for crippled children, being planned in connection with the new H ealth School.

$1,261 for the transp ortation of crippled child ren to the summer day camp:

Both these items have been included in the budget of the Recreation Department, which believes th at recreatoin for crippled children is a legitimate 

and much-needed function of public recreation and that plans for the crippled 

children’s day camp should be coordinated with the planning of the new Health 

School.

This day camp for crippled children was originated by the United Cerebral 

Palsy Association who financed it until it was taken over by the District of 

Columbia Recreation Departm ent who operate it along with their 10-day camps 

for normal children.

In closing our testimony we wish to again thank the committee for their great 

help and cooperation in obtaining the app ropriation for the construction of 

the new Health School, now nearing completion. Its program for education
318 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 1959

and rehabilitation will provide opportunities for crippled child ren never before realized in the Nation's Capital.

William A. Rich ,

Vice President, Health School-Visiting Instru ctio n Parent Teachers Association.

W oodrow Wilson Senior H igh School Home & School Asso ciatio n

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM C. WISE, CHAIRMAN, LEGISLATIVE 

COMMITTEE

P repared Stateme nt

Mrs. Mize n. Our nex t witness will be Mr. William Wise, repr esen ting the Woodrow Wilson Hom e & School Associa tion, who will 

be followe d by Mrs. Rob ert Banks of the Ben Murch H ome & Scho ol 

Association, and Mr. Hon Goodloe fro m the A. F. of L. Teach ers 

Union.

Mr. Wise. I rep res ent the Woodrow Wilson Senio r Hig h School 

Hom e & School Association. I wou ld like to pu t my sta tem ent in 

the record, if I may.

Senator P astore. Yes, you may. W ith ou t objection, th at is so 

ordered.

(The stat em ent refe rre d to fo llo ws:)

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of th e Committee, I appear before you today pu rsuant to the following resolutions which were adopted at the April meeting of 

the members of Woodrow Wilson Senior High School Home & School Association. The association has more than 1,400 members.

“Resolved, That Woodrow Wilson Home & School Association hereby approvos the public-works program with borrowing for construction and an increased Federal payment as recommended by the Commissioners of the District 

of Columbia to Con gress; and

‘'Resolved, That Woodrow Wilson Home & School Association approves the 

budget for fiscal 1959 submitted by the District Board of Educati on; and

“Resolved, That Woodrow Wilson Home & School Association authorizes its 

executive committee to take all necessary actio n to supp ort the teache rs’ pay 

raise bill, the Commissioners’ public-works program and the Board of Education’s budget for fiscal 1959, including having a represe ntative testify in support thereof before the committee of Congress holding hearings thereon.”

We respectfully request your committee to reinst ate the budget cuts made 

by the House Appropriations Subcommittee. The amount requested of th e House 

by the Distric t Commissioners represen ted the bare minimum appropriation necessary for the operation of our school system on a level of educational standa rds 

which is somewhat less than satisfactory. To att ain the desirable level a considerably larger appropriation would be required. The cut made by the House 

committee in the supervision and instruc tion item will definitely result in a 

serious and unforgivable dete rioratio n in the standard s of instruction made 

available to our children.

It should be emphasized that a larg e pa rt of this budget reflects the impact 

of inflation. This fac t is too often overlooked. A much gre ate r budget today 

that the one of a few years back would actually provide for less services than 

made av ailab le then.

While each of the items in the budget is essen tial to the proper functioning of 

our school system. I shall comment with respect to only a few of them which 

more direc tly affect our own high school. This does not mean th at we do not 

wholeheartedly suppo rt the reque sts relating to the elementary schools. In that 

connection, we wish particularly to go on record in favo r of obtaining the additional teac hers which will make an approach to the highly desirable “30 pupil 

per teacher” stan dard.

In the newspapers and public discussion, both in and out of Congress, much 

is said about the necessity for attain ing improvement in the achievement levels 

of Distric t students. If this is to be accomplished, it is self-evident th at the 

testing and rela ted services must be increased. The special teac hers requested 

are also essential, if we are to reach the desired achievement levels. The phychi-
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 319

atric team should pay handsome dividends in the handling of severely disturbed 

and incorrigible children.

In connection with the requested increase for textbooks and additio nal supplies, we must emphasize again the results of inflation reduce g reatly the number 

of books th at can be purchased with the amount of money available. As a result, 

at the present time there is a lack of textbooks to go aroun d in certain courses.

While we a re more f ortun ate a t Woodrow Wilson than a re most of the schools 

in the Dis trict from the stand point of the physical condition of our buildings and 

grounds and furnitu re and equipment, within our own plan t is ample evidence of 

the necessity for the additional fund s requested for the replacement fund for 

furnitu re and equipment and the fund for repairs and maintenance of buildings 

and grounds. If your busy schedule perm itted you to visit our school, I am 

certain that in a very few minutes you would be convinced it is very poor business from a long-term sta ndp oint of dollars and cents not to restore those requests. 

There are so many little things about the building which, were they to be take n 

care of now, would resu lt in considerable savings in maintenance expenditures 

lat er on.

An example of this is our fire doors, which, if to be effective, must close automatically. Due to lack of repairs, vir tually none of the doors close automatically now and a number of them will not stay closed even when closed by the 

pupils. The locks on the buildings are all in bad shape. The custodial staff is 

reduced from time to time in order to make employees available to the new buildings as they are placed in operation. This naturally results in our building not 

being maintained properly. We are definitely fighting a losing battle insofar as 

the grounds are concerned.

The inadequacy of past app ropriations was dramatica lly illust rated at our 

school this year. The acoustics were so bad that our arm ory served very poorly 

as a drilling place for our cadets. In addition, the installation of a suitable 

acoustical ceiling would make the space available for a number of other highly 

desirable studen t activ ities. Having faile d repeatedly to have this essential 

improvement included in the budget, the studen ts and the Home and School Association were forced to take the matt er in their own hands. I am happy to report 

tha t as a result of a fund-raising ac tivity by the association and a most successful 

fair conducted by the students, the amount of $2,600 was rais ed and the necessary installa tion is now being made. It would be difficult for an outsider to 

believe th at such a necessary physical improvement to the school building was 

not financed by the public authoritie s.

If I had the time, I could cite many other insta nces which would establish 

how penny wise and pound foolish is the practice of not making adequate funds 

available for repairs and maintenance.

The most pleasing item in the budget subm itted by the Commissioners is the 

provision of an amount to provide for the first yea r of school construction in 

the revised public-works program. Our only disappointment is that the amount 

is not nearly enough. We vigorously support the long-term borrowing program 

to finance the construction of the sorely needed schools, for the reason that it 

is obviously the only approach which will res ult in the schools being built when 

needed. Moreover, it is the only businesslike method of doing the job and will 

resu lt in lower costs to the taxpay er in the long run.

It is a shameful fac t that many hundreds of stud ents must attend part-time 

classes. Th at this is tru e in the Nation’s Capital serves as real grist for the 

propaganda mills of the oppressive system which does battle with our Nation 

for the good will and supp ort of men through out the world. In this connection, 

it is hoped th at the concern over our educational system which spontaneously 

developed following the release of the first sputn ik will not subside at appropriation time. It is hoped tha t reveleation of the accomplishments of Russia’s educational program will awaken us from our complacency and make us realize th at 

we simply must spend more money on our educatio nal facilities if we are not 

to come out second best.

Equally serious with the part-tim e student problem is the one of overcrowded classes. At Wilson alone we have 178 classes with more than 30 

pupils. These are broken down as follows :

Cla sses:

65_____________________________ Pupils

-----------------------------------------30-24

----------------------------------------- 40—44

2 7 2 3 5 -5 8 - -21
320 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

We have 1 French teacher with slightly more than 200 students, divided into 

5 classes. The impossibility of one person correcting papers and adequ ately 

checking homework assignments for th at number of studen ts is obvious.

The size of the classes can only be reduced if additional buildings are made 

available.

We respectfully request your assistance.

W m . C. W is e .

Gen er al Sta te m en t

Mr. Wise. I want to, at the outset, state tha t I have had a child or 

children in the public schools of the District of Columbia for 22 years 

now, during most of which time I have been active in the PTA, or 

Home and School Association work.

I have been before committees several times. Obviously, with the 

sympathetic interest you have manifested here tonight, and with the 

perceptive questions you are showing, you have a grasp of this.

This is the failure of us parents, if I may say very respectfully of 

the authorities^ in submitting this problem tha t we are in the deplorable situation that we are in. I submit to you tha t we are in a 

deplorable situation. I think we talk in generalities instead of specifics.

REDUCING SM AL L IT EM S

You raised a question about reducing small items. Most of the 

items reduced by the House are very small, but the fact is that we 

have not asked nearly enough, in the first place, and tha t knocks us 

out of kilter.

We are in the most fortunate situation in the city, in Woodrow 

Wilson High School. I know you cannot spend the time, but if one 

of your staff members could come out and see this most favorably 

treated school, allegedly, and see the condition we are in, you would 

realize how knocking off $4,000 or $13,000 from repairs and maintenance, or $28,000 from buildings and grounds or services, is terribly 

important.

If you will read my report, we show our teacher figures there. And 

where, perhaps, we have the best situation, we still have 178 schools 

with classes over 30, a number of them over 35; 22 over 40, and 1 over 

45. We have 1 French teacher for 200 students, who had to correct 

all those papers.

FOU R-TRAC K SY ST EM

One of the most forward movements tha t the school authorities took 

in recent years was setting up the four-track system, in our opinion. 

The honor system is especially applicable at our school. We have a 

large number of students participating. It is a complete failure in 

large classes. Any educator will tell you that. Something must be 

done about that.

We submit, sir, tha t you have to do it by restoring these small items, 

and you cannot cut anything. The good Commissioners simply do 

not ask for enough.

The directors, the Board of Education budget, would have gotten 

us by, not at the standard which was desirable, but at a minimum 

standard, to obtain desirable results.

We repeat the obvious: T hat inflation has such a great impact on 

this budget, it is ’way, ’way up. We get so much more for what you
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 321

Ljive us now th an what we wou ld hav e go tte n fo r the same am ount a 

few years ago.

Se na tor P astore. You me an, so muc h less?

Mr. Wise. I t tak es so mu ch more.

REPORT OF COMM ISSION ER OF EDUCATION

May I res pectf ull y call yo ur attention to the repo rt o f the Fe de ral 

Com missioner of Ed uc ati on , w’hich was h ighlighted in the papers in 

the last couple o f d ays.

I know it is cry ing, “W olf , W olf ,” by going back to the Russian 

system. But it was such an aroused public opinion, in the Halls of 

Congress, in the newspap ers, a fter sp utn ik, and now t hat has sub sided.

I hon estly believe th at while this is only a very sma ll part o f it, if 

we rea lly wa nt to stan d up to the Russians scientifically an d edu catio na lly , we hav e th e pro blem th at the Com missioner of Ed ucati on 

brou gh t out, th at the little item s cut here are absolutely necessary to 

be res tored by Con gress, here in the D istric t. Th e same t hi ng is true 

ove r the cou ntry.

But to ta lk abou t wha t we ca n do and wh at someone else can do, we 

subm it to you th at we would res pectfull y ask th at something be d one 

by the Senate to res tore all the House cuts, and to next ye ar somehow 

needle the Com missioners to set up the Bo ard of Ed ucati on figures, 

and then to h ave the House cuts restored.

Se na tor P astore. W ha t is the difference b etween w ha t th e B oard of 

Ed uc ation asked f or an d the Com missioners asked f or ?

Mr. Wise. I am so rry; I do no t have the figures. I t is a very 

con siderable amo unt, I am sure.

Mr. L owe. Th e con siderable differen ce was in th e special items.

Se na tor Pa sto re, the Com mis sion ers asked fo r th e same am ount of 

eleme nta ry teachers.

Se na tor P astore. Th ey did no t ask fo r more th an t he 48 th at have 

been deleted by th e Ho use ?

Mr. L owe. T hat is correct.

ELEMENTARY TEA CHE RS

Th e Bo ard of Ed uc ation req uested a re gu la r eleme nta ry classroom 

pu pil-teach er setup, or 32 to 1, fo r th is yea r. T hat was exp lain ed, 

however , on the premise th at they wer e so sh or t of classrooms th at 

they did n ot feel t hey sho uld go to m ore p ar t-tim e classes th at would 

be cre ated if y ou ha d a l ower ratio . However, in justice to wh at Mr. 

Wise has sa id, th ere hav e been years th at we cut.

Mr. Wise. W ha t was the cut in the ca pital ou tla y requested of the 

Bo ard o f E du catio n ?

Mr. L owe. Alm ost nothi ng.

Mr. W ise. H ow abo ut the hu nd red counselors who were requested 

by th e Board of E du catio n ?

Mr. Lowe. I was talk in g about the re gu lar classrooms. In ma ny 

of the e xtra items, such as c ounselo rs an d gro ups like tha t, there were 

red uctions from the Boa rd of E du catio n.

Mr. Wise. In ou r own favo rably sit ua ted school, we have 2 counselors f or 1,400 students , w hereas the e ducators sug gest 1 to 300 or 400. 

T hat is It o 700.
322 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 1959

Tn our own school, the fire doors fal l down. Th e fire-alarm system 

does not work. They have fire drills , and the ala rm system does not 

go off. We s pent $2,600 of our own money, the stu dents raised some 

of it, and the pa rents rai sed the rest of it, to replace the ceiling in 

the arm ory, which could not be used fo r cadet drill because of the 

acoustics.

You will find in ou r school, which we ad mit is most fav ora bly si tuated, these item s whe re, if we do no t do som ething about it thi s 

year, will cost $100 more ne xt year. I t is a m atter o f business. There 

can be so m uch saved to the t axpayers by doin g i t now instea d o f d oing 

it later. I t is stri ctly a business pr oposition.

Ben W. Mu rch H om e an d Sch oo l Ass oc ia tion

STATEMENT OF MRS. ROBERT L. BANKS, REPRESENTATIVE

Gen er al State m ent

Mrs. Banks. Senator , I am not going to rea d my statem ent, because 

every thing t ha t I would have to say I have he ard here, and I would 

just be repeatin g.

I am going to say som ething th at has not been said ton igh t, and I 

thi nk th at everybo dy else has implied.

Fo r man y years in the Di str ict we have been talk ing abo ut more 

teachers and more classrooms. I wou ld like to see the day come when 

we sit in this room a nd begin to talk about things like e duc atio n, cu rriculum, and inc rea sing ou r tea chers ’ backgrou nds.

We want to get off of the poin t we were talk in g about, housekeeping 

details, and get to the po int where we are g oing to talk abo ut giv ing 

these chi ldr en a good education. T hat can only come when your 

comm ittee and oth er committees begin to give us the backlog of all 

the things we have been w ait ing for so long.

The second point, which has been said by everybody, and again 

which is obvious, if we stop spendin g money in prison s, at St. Eliza ­

beths, and all the oth er pre venta tiv e places, and pu t it in this pos itiv e 

instance, this whole th in g can righ t its elf and we can begin to get the 

nucleus of wh at is im po rta nt.

Tha t is all.

(The statem ent re ferre d to fo llo ws:)

Our association strongly urges that your committee resto re to the District of 

Columbia school budget the following items which were deleted by the House 

Appropriations Committee.

We ask th at you gra nt us the additional 48 elementary-school teac hers to 

reduce the citywide ratio from 32.8 to 32.1. School Superintenden t Hansen 

points out th at twice this figure, .$580,000, could be saved annually, if the elementary-school failur e rate could he reduced from the prese nt 12 percent to the 

normal 7 percent. It is obvious that not only the fa ilures, but all children, would 

profit from more teaching time per pupil. The increase in part-time classes we 

view as only temporary and a lesser evil tha n overcrowded, underinstructed 

classes.

The 5 psychologists and 3 clerks deleted from pupil app raisal are a necessity. 

The understaffing in this Departm ent seriously delayed the return of our fifthand sixth-grade tests this year until after the Eas ter vacation. This scarcely 

allows sufficient time for the school to evaluate its program or to aid the individual child. With reference to the deleted 6 elementary superviso rs and 3 

supervising directors, our teachers are in urge nt need of this assistance. The 

staff now doing these jobs must dilute their time among too many schools and
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 323

teac hers to be effective. The $41,000 requested for textbooks in many instances 

will barely pay for replacement of those torn and worn, and there is insufficient 

money to purchase new interesting material.

We are gratified that the House recognized our immediate needs for school 

construction. We are also pleased that the psyc hiatric team and the 27 specialized teachers were allowed, and it is our hope that your committee will allow us 

these same importa nt items.

Respectfully submitted.

Esly n B an ks

Mrs. Robert L. Banks,

Legislative Chairman.

A. F. of L. T ea cher s’ U nio n

STATEM ENT OF DONALD GOODLOE, RE PRES EN TA TIVE

CL ER KS FOR EL EM EN TA RY SC HO OL S

Mr. Goodloe. I am Donald B. Goodloe, representing the Teachers’ 

Local No. 6, affiliated with the union. My statement will be brief.

We have long asked for enough money to provide at least one fulltime clerk in every elementary school. Tha t is supported and elaborated in our testimony.

N URSE S FOR EL EM EN TA RY SC HO OL S

We wish, further , to emphasize that there should be a nurse in every 

elementary school. The strange th ing is that, although there is a nurse 

in every secondary school, that is not true in every elementary school.

It seems logical to us that, where the children are less mature and 

are less able to look after themselves, there would be a greater need 

for nursing. But that is not the way the thing has been run.

CL AS S NUM BER RA TH ER T H A N RA TIO

Third, as for the pupil-teacher ratio, much has been said about the 

smaller classes and we shall not repeat it. But this, I believe, has 

not been emphasized : What we favor is that there should not be a class 

in the public school system of Washington, D. C., with more than 30 

pupils.

As some witnesses have already emphasized, an overall ratio or 

proportion may be deceptive. You could have an average of less than 

30 pupils to a class and yet you could have some classes of over 40. 

Driving classes, for instance, cannot have more than 10. Language 

and mathematics classes should be small. That is why we advocate 

not an overall ratio of 30 pupils per teacher, but no class in the school 

system with more than 30 pupils, which would be a different thing.

That is all we have to say about it.

FE DE RA L CO NT RI BU TI ON

The main point I wish to emphasize, though, is the need for a 

greater Federal contribution. Even if $25 million were contributed, 

that would be approximately 121/2 percent of the total amount of 

money to run the District.

Even if the $32 million, the entire authorization, were appropriated, 

that would be approximately 15 percent of the money needed to run 

the District.
324 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION'S, 19 59

It is really unrealistic the way the Federal Government is handling 

this problem. Here we are in the District compressed within 70 

square miles of territory. Our municipality, if you want to call it 

that, cannot expand like some other cities have by taking in suburban 

areas and taxing them.

Well-to-do citizens are going to the suburbs. Poorer people are 

moving in all the time.

As you know, the Federal Government is withdrawing more and 

more real estate from the taxable base.

This city of less than a million people simply cannot keep up the 

capital of the world. It is out of date. Tha t is why we would go 

further than the Commissioners and ask for the appropriation of the 

entire $32 million contained in the authorization.

That completes our testimony. Thank you very much, Senator, for 

the privilege of having been heard.

Senator Pastore. It is always nice to have you too.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement of Don B. Goodloe, Legislative Representative of Teachers Union

Local 6 of the American F ederation of Teachers, AFL-CIO

Gentlemen of the Senate Distric t Appropriations Subcommittee, Washington 

Teachers Union Local 6 of the American Fed eration of Teachers has the honor 

of submitting the following testimony in regard to the needs of the public schools 

of the District of Columbia during the fiscal yea r 1958-59.

First, we continue to emphasize the need for more clerical help in the public 

schools of Washington, D. C. The public has been slow to realize the extent 

to which our teachers are having to devote the ir time to routine clerical work. 

More and more re ports are required. A vast amount of compilation of data goes 

on. Tests are continually being given. Our teachers are thus losing time from 

teaching and study, for which they have been hired. Worse still, they have not 

been train ed for clerical work and are, of course, doing it less efficiently than 

train ed clerks could perform it. On both hands, this represen ts a terrific waste 

of the public’s time and money. Partic ularly, is this tru e in our elementary 

schools. In these buildings, the principal eith er does it at a tremendous loss of 

time and energy or delegates it to teach ers. We, accordingly, recommend th at 

enough money be appropriated to provide for at least one full-time clerk in every 

elementary school in the District of Columbia.

We likewise repeat our request th at money be made available to hire a nurse 

in every school building of our system. We wish to emphasize the fac t that we 

favor a nurse under the control and direction of the Board of Education in every 

school. We unqualifiedly oppose any tra nsfer of jurisdiction over such employees. Strange as it may seem, the elementary schools are the ones that lack 

nurses. There is a nurse in every secondary school. That is all to the good. 

Still, it would seem that the need is all the gre ater in buildings where the children are younger and thus less capable of looking af ter themselves.

We support the Board of Education in its efforts to reduce the size of classes 

in our public schools. Much has alre ady been done in this direction to provide 

for the individual needs of our pupils. For instance, smaller classes under Dr. 

Hansens’ four trac k plan have greatly facilitated the instruction of our slow 

learners. Still, more individual atte ntion is required for other children, 

especially for our gifted students. We wish to make the point, however, tha t 

support the appropriation of enough money to make sure that no class contains 

more than 30 pupils. That is a different thin g from an overall ratio of 30 

pupils per teacher. It is possible to have an average of less tha n 30 pupils to 

a class and yet have some classes with more tha n 40 pupils. Some groups like 

safe-driving classes, for instan ce will have as few as 10 pupils. A number of 

classes like this will disguise the fac t th at some classes are very large. The 

average figure, therefore, is very deceptive. We repe at our request for enough 

money to insure that no class in our public school system contains more than 

30 pupils.

Finally, our union supports the appropriation of the entire $32 million recently authorized for the Federal contribution to the expenses of the District
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 325

government. It is unrealistic to do anythin g else. The people of the Distric t 

simply cannot mainta in the cap ital of the world. We are confined within 70 

square miles and cannot expan d our tax able basis as some municipalities have 

been able to do. The Federal Government continually withdraws real estate 

from the taxable basis but is very slow to increase its own contribution to our 

expenses. Another difficulty is that poorer people are constantly moving into 

Washington, while those with high er incomes are moving out. This means that 

increasing income and sales taxes will not extric ate us from our financial difficulties. Our citizens simply cann ot support a city th at will be a model for the 

world. The taxpayers of the Nation must give us more help. The city belongs 

to them, as well as to us.

Ali ce D ea l J unio r H ig h Sch oo l Ass oci ation

STATE MENT OF GLORIA ROBERTS

Airs. Mizen. I would like to put in the record at this time the statement of Gloria Roberts of the Alice Deal Jun ior High School Association.

Senator Pastore. All right.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Si r s : The Alice Deal Jun ior High School Home and School Association would 

like to go on record in support of the following ite ms:

1. Restora tion to the school budget the item for additional salaries for psychologists and clerks in the Pupil Appraisal Department. We feel with the 

backlog of cases needing immediate attention that something must be done now 

to remedy this. It is vita l to the welfare of all of our young sters to help those 

in need of psychological testing—witho ut a waiting period of many months.

2. Retention in the budget of the item for salarie s of a psychiatric team. 

At Alice Deal, the par ents have been paying for the services of a clinical psychologist, and we cann ot say often enough the tremendous benefits that have 

resulted from this service. We feel th at every school in Washington should 

have this vital service available. This phy chiatric team is a step forward.

3. Restoration to the budget of the amount slashed from the textbook and 

supplies item. Although a member of the House subcommittee feels that supplies can easily be furnished by the parents, anyone who is fam ilia r with the 

District of Columbia knows well th at many of our paren ts cannot even afford 

to feed the ir child ren adequately, let alone fur nis h them with school supplies.

We know th at you will do all in your power to provide our child ren with 

what they so desperately need.

Thank you,

Gloria K. R obert s.

T h e A mer ic an Co un cil on H u m a n R ig h t s

STATEMENT OF LT. COL. ROBERT L. POLLARD, UNITED STATES 

ARMY, RETIRED, REPRESENTATIVE

Gen er al Sta te m ent

Mr. Pollard. My name is Robert L. Pollard, Lt. Col., United 

States Army, retired. I am a member of Phi Beta Sigma Fratern ity 

and officially represent the American Council on Human Rights.

I am authorized to speak for the national office, located in this city, 

and for the Washington, D. C., local council of ACHR. The local 

council of the American Council on Human Rights represents in this 

city several thousand men and women in membership.

As citizens of the District of Columbia, our local membership is 

directly interested in the welfare of the city and the budget for the 

city's projects. Our membership on the national level is equally 

interested because of the assumption that the Nation’s Capital belongs
326 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIAT ION'S, 1959

to all the citizens of the country. Our members reside in every State 

in the Union.

FEDERAL PA YM EN T

The American Council on Human Rights is distressed tha t the authorized $32 million Federal payment is not being met, in fact, that 

steadily the Congress of the United States fails to meet its obligation 

to the citizens of the District of Columbia.

The American Council on Human Rights vigorously presses on the 

Senate District Appropriations Subcommittee to recommend the full 

$32 million Federal payment.

Certainly at the least the committee should recommend an increase 

over the $20 million allowed by the House committee.

We are equally concerned by the fact tha t the House committee 

reduced the Commissioners’ request by several million dollars. We 

believe that there is every justification for the Senate subcommitee 

to restore this cut of the more than $5 million.

It seems to this council th at the larger Federal payment must be 

allowed in view of what can be expected in pay raises for District 

employees.

The Federal payment should not and cannot be made solely on 

present needs of the District.

Daily papers report the imminence of a raise in salary for the classified employees.

SAL ARY RA ISES

I recently testified before another Senate subcommittee in support 

of raises for teachers salaries.

Further, an increase in salaries for firemen and policemen is in the 

wind. And wage employees have already been raised.

All of these increases spell an increased expenditure for the District, 

must of it likely to be retroactive to Janu ary 1958. The larger Federal 

payment is wholly justified, and again we urge this subcommittee to 

recommend.

RECOM M EN D ATIO N 8

Some of the most disheartening reductions by the House committee 

occur in the budget area for the public schools. The American Council on Human Rights strongly recommends tha t you put back into 

the budget such items as the following:

1. The full request for elementary school teachers, including the 48 

eliminated in the House position.

Although this council believes the standard of pupil teacher measurement in the classroom should be no regular classroom to exceed 30 

pupils, we accept at present the goal of a 30 to 1 pupil-teacher ratio.

We urge the restoration of a budget item therefore for the 48 

teachers.

2. Special teachers are needed throughout the school system—for 

retarded and disturbed children, for remedial reading, special arithmetic, and speech classes.

At present, in spite of the standard of 80 children for a special 

speech teacher, the load is nearer to 180 to 1.

3. Psychologists are also badly needed in this large city school 

system and the Board of Education and Commissioners’ request 

should be heeded.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 327

4. Again we join others in the community in support of the 40 

assistant principals and 100 counselors in the elementary schools.

5. A single plant for the District of Columbia Teachers College is 

highly desirable.

The American Council on Human Rights appreciates this opportunity to present its views to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee 

on the District.

Senator Pastore. Thank you very much, Mr. Pollard, for coming 

here.

T h e A mer ican U n iv ersi ty P ar k Cit iz e n s’ A ss oc ia tion

STATEMENT OF DR. ELLIS HAWORTH, REPRESENTATIVE

Gen er al Sta te m ent

Dr. Haworth. Senator, my name is Ellis Haworth and 1 am legislative chairman of the American University Park Citizens’ 

Association.

I regre t having been out of the city from last Friday afternoon 

until today and I did not know until 4:15 this afternoon about the 

hearing. Therefore I am not able to present a written statement but 

I can present it to your staff tomorrow afternoon.

Senator Pastore. That is fine.

Dr. Haworth. I would like to say a few brief words about three 

points that we are interested in especially.

FE DE RA L PA Y M EN T

In the first place, our association has been uring for some years the 

appropriation by the Federal Government of the full amount agreed 

upon by legislation for the Federal payment toward the District 

expenses.

We think tha t the bill this year should include the full $32 million 

recently approved by an act of Congress.

My understanding is that the present bill, as approved by the House 

committee, contains a surplus of only about $3 million as against that 

to be charged to increases in pay for the general clerical staff of the 

police, firemen, and school system, or a good part of it.

Senator Pastore. Tha t is not included in this budget. In making 

their presentation before us the committee made it abundantly clear 

tha t while they were agreeing to reducing the amount to $21,500,000, 

that tha t did not foreclose their coming back here after the beginning 

of the next session to ask for the full amount in order to offset the 

added expenses on the pay increases.

Dr. Haworth. Yes, sir. The difficulty, though, is that when we go 

before the legislative committees to discuss the salary proposals it is 

always brought out by somebody th at there is practically no surplus 

or no amount of money left in the funds with which to pay these 

increases in salaries.

Therefore, it seems to me tha t if the full amount were appropriated 

this time to build up the surplus, we could then talk about the proposed salary increases and we would have a better prospect of getting 

some desirable pay increases.
328 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

We think Congress ought to do a bette r job of prote cti ng o ur Distr ic t Com missioners fo r unfo reseen difficulties of this sort.

We need some op erating cushion. So we u rge the ful l $32 m illion.

TEXTBOOKS AND SUPP LIES

Then, with respec t to the dele tion or the red uction th at the House 

com mittee suggested f or th e fun ds for the schools, for the purch ase of 

textbooks and supplie s of th at sort, I should like to call attenti on to 

the fact th at with the increases in pu pils and the increase in cost of 

such items it becomes increa singly difficult to keep the child ren supplied with up-to -da te books of a su itable sort.

To illus tra te it, abou t a year ago a tea cher at M cF arland Ju nio r 

High School told me th at th e pu pils were usin g h istory books wr itten 

before W orl d W ar I I. I think th at is a pe culiar situatio n fo r junior 

hig h school p upils.

A student in a senior hig h school class at the Dist ric t Teachers 

College told me th at in doing his teaching a t the Ellio tt J unio r High 

School thi s year his science class was using science textbooks wr itten 

in 1932. It is needless to rem ark upo n the numb er of changes in the 

world th at have been brou gh t about by discoveries in the field of 

science in th e la st 26 years.

I think situations of t hat so rt in th e Nation’s Ca pi tal’s schools o ught 

not to exis t and we need enough money to keep our pu pils supplied 

with adequate books in qu an tity and qu ality and up to date.

COUNSELING IN ELEMENTA RY SCHOOLS

Fina lly , the item we are quite concerned abo ut in our association 

is the need fo r adeq uate c ounseling and g uid anc e in elem ent ary schools 

because we thi nk there the p roblem s can be pre vente d fro m becoming 

serious in la te r years. So we w ould like t o see th e item fo r 100 cou nselors, which the School Bo ard o rig inally requested, pu t int o the bill.

To illus tra te the need fo r th at so rt of thing, I was talk ing to the 

princ ipal of the Tho mpson El em en tary School in the dow ntown dis ­

trict. The fig ure s ubmitted to your com mittee by the school au tho rities 

showing the pu pi l cap acity and showin g the act ual enrollments do 

not tell th e who le story.

In this 1 pa rtic ul ar case, the bu ild ing has a cap acity of abo ut 525 

pup ils. It s act ual enrollment as of the close o f Ju ne o f this y ear was 

590. During the course of the year, because of the lar ge turnov er in 

th at school the pr incipa l and h is 1 clerk h ad to process some thing over 

1,150 diffe rent pupils.

CLERICAL WORK

I t is a n im possible bu rden for the p rin cipa l o f a school to handle the 

clerical work invo lved wi th such ra pi d turnov er and entries and 

disc harges of pu pils and to g ive adequa te supervisio n fo r a tra ns ient 

school po pulat ion of th at sort.

There for e, counselors an d assis tan t princ ipals we feel are most 

essential in the elementary schools. I give you those figures to illustrat e the fact th at enro llm ent figures tak en b y them selves do no t ffive 

you anywhere near the complete p icture of t he problems that we face.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 329

PREPARED STATEM ENT

Senator Pastore. We will keep the record open so that you may 

furnish your statement tomorrow.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Sta te men t of D r. E let s H aw orth , Am er ic an U niv ersi ty P ar k Cit iz en s

A ss oci ati on

Gen tl em en : The American University Park Citizens Association, represe nting over 1,400 members in good standing, h as authorized me to make the following stateme nt concerning our views on certain items in the 1959 Distric t of 

Columbia appropriation bill.

1. We are concerned about the reduction by the House Committee of about 

$41,000 in the amount for purchase of textbooks and instruction al supplies. With 

the number of pupils increasing each year and the cost of such items also increasing, this fund should be increased, not decreased. The present sum for 

such items is greatly insufficient. A teacher at the Macfarland Jun ior High 

School told me las t yea r th at they were using history texts printed before 

World Wa r II. A senior at the District of Columbia Teachers College told 

me this yea r that in his studen t teach ing assignment in general science at the 

Elio t Jun ior High School, his class used a science tex t prin ted in 1932. Such 

conditions should not ex ist in our schools.

2. We are much concerned with the need for adeq uate counseling and guidance 

in our schools. Evidence shows that the ear lier such assistance is provided, 

the more effective it is. We therefo re strongly urge th at you place in the bill 

an item of $501,435 for 100 counsellers in the elementary schools, as proposed 

by the Board of Education. To illu strate the need for such assistance, the principal of the Thomson School, at 12th and L Stre ets NW., has given me the 

following fa cts : This school is located in a downtown area, serving a low 

economic level neighborhood, with many transi ent families. The rated capacity 

of this school is 581 pupils. The average daily membership during 1957-58 

was 590 pupils. In September 1957 there were 345 pupils carried over from the 

previous June. In addition, 98 other pupils in school in Jun e 1957 failed to 

report and had to be traced. During 1957-58, 733 pupils were entered and discharged. so th at the tota l number of pupils who had to be cared for by the 

principal and clerk alone was 1,170 (34 5+98+ 733 ). Obviously, the average 

enrollment of 590 does not give a corre ct picture of the load on the principa l’s 

office.

3. We urge the full appropriation of $32 million recently authorized by the 

Congress as the Federal payment toward District expenses. Figures show that 

our residents already bear a tax burden comparable with th at of our neighbors 

in Maryland and Virginia. With fixed bound aries to the District, it is not possible to seek additional taxpayers. This is an obligation which the Congress 

has imposed upon its elf and which the Congress ought to honor.

4. We note th at the House Committee h as approved an item of $3,000 for the 

expenses of accreditation of our high schools and the District of Columbia 

Teachers College. We have urged this action the past 2 years and hope that 

you will also approve it.

5. We note also that the House committee has approved an item of $517,000 for 

a new branch public library at Wisconsin Avenue and Albemarle Stree t, NW. 

(Te nley). In ad dition to a la rge residen tial are a, the following schools ar e within 

a four-block radius : Inimac ulata High School and Junior College, Sidwell Friend s 

School. St. Anne’s Paroc hial School, Woodrow Wilson High School, Deal Jun ior 

High School, Ile arst, Janney, and Murch Elem entary Schools. At a slightly 

greater distance is the American University. The existing facility is completely 

unable to meet the demands of such a neighborhood. We hope you will also 

approve this item.

6. We also urge full approval of fund s for the D istrict of Columbia Recreation 

Depa rtment. We consider the work of this department of the gre atest importance.

It is only through you that we in the District can buy the things we want with 

our money. Please heed our cries.

We thank you for this opportunity to make our views known to you.
330 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APP ROPRIATIONS, 1959

Library Cons tr uc tion

Senator Pastore. We shall insert in the record at this point the 

statement of Mr. T. W. Mermel on the Tenley-Friendship library 

construction.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Sta te m en t by t o e F r ie n d sh ip Cit iz en s Ass oci ation in S up po rt of t h e F is cal

Year 1959 B udg et R eq ue st for th e Con st ru ct io n of t h e T en le y-F k ie n d sh ip

B ranc h L ibr ary

Mr. C ha irm an an d mem be rs of th e co mmittee , my na me is T. W. Merme l. I 

am ch ai rm an of th e co mmittee on ed uc at io n of th e Fri en dsh ip Citiz en s Associat io n an d I ha ve been requ es ted by ou r mem be rship to appear be fo re you on 

be ha lf of the ite m which pr ov ides fo r co ns truc tion fu nds fo r th e Ten ley- Fr iend - 

ship Bra nc h Lib ra ry now be fore your co mm itt ee as p a rt of th e D is tr ic t of 

Co lum bia ap pr op ri at io n re qu es t fo r fiscal y ear 1959.

We ap pre ci at e yo ur gra nting pe rm ission fo r my ap pea ra nce he re to da y. Yo ur 

co mmitt ee is fu lly info rm ed of th is ite m as it ha s alr ea dy reco gn ized th e need 

fo r th is br an ch li bra ry an d has in di ca te d its in te ntion th a t it be buil t by 

ap pro pri at in g $50,000 fo r a si te an d $22,050 fo r pla ns and sp ec ifi ca tio ns . We 

are plea se d to re port th a t th ro ug h th e ef fo rts of t he D is tr ic t Com miss ione rs an d 

th e splend id co op eration of th e B oa rd of Edu ca tion an d B oar d of L ib ra ry 

T ru st ee s th e $50,000 ap pr opri at ed fo r th e si te has been save d an d re tu rn ed to 

th e T re asu ry be ca us e an id ea l si te w as loca ted which w as alr eady ow ned 

by th e D is tr ic t an d un de r th e ju ri sd ic ti on of the B oa rd of Edu ca tion . A fter 

pu blic he ar in gs , co ns id eration, an d ap pr ov al, th e si te w as tr an sf err ed by th e 

Co mm iss ione rs to th e D is tr ic t Pu bl ic L ib ra ry fo r th e si te of th e Ten ley- Fr iend - 

ship Bra nc h Lib ra ry . Th e co mmun ity who le-h ea rted ly co nc ur s in th e wisdom 

of th a t ac tio n. Th e way is now pa ve d fo r th e nex t ste p, th e ob ta in in g of co nstru ct io n fu nd s.

The si te sel ec ted fo r th e br an ch li bra ry is ce ntr al ly loca ted m id st se ve ra l 

gr ad e and high sc hools : Wilson, Alice De al, Ja nn ey , St. Ann ’s Im m ac ul at a, 

Frien ds , an d othe rs. It wi ll serve a co mmun ity of mor e th an 21,900 peo ple, 

adult s a nd child ren, lo ca ted w ith in a 1-mil e r ad iu s.

Th e pr es en t ab an do ne d police st at io n now se rv in g as a m ak es hift br an ch 

li bra ry can no long er se rv e th e needs of th e are a. The sa le of th a t pr op er ty 

will br in g ap pr ox im at el y $50,000 an d will per m it it to re tu rn to th e ta x rolls 

of th e D istric t. Th e pre se nt te m po ra ry arr an gem en t is hav in g a detr im en ta l 

eff ect on ou r ch ild ren. Th ey ca nn ot be in sp ired to seek hig her ed uc at io na l 

be ne fits th a t ad eq ua te li bra ry fa cil it ie s could pr ov ide. The tr ain in g an d hab its 

to see k kn ow led ge m us t be en co urag ed if we a re to st im ula te our yo un gs te rs to 

ad va nc e in te llec tu al ly an d grow in to Nation- be ne fit ing citiz en s. The pre se nt 

era cl ea rly in di ca te s th e im po rtan ce of ed uc ation, be it scienc e or th e art s. 

An ad eq ua te br an ch li bra ry is one of th e ba sic tools ne ce ss ar y to st im ula te 

ed uc ation in all fields.

Th e br an ch li bra ry is a co mmun ity im prov em en t long aw ai te d. A new br an ch 

li bra ry bu ild ing will ope n th e do or fo r co mmun ity gat heri ngs of boy scou ts, 

girl sco uts , an d ot her si m il ar w or th y co mm un ity pr oje ct s. I t will pr ov id e 

a w or th w hi le plac e whe re our ch ildr en m ay go to ad van ce th eir ed uc at io na l 

in te re st s an d spen d le is ur e ho ur s to good ad van ta ge, th er eb y de cr ea sing th e 

tend en cy fo r yo un g people to sp en d th eir idle hour s ha ng in g ar ound w ith no 

plac e to go. W e ur ge you r co ntin ue d su ppo rt in re co mmen ding an d ob tain in g 

th e ne ce ss ar y co ns truc tion fu nds so th a t th e co ns truc tion of th e Te nley -F rien dship B ra nch L ib ra ry can be com me nced ea rl y in fiscal yea r 1959.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 331

T h e N orth w es t Set tl em ent H ou se

STATEMENT OF MRS. ROSALINE FISH ER, REPR ESEN TATIVE

P rep ared Sta te m en t

Mrs. Fisher. Senator, I am Rosaline Fisher, vice president of the 

Northwest Settlement House and chairman of the school-lunch program in that area.

Because 1 have worked so intimately with the children who are 

hungry and know the devastating effects of hunger, I am not going to 

read this whole statement.

Senator P asture. We will put it in the record.

(The statement referred to follows:)

No rth w es t Set tl em ent H ouse ,

Washington, I). C.

S e n a to r J o hn O. P asto re,

Chairman of Subcommittee on the District Budget of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

D ea r Sen at or P a st o r e: The Distric t of Columbia now has a school-lunch program in its senior and junior high schools. This testimony asks that the lunch 

program be extended to all elementary schools. This repo rt shows the need 

and value of such a program and tells of a way of providing school lunches 

easily and economically while planning for new school building construction goes 

on.

The Northwest Settlement House, a Red Feath er agency, is located in the 

heart of the second precinct, the so-called wickedest prec inct of Washington. 

There have alway s been hungry underprivileged children in this densely populated slum area . Because of our limited budget compared to the vast need instead of tryin g to feed a few children lunches, we have aimed to get an area wide 

lunch program set up in the elem entary schools, and have so testified before the 

Distric t Committee of Congress.

But this year there was an increase in unemployment and in the number of 

children who were hungry. When the prin cipa ls of our two neighboring schools 

asked us to do w hat we could for their most undernourished children, we began 

to act.

We had to get permission from the D istrict School Board, the Health Department, and the Bureau of Maternal and Child Welfare. The latte r two set up 

the project for us. We were allowed to pre par e lunches for 70 children, 35 in 

each school. The lunch was to conssit of 2 full sandwiches, 2 cookies, a piece 

of fresh frui t (apple, orange, or ban ana s) and a carton of milk. We prepared a 

sacked lunch for each child in the Settleme nt House and took the 70 lunches to 1 

school where a ll the 70 children ate. For these children it was a picnic litera lly. 

Their faces told of the physical satisfactio n the food gave them ; th eir increased 

regularity in school atte ndance and the ir improved social atti tud es and greater 

teachability bespoke the value of an elem enta ry school program. Copies of 

letters written to us by the two school principals are attached . (Representative 

Carl C. Rabau t of the House Subcommittee on Appropriations has the originals.)

Teachers came over to tell us of their experiences. One told us of a boy who 

was never in school except when brought by a trua nt officer. Afte r our lunch 

program was sta rte d the hoy came to school regu larly. Another teach er told us 

of a litt le girl, a listless, thumbsucker who never could be reached in school nor 

would join any group in games on the playground. Afte r 2 weeks of the lunch 

program, the personality of the child changed. She played with children and 

began to learn to read. If lunches can be so powerful a tool for learn ing, we 

must extend the lunch program.

And aside from the physical and social values of food, there is the very practical, financial one. Our school Superintendent, Dr. Carl F. Hansen stated on 

Jun e 11, 1958, before the House Appropriations Subcommittee for the District 

Budget, th at if the D istrict fa ilure rate in the elementary school could be reduced 

from the presen t 12 percent the annual saving to the District would be $580,000. 

An elementary lunch program would help reduce that 12 percent of failures for 

a hungry child cann ot learn.
332 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION’S, 195 9

The expense of this lunch program would not be so great. The lunches could 

be prep ared centrally and delivered to the schools. It cost us about $0.90 per 

child for his 5 lunches, each week. The Federal Government could be brought 

into this program. We secured butter and some cheese for the sandwiches and 

dour and milk powder for the cookies from the Departm ent of Agriculture. The 

Distric t on a larg er scale could get more help for there must be 10,000 children 

who really need this lunch, children of our large, public-welfare families, for 

instance.

The only equipment each school needs is tables, chairs, and a trash container. 

The children can wash their hands in the school’s toilet rooms.

Our new building would have cafeteria facilities but our old buildings would 

not wa rra nt the insta llation of cafeterias.

Most cities have school-lunch programs, we should try to set one up for this 

coming school year. It really hu rt us to tell other school principals who asked 

for help with their underprivileged children that we were not able to do more. 

We of Northwest Settlement House ask you to feed the hungry, to make these 

children able to do a year’s school work in a year.

Respectfully submitted.

R os al ine F is her

Mrs. Clarence Fisher,

Vice President of the Board, Chairman of the School Lunch Program.

Public Schools of the District of Columbia,

Washington, J). C., Jun e 6, 1958.

Mrs. Rosaline Fisher,

Director, Northwest Settlem ent House,

Washington, D. C.

Dear Mrs. Fishe r: The school-lunch program has benefited all of the children 

who were fortunate enough to have participa ted in it.

The classroom teachers have noticed marked changes in atti tudes, class work, 

and behavior. Many children have developed a sense of belonging and being 

cared for that makes it easier for them to be cheerful and more friendly. They 

are generally more ale "t and responsive in class. The two most belligerent 

children have been reported to be less antagonistic and the problem of the child 

who had been stealing and begging food was eliminated.

We w ant to express our appreciation to the personnel of the Northwest House 

for providing the lunches for our children.

Sincerely yours,

Leroy C. Dillard,

Principal, Scott Montgomery-Morse Schools.

P ublic Schools of the District of Columbia,

Washington, D. C., .June 6, 1958.

Miss Antoinette Gardner,

Director, Northwest Settlement House,

Washington, D. C.

My Dear Miss Gardner: I am subm itting the following with reference to the 

changes that we have noted in the Bundy School pupils who participate d in the 

lunch program sponsored by the Northwest Settlement House.

As you know, this program has been in operation for a period of approximately 2% months. This period is too short, we believe, for any major changes 

to be noticed. Nevertheless our teachers have m ade the following observations :

1. “Although his size and weight seem to be the same as before, my observation is tha t Willie is more a lert, is beginning to take a more active pa rt in classroom and playground activities, and attends school more regularly.”

2. “Appears more ale rt and active.”

3. “Pupil has improved, more a lert.”

4. “Children appear anxious and happy to partic ipate in the program. They 

enjoyed the lunch and showed a keener desire to partic ipate wholeheartedly in 

classroom activ ities.”

5. “Jacqueline’s attendance improved grea tly. She has gained weight and 

looks much better.”

6. “Dispositions have improved.”
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 333

7. “These children feel be tter and do not seem tir ed and sleepy in the evening.”

8. “The pupils attended school more regularly. They were also more ale rt.”

9. “The children receiving free lunch atte nded more regularly tha n before.”

10. “George has appeared more ale rt since the lunch program has been in 

operation.”

Sincerely,

B e n ja m in J. H en le y, 

Principal, Bundy School.

Gen er al Sta te m ent

Mrs. F isher. I simply want to emphasize one point that I)r. Hansen made when he testified before the House committee. He said 

that—

if the failur e rate in the elem entary schools could be reduced from the present 

12 percent to the normal 7 percent the ann ual savings to the District would be 

about $580,000.

With the report tha t I handed in are the reports to us of the p rincipals of two elementary schools whose children we supply the lunches 

for this year.

The principals’ statements will emphasize again that a hungry 

child is not teachable and a child who remains away from school 

because he is hungry is not even exposed to the learning process.

So we can really consider th at the feeding of our hungry children, 

a school lunch in the elementary schools, can really help to effect a 

saving to the District.

Senator Pasture. Is that not a sad documentary? Here we are 

the leading Nation in the world where we spend billions of dollars 

abroad to help people and we have to talk about hungry children in 

our schools.

Mrs. F isher. Our settlement house because it is a small settlement 

house resisted doing this year after year but this year when unemployment was at its worst the principals of these two elementary 

schools came to us and asked us if we could not do something for 

the children who were not coming to school unless the truant officer 

brought them or else when they came in they sat there listlessly.

We feed only 70, which is a tiny number of that vast group in that 

second precinct. Yet among the 70 the results show that it should be 

extended.

Thank you.

Mrs. Mizen. Our next witness will be Mr. Alden Potter, who will 

talk about highways and Mrs. Max Kappleman, a friend of the 

National Zoo.

Tha t closes the list of people who have asked to be here.

H ig h w a y s

STATEMENT OF ALDEN A. POTTER

Gen er al State m ent

Mr. Potter. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to read the report of 

the Maryland hearings on Route 240 or to present the contents of this 

general case. I simply want to show tha t I have the information on 

hand and appearing on the matter of highways.

I would like to explain by using this map printed in the Washington Post why I as a nonresident in the District am interested in 

this appropriation.
334 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

ENG INEERING STUDY

This appropriation bill, I believe, provides for an engineering study 

for this segment of the route which is to connect with 240. 1 woidd

point out that if this segment is provided, then the entire loop will 

be involved, because there is no point in bringing the traffic down 

to the District here unless you do go to an inner loop.

My residence is out here where the George Washington Memorial 

Parkway interchanges with the circumferential route which is also 

called 240. It is for that reason th at 1 am appearing here to make 

comments on this segment of the route.

I understand that the committee is going to take this up at some 

length at other than public hearings.

Senator Pastore. I do not know about that. They talked about 

this inner loop yesterday and I told them it was quite an involved 

thing to bring up at this juncture of the District budget hearings and 

at some time we m ight be interested in having quite a briefing on it. 

That is the way we left it yesterday. After all, this is an engineering 

project. I mean the way you are desiring to discuss it tonig ht is 

more than a budgetary item.

Mr. Potter, in a sense that is true. I was just using this to explain why I was appearing at all from outside the District.

Senator Pastore. Well, you are still an American. You have a 

right to be here. You do not have to apologize for that. You are 

addressing the Congress of the United States.

Mr. P otter. But I have lived there for nearly 40 years and I think 

I know the circumstances. So while I cannot take much time to 

cover all the intricacies of the thing, I would like to make a few 

comments.

Senator Pastore. Well, you see you have gotten yourself into the 

engineering aspect of it and I am afraid you will be above us and 

beyond us.

Prepared Statement

Mr. Potter. All I wish to do is to file this statement for the record.

Senator P astore. Tha t is fine.

Mr. Potter. This is a generalized criticism of the loop for your 

consideration.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement of Alden A. Potter

The Congressional Record, ju st after the 1956 Highw ay Act was signed into 

law, printed the opinion of the eminent London economist, Geoffrey Crowther, 

that the construction planned is needlessly extra vag ant.

This opinion is supported by the fa cts ; for the so-called planning was done 

just before the end of World War II as a postwar public-works boondoggle (to 

prevent unemployment), not by engineers fam ilia r with such a defense highway 

system as the German autobahns, but as an inter sta te hodgepodge to connect 

our cities.

Since then these urban centers have so rapidly melted away into suburban 

real esta te as to make the projected connections an outmoded absurdity, especially along the northea st coast. A notably inept development has been the 

“spiderweb” system for detouring interu rba n traffic on a series of b eltlin es with 

highly confused and confusing, multilane interchanges. Big business has moved 

out of the old urba n centers onto these “circumferentials,” in Boston, for example. Here the State has had to abandon the detour scheme and avoid the city 

altogether in inters tate routing.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPRO PRI ATION S, 1959 335

A ra ti onal ge om etry fo r a national de fens e hi gh w ay sy stem shou ld copy th e 

well-c onceive d syste m of av en ue s in W as hi ng to n as a he xa go na l ne tw or k w ith 

pl en ty of ac ce ss fo r al l fu tu re de ve lopm en ts so th a t bo ttlene ck s ca nnot develop 

a t in te rc han ges (W as hi ngt on' s circ les a re a pr oto ty pe) th a t ar e no t an d 

shou ld no t be sufficie ntly fr eq uen t fo r al l ne ce ss ar y access.

P la ns to pr es er ve th e urb an de ve lopm en ts of ra ilw ay -h or se -a nd -b ug gy da ys in 

bu sine ss ce nte rs serv ed by su bw ay and elev at ed tr a n sit sy stem s fo r co mmuters 

are pl ai nl y da te d. Th ey are le ad in g to sc an da lo us ly ex pe ns iv e co ns truc tion s 

which will no t reso lve th e sn arl s of fu tu re traffic, th e mec ha nics of wh ich may 

rese mble pr es en t tech ni qu es ev en less th an to day ’s tr an sp o rt resembles th e 

ho rse-an d-bu gg y syste m.

Co mm on sen se dic ta te s a re ali zati on of di m in ishi ng po ss ib ilitie s fo r fu tu re 

gr ow th of po pu la tion an d traffic. We ca nnot pl und er our pla net en dles sly in 

th e va in ho pe of mo ving on to oth er pla ne ts. To co ns tr uct a bi lli on dol la r sy stem ar ound an in ner loop in W as hi ng to n as th e ce ntr al elem en t in a sp id er web 

vi ol ates th e ex ce llen t pla n of th e cit y’s av en ue s. I t ca nnot se rv e ei th er , ce rta in ly no t bo th, of it s allege d obje cti ves; to ge t traffi c th ro ugh th e ci ty a t high 

speed and a t th e sa m e tim e dis tr ib u te co m m uter traffic in m or ni ng an d ev ening 

ru sh ho ur s. Ther e are no su cc es sful pre ce de nt s fo r su ch a ci ty loop. The DeLeu w-C atlie r re port to th e D is tr ic t of Co lumbia Highw ay D ep ar tm en t re ve al s 

th e in ep titu de ra th e r th an ju st if ie s th e co ns truc tion , es pe cially in it s w es te rn 

an d nort hern leg a s now pro je ct ed in t he bu dg et.

We ca nn ot pl an ad eq uat el y fo r 1980; th e att em pt to do so pr od uc es extr avagant en gi ne er in g ca lc ul at ed to cre ate a contr acto rs ’ para dis e in st ea d of me eti ng 

ac tu al , pre se nt needs. We wo uld do bett er to bu ild an American sp hi nx su rro un de d by pyra m id s if we m ust ne ed s fig ht off de pr es sion by ke ep ing big bu sine ss b us y boondo gg lin g.

RIVERSIDE LOCATION

Mr. P otter. What I wish to say to the criticism of Mr. Robertson's 

testimony as I saw’ it in the transcript. 1 would like to read that into 

the record.

First, on page 54 of the transcript Mr. Robertson said th at a riverside location is the proper route for coming into the District on an 

arterial highway which is to carry the traffic from Route 240. This 

requires a detour of several miles around this circumferential system 

to the George Washington Parkway.

As Mr. Robertson pointed out, this route provides no entry at all 

for trucks into the District. This takes it off of the system of financing. Also for another reason not at once apparent. Tha t reason 

is that the requirement of public hearings under the Public Highway 

Act need not be held to justify use of the parkway as a traffic artery.

There is ample reason to believe th at this traffic of the p ark system 

will be avoided in the end. The u priver compromise, so-called, using 

the George Washington Memorial Parkway, seems rather a ruse to 

mislead the public, including Congressmen. It is sort of a divided 

counterscheme to first acquire the Maryland Belt Line right-of-way, 

the provision for a large interchange in a very bad location for such 

engineering operations, which is where I live. With these extravagant contracts sewed up, diversion to the truck route connection already designed by the Clarkson Co., which is this route. This comprises another 4 or 6 lane highway along the river and up Cabin John 

Creek to take traffic to and from Route 240.

No engineer seeking an economical site for an arterial route would 

choose the Palisades, not just because of aversion to marring the 

beauty along the river, but because of the rough, rocky contours with 

expensive bridging. An arterial highway cannot follow these contours and stay in line with the safe highway standards of the Inter ­

state System.

27 23 5— 58 22
336 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

No r does it make sense to build a tru ck hig hw ay th at can be ap ­

pro ach ed from only one side.

COST OF INNE R LOOP

My second point relative to the inn er loop was th at Mr. Rob erts on 

was asked how many miles are to be bu ilt wi th the $272 million estima ted for the inn er loop. To the l7!/2 miles of loop itself he add ed 

certa in connections, bringing the mile age to nearl y 28*4, b ut wi tho ut 

stat in g th at these connectio ns were no t covered by the costs quoted.

Inste ad of $10 million the cost is a dm ittedly well over $15 m illion 

pe r mile. One expert in the National Ca pit al Pl an ni ng Comm ission 

has rem arked th at when all the accessories to this inner loop hav e 

been bro ught in the cost will run up to a billion dollars or more. 

Th is one connection for 240 up riv er at Key Br idge may run to $25 

million fo r no t much over a sing le mile. That would buy a good 

man y-----

Senator P astore. Schoolteache rs.

Th ank you ve ry much.

I asked the Commissioners wheth er they were going to g ive a he ar ­

ing to all intere ste d p artie s alon g this inner-loop proje ct and they told 

me that th ey would.

Mr. P otter. Th is is a very complex thin g.

Senator P astore. I th in k you will ge t yo ur opp ortunity.

Mr. P otter. I do n ot expect you to go int o it , Sena tor.

WID ENING OF PORTER STREET

Senator P astore. Here is a lette r fo r the reco rd, by Mrs. Bev erly 

Robinson, con cerning the wid ening of Por te r St reet NW., which 

appeare d in the Ev en ing Sta r and Wash ing ton Po st of Ju ne 12. 

Sev eral letters on th e same su bject a re also included.

(The lette rs ref erred to f ollow:)

Tree Slaughter

I know I shall never see a truck as lovely as a tree. But from all repo rts 

I am going to have to try.

The Distric t Highway Department in the name of progress proposes to destroy 

some 147 trees between 25 and 50 years old, all healthy and in good condition, 

thanks to care. These tree s line Porter Street between Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues and are to be removed in order to widen the present 28-foot 

street by 6 feet on each side.

A once attrac tive residential street, along which many small children walk 

to school, will become a freeway for speeding vehicles. Walks in a semitropical 

climate to the nea rest shopping center and transp ortation to offices will become 

an ordeal withou t the sh ad e; houses will be h otter ; noise and dirt will increa se; 

the streets will be ugly.

When the American Institut e of Architects held the ir 100th anniversary 

celebration in 1957 in Washington, some of the 4,200 architect visitors were 

taken to view Washington from the air. Many released statements to the 

local press condemning the developers of adjace nt suburban are as for their 

wholesale destruction of trees. And the District itse lf was complimented on 

its beautiful park like appearance.

Involved in this proposed raid on Porter Street are a number of families 

who own the ir own homes and who had intended to rema in in this location 

the rest of the ir lives. Now, “For Sale” and “Rent” signs are appearing. If 

the plans are carried out, the District will have changed the chara cte r of the 

street, destroyed property values, and have on its hands ano ther are a on the 

downgrade.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9 337

There must be a possible compromise (say, “No Parki ng” signs, for one 

thing ) between comfort, safety, beauty, and speed, which are the issues involved. Surely, there must be someone who can stop the modern-day highwayman w ith an appropriation on his hip.

Mrs. Beverley Robinson.

3028 Porter Street NW., Inc., 

Washington, D. C., June 16,1958.

The Chairman,

District Subcommittee of the Senate on Appropriations,

Sena te Office Building, Washington, D. C.

Gentlemen : The subject of this letter is the proposed widening of Porter 

Street NW., from Connecticut Avenue west. The views expressed here in are 

those of the stockholders of the undersigned corporation, which owns one of 

the several 12-unit cooperative apa rtm ent buildings in the 3000 block.

It is understood this project to widen the street to 40 feet was among the 

deletions of the House committee for cutting back the spending program of the 

District. It is sincerely hoped your committee will concur in and supp ort the 

action of th e House unit, because an increase in width of some 12 feet will require 

the removal of most of the trees which prese ntly make this section of Porter 

Street one of the most pleasant residen tial neighborhoods in the District.

That traffic on this section of the street has increased in recent years is 

recognized. However, it is only during short morning and evening periods on 

weekdays th at th e capacity of the str et is taxed. It is believed this condition on 

working days is caused by the many privately operated vehicles of persons living 

east of this ar ea ; also, to a large extent, on the light controls at Connecticut 

Avenue and at 34th Street which, obviously, must be set to serve the heav ier 

north-south traffic at these intersections during peak periods.

Undoubtedly, the Highway Departm ent has given consideratio n to widening 

the street to 30 feet, thu s permitting three 10-foot lanes. By eliminatin g parking 

during rush hours, as is done on many streets, and regulating the direc tion of 

traffic in the middle lane appropriate to the crosstown flow, it would seem 

Por ter Stree t, without a major alte ration, could easily handle all the traffic 

that could pass the lights at 34th Street and at Connecticut Avenue. In this 

connection, it appears, from a laym an’s observation, th at Porter Str eet traffic 

is considerably less tha n that of 34th Street and Reno Road, yet th at thoroughfare has but three lanes in a number of sections.

It is a privilege to address your committee. It is hoped th at you are in full 

sympathy with our desire to preserve the b eauty of Po rte r Street NW., between 

Connecticut and Wisconsin Avenues.

By copy of this letter, the Director, District Highway Departm ent, is advised 

of the views of this corporation, which feels th at any modification of Porter 

Street should be limited to the extent th at the present bordering trees are 

undisturbed.

Respectfully,

Frank W. Lampertz, President.

3022 Porter Street NW.,

Washington, D. C.

The Chairman,

Senate Appropriations Committee,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

Dear Sir : We, the undersigned, taxpay ers and owners of the apartments in 

3022 Por ter Street NW., having read the letter which, we are told, ha s already 

been mailed to you from the owners of 3024 Po rte r Street NW., wish to concur 

in all th at is stated therein pertain ing to the proposed widening of Porter Str eet 

west of Connecticut Avenue.

We, therefore, add our names to their petition.

Amelia B. Deane

(And 13 oth ers ).
338 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

3024 1’obter Street NW., 

Washington, D. C.,Jun e 15,1958.

Th e Chair man,

Senate Appropriations Committee,

United States Senate, Washington, J). C.

Dear Sir : The subject of this letter is the District appropriations bill, with 

par ticula r reference to tha t portion which deals with the widening of Por ter 

Street NW., and was prompted by reason of an article appearing in the Washington Post of Saturday, Jun e 14, and an editorial appe aring in the same paper 

today, Sunday, June 15, entitled “Saving a Stre et.”

According to the newspaper article of Saturday, Jun e 14, the House committee cut $54,400 from the District appropriations, and eliminated the project 

to widen Porter Street NW. The undersigned, who live at 3024 Porter Street, 

who are property owners and taxpayers, hasten to write the ir approval of your 

action.

When we became aware of the proposed widening of the street for the purpose 

of constructing a highway, we immediately filed our protest with the District 

Highway Commission, and we understand many other homeowners along the 

stre et have done likewise.

Such a construction project will mean the loss of a great many beautiful 

trees, many of which are 25 to 50 years old. It will completely change the at ­

mosphere of the neighborhood. Porter Street is entirely resid entia l. It is 

lined with trees on both sides, in good condition, and fron ting upon the stre et 

are many homes surrounded by green lawns and lovely gardens. The stre et has 

charm, and typifies the best in American life. All this will go when the mellow 

culture is sliced through by a modern highway whose chief end will be to si»eed 

traffic over a stretch of durable cement.

This will resu lt in the inevitable downward trend, in both the cultural tone 

of the neighborhood and the value of its property, a pattern too often repea ted 

in the city of Washington. A fast-traveling highway will force many residents, 

who want to live in i>eace and quiet, to flee to the surro unding suburbs. It is 

just such inroads into the quiet residential neighborhoods which is fast turn ing 

the city, once so desirable and beautiful, into one which has lost its sense of 

direction—its reason for being. It is forgetting th at our first President planted 

it beside the Potomac to become the most gracio us capital in the world.

We urge you to use all of your influence to withhold the necessary appropriation, and save our street.

Sincerely,

Pearl L. P utney, President

(And nine othe rs).

National Zoological P ark

The F riends of the N ational Zoo

STATEMENT OF MAX M. KAMPELMAN, PRESIDENT

General Statement

Mr. K ampelman. Mr. Chairm an, it is nice to see you, sir. It is good 

of you to recognize me, Mr. Ch air ma n. I never believed th at the 

Senate ought to be in session pa st 10 p. m.

In view of the laten ess of the ho ur I would be con tent merely to 

have my testimo ny printed as if read.

Senator P astore. You can rea d it if you wan t to.

Mr. K ampelman. I have wa ited so long.

My name is Max M. Kamp elm an. I am an att orney prac tic ing law 

in the Distri ct of Columbia. I ap pe ar here tod ay in my capacit y as 

pre sid ent of the Frien ds of the Na tional Zoo, a newly formed nonpro fit org ani zation desig ned to help develop com munity and pub lic 

su pp ort in be ha lf of the zoo.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 339

NE ED S OF ZOO

Our objectives before your subcommittee this year are limited. Our 

studies to date persuade us tha t the needs of the zoo are great if the 

zoo is to be the beautiful and efficient national shrine which the Nation’s Capital deserves and if we are to fulfill our Government’s responsibility to the 4 million men, women, and children who annually 

visit the Washington Zoo from all over our country and the world.

These desirable long-range objectives must await a review of the 

zoo's present ambivalent and illogical administrative pattern under 

which authority is divided between the District government and the 

Smithsonian Institution. We trust that such a review will be called 

for by this subcommittee.

Our limited objectives this year are rath er directed at. needs we 

consider to be of a more emergency nature. I refer to the subject of 

the zoo’s safety requirements.

The House Committee on Appropriations has approved an operating budget for the zoo submitted by the District government of $898,- 

000 for the next fiscal year.

We commend the House committee for not cutting that request, but 

we respectfully submit that this sum is grossly inadequate and ignores 

urgent requirements which cannot and should not be neglected for another year. These deficiencies are in two area s:

AD DITIO NAL PEK 8O N N EI.

The present budget request would allow the zoo to hire 3 additional 

keepers and 4 policemen. We are informed that one of those guards 

was intended for the area of the lions’ cage, the scene of the May 16 

tragedy. The timely expenditure of $3,400 to $4,500 could possibly 

have averted or minimized the accident.

It is not prudent to economize in this crucial area. Yet a scientific 

personnel survey made in July 1957 recommended th at there be a total 

of 65 keepers and 30 policemen for the zoo. Instead of 3 keepers as 

the budget, calls for, therefore, we should have 17 new keepers; and 

instead of 4 policemen, the budget should provide for 9 additional 

policemen. These requirements would add $80,000 to the budget—an 

amount less, I am certain, than a lawsuit based on negligence would 

cost the Government.

capi ta l im pr ovem en ts

The second great area of safety deficiency relates to the capital imPi •ovements for the zoo. I bring to the attention of this committee 

that in the 6-year budget of capital improvements recommended by 

the Joint Senate-House Committee on District Affairs and recently 

approved by the Congress, absolutely no funds were provided for 

capital improvements for t he zoo.

This is wrong, this is shortsighted and this is not in the interest of 

the community. We also want to point out that this decision was 

made by the joint committee without even giving the officials of the 

zoo an opportunity to appear, testify, and defend their modest requests.

One item in the urgent capital improvement request was for $50,000 

to replace and repair dangerous and unhabitable animal paddocks. 

Overcrowding of animals is a danger to the public, to the zoo person-
340 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

nel, and to the animals themselves. This request for essential paddock 

repair should be granted this year.

Senator P astore. The request was made today, so I understand.

SAFETY FEAT URES

Mr. Kampelman. The other items in the rejected capital improvement budget requests are also related to safety. The present Administration Building, built in 1805—153 years ago—is located three-quarters of a mile away from the operations of the zoo, much too far for 

proper administration and zoo safety. This termite-ridden building 

has been declared unsafe for occupancy. Must we wait for another 

unfortunate accident before community and congressional awareness 

will be aroused? The cost for preliminary studies and plant for this 

building come to $25,600.

We trust that this subcommittee will see fit to act upon these urgent 

requests now.

Furthermore, we respectfully urge this committee to call for an 

immediate safety study by the District government and the Smithsonian Institution, to begin and be completed this year in order that a 

report and a supplementary safety budget request be submitted to the 

Congress as soon as practicable.

The Congress now has enough facts to act on the three urgent and 

vital budgetary items for which action is now required. For a more 

comprehensive and intelligent approach to other safety requirements 

of the zoo; a supplementary budget request should be submitted by 

the administration to the Congress. The report we recommend should 

be the basis for that supplementary request.

RECOM M ENDATION S

In conclusion, T desire to summarize our testimony. The Friends of 

the National Zoo now call for the following five-point congressional 

program:

1. The Congress should call for a review of the zoo’s present 

ambivalent and illogical administrative pattern so that the officials of 

the zoo may be responsive and responsible to the Congress and to the 

community without confining and confusing administrative layers 

over and around them.

2. An additional $80,000 should be appropriated for fiscal 1959 so 

17 additional keepers and 9 additional policemen may be hired immediately.

3. The zoo should he given $50,000 to replace and repair dangerous 

and unhabitable animal paddocks.

4. An appropriation should now be provided so that the plans and 

studies can take place this year toward replacing the present 1805 

dangerous Administration Building.

5. The Congress should ask the District government and the S mithsonian Institution to undertake and complete as soon as practicable 

a thorough safety study and review of the zoo and its facilities, which 

should be the basis for a supplementary budget request to the Congress 

designed to make the zoo as safe a park as is required by prudence and 

responsibility.

We realize that in addressing ourselves to the members of this 

subcommittee and its chairman, we are addressing ourselves to the
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 341

parents and grandparents of children who enjoy the zoo, who can 

learn a great deal from the zoo, and whose development and training 

can be enriched from having satisfactory zoo facilities in their 

community.

We also know that we are addressing Members of Congress whose 

lives and careers are dedicated to the public interest and who share 

with us the vision of a Nation’s Capital which can be beautiful, safe, 

and an object of national pride. We testify before you with that 

premise in mind. We offer our services as an organization to work 

with this committee and its staff not only for the immediate objectives which are essential, but also for the long-range development of 

the zoo and its rightfu l place in this Capital.

Senator P astore. Thank you very much.

F IS H W A Y AT IJ T T L E FA I.I.B DAM

Senator Pastore. Mr. Stewart Brandborg, assistant conservation 

director of the National Wildlife Federation, notified the committee 

tha t he was unable to be here this evening, so his statement will be 

placed in the record at this point.

(The statement referred to follows:)

Statement of Stewart M. Brandborg

I am Stewart M. Brandborg, assistant conservation director of the National 

Wildlife Federation. This statement is an outgrowth of the collective thinking 

of my organization, the Wildlife Management Institute, and the Izaak Walton 

League of America, three national conservation groups who have worked closely 

together in their efforts to gain construction of an adequate fishway at the 

Little Falls Dam on the Potomac River. These three organizations represent 

a major segment of sportsmen and other conservation-minded citizens in the 

States, Alaska, and Hawaii. All three endorse the recommendation that additional funds be provided to build the fish passageway at the Little Falls project.

The Maryland Board of Natural Resources, Maryland Game and Inland Fish 

Commission, Northern Virginia Regional Planning Council, and individual 

sportsmen’s and conservation groups in the Potomac Basin States also have 

asked that the fishway be constructed.

For the past several years conservationists have urged that fish-passage 

facilities be installed as an integral part of the Little Falls diversion dam which 

now is in the final stages of construction. Without this fishway, there would 

be only 4 miles of accessible spawning area for the imi>ortant runs of striped 

bass, shad, and alewives that spawn in the Potomac River. With construction 

of this fish-passage facility, the stretch of the river from the dam up to Great 

Falls can be used for spawning purposes. This addition to the available spawning area would result in a sizable increase in the number of fish produced for 

both commercial use and the enjoyment of sport fishermen on the Potomac 

River and in bay waters.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that the value to the 

commercial fishermen in the Potomac River from the enlarged populations of 

strij>ed bass, shad, and alewives would reach $200,000 annually. The total 

annual value of the Potomac River commercial fishery has fluctuated between 

$200,000 to $400,000 during the past 10 years.

The Little Falls fishway would also provide additional fishing area for sports 

anglers. The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that an additional 50,000 

man-days of fishing would generate an additional $250,000 in business for the 

community.

On the basis of preliminary cost estimates for the fishway, the Congress 

appropriated $200,000 for its construction in fiscal year 1957 and directed that 

any additional funds should come from the water fund of the District of 

Columbia. It was believed tha t the District’s share would amount to about 

$150,000.

The Appropriations Committee were told last year that the cost of a suitable 

fishway to assure the passage of fish would be $516,000. The committees in-
342 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

structed that the proposed plans and the required financing be resubmitted. 

Some members expressed concern that the cost of the fishway was inordinate 

inasmuch as the dam was originally estim ated to cost about $700,000. According to more recen t information, the cost of the dam is said to be nearer $1.1 

million, and the complete water project, of which the dam is a part, will cost 

more than $8 million.

Those figures are relative, however, because the cost of the fishway has little 

bearing when considered alone to the cost of the dam or other physical development. The true yardstick to apply to the fishway is its cost in comparison 

with the value of the benefits that would be generated by its construction. In 

relation to the $400,000 to $450,000 annual incre ase in the yield of sport and 

commercial fisheries of the Potomac, this investment is small and completely 

justifiable.

Figuring the fund s that Congress alre ady has made available for the fishway, 

Mr. Chairman, it appears th at an additional appropriation of about $175,000 

would enable the construction to proceed. Some of the difference between the 

preliminary and final cost estimates for the fishway can be trace d to increased 

labor and material costs—fac tors that have necessitated revision of the cost 

estimates for the dam itself. Some of the additional cost also can be attributed 

to the cofferdam that must be constructed to prevent the river water from interfering with the work and for the purchase of the construction access bridge 

presently in place.

Had the fishway construction proceeded at the time of the construction of the 

dam, it would appear that the present cost prices for the access bridge and the 

cofferdam would be proportionately lower.

The construction of the fishway, Mr. Chairman, we believe offers an opportunity unique in this day to fish conservation. Here at this fishway in the 

Potomac River we have an opportunity to enhance a fisheries resources, with 

benefit to both commercial and sports fishermen. Such an opportunity is rar e 

and particu larly so in a densely urbanized are a like the Distric t of Columbia.

We urge the committee, Mr. Chairman, to reque st the appropriation of $175,000 

so tha t the construction of the fishway may proceed.

FIS HW AY AT LITTLE FALLS DAM

Senator Pastore. The. National Fisheries Institute, the Wildlife 

Management Institute, and the Tzaak Walton League have sent letters 

relative to the appropriation for the fishway at Little Falls. They 

may be. placed in the record at this time.

(The letters referred to follow:)

National F isheries Institute, I nc.,

Washington, n . C., June 17,1958.

Hon. J ohn O. Pastore,

Chairman, Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee for the

District of Columbia, United States Capitol, Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator Pastore: Last week the House of Representatives passed the 

District of Columbia appropriations bill and sent it to the Senate. Included in 

the appropriation was an item of $200,000 to permit the construction of a fishway 

at Little Falls Dam on the Potomac River.

It is highly imp orta nt that Congress provide this additional appropriation in 

order to make possible the construction of the fishway. The Fish and Wildlife 

Service estim ates that the increased value of the Potomac River fisheries, 

involving shad, strip ed bass, herring, and other species of migratory fish, will 

produce an annual return of between $400,000 and $500,000 per annum to the 

commercial fishing industry and the sport fishermen. I recognize th at the cost of 

the fishway has been increased, but even at the latest figure of $516,000 the 

investm ent would pay for itself over and over again in public benefits.

In addition to the monetary value, it is important that Congress provide a 

fishway at the fron t door of the Nation’s Capita l where millions of citizens can 

observe the benefits of conservation.

On behalf of the entire fishing indu stry —and, I am sure this also goes for the 

recre ational groups—we sincerely hope your committee will provide sufficient 

funds to include the fishway in the Little Falls Dam.

Very truly yours,

Mal Xavier,

Acting General Manager.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 343

Wildlife Management Institute,

Washington, D. C., Jun e 16, 1958.

Ho n. J ohn 0 . I’astoke,

Chairman, Subcommittee on the Distric t of Columbia, Sena te Committee

on Appropriations, Capitol Building, Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator 1’astore: The institute is hopeful th at your committee will assent to the inclusion by the House Appropriations Committee in the Distric t of 

(Columbia appropriations bill of $200,000 to finance the increased cost of the proposed fishway in the Little Falls Dam on the Potomac River near Washington.

The fishway offers Congress a unique opportunity to enhance fishery resources 

in the lower Potomac River. By making an additional 8 to 10 miles of the river 

available as a spawning and nursery ground the fishway will triple the now 

rather limited area of clean water in which the anadromous fishes can spawn 

in the Potomac.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service has estimated that the fishway 

would increase the value of the local commercial fishery by $200,000 annually. 

Sport fishing would benefit by the provision of about 50,000 man-days of fishing 

opportunity worth $250,000 a year. The cost of the fishway is modest when compared with the benefits th at would be created.

The project has th e endorsement of the M aryland Game and Inland Fish Commission, Maryland Board of Natural Resources, Virginia Commission of Game 

and Inla nd Fisheries major national conservation and sportsmen’s organizations, and sim ilar local groups in Maryland and Virginia.

Sincerely,

C. R. Gutermuth.

Vice President.

The Izaak Walton League of America, Inc.,

June 19,1958.

Ho n. John O. Pastore,

Chairman, Dis trict of Columbia Subcommittee, Committee on Appropriations, United St ate s Senate, Washington. D. C.

Dear Senator I’astoke: The Izaa k Walton League of America is very much 

interested in assuring th at fish passage facilities are constructed at the Little 

Falls Dam on the Potomac.

Studies by ex pert fisheries people have shown th at such facilities will add some 

10 river miles of spawning area for mig ratory fish and will add very substantially to the annual value of the commercial catch. Obviously the contribution 

to the outdoor recreation potential of the Potomac to the millions of people in 

the metrop olitan area will be even more significant.

We und erstand the House committee has favo rably repo rted the Distric t of 

Columbia appropriation bill including the $200,000 to finance the increased cost 

of the Little Falls fishway. We sincerely urge th at your committee take favorable action also on th is important item.

Sincerely,

J. W. Penfold, 

Conservation Director.

FEDERAL PA YM EN T

Senator Pastore. Here are several letters advocating increased contribution from the Federal Government to the District. We shall place 

them in the record at this point.

(The letters referred to follow:)

The Washingtonians, 

Washington, D. C., June 18,1958.

Senator J ohn O. Pastore,

Chairman, D istrict Appropriation Subcomm ittee,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

Dear Sir : At the ann ual meeting of the Washingtonians, recently held a motion

was passed unanimously by the group in connection with the apparent financial 

plight of the District of Columbia, and a solution was recommended as to receiving 

needed revenue to maintain the District, th at is. for the Federal Government to 

pay to the District Government its obligation created under the 1922 statute, 

and which sta tut e provided that 60 percent of the main tenance of the District
344 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

be paid by th e Dis tric t and 40 percent to be paid by the Fed eral Government. This 

obligation was created when the Federal Government ignored the term s of the 

agreement of 1922 by th e lump-sum payments in 1925 while the sta tut e was still 

in effect, and not repealed until 1938.

Today I read in the News that you thought the District officials had not 

produced “solid justification" or something “sta tistic al” for re storing many items 

to the city ’s budget for next year, certain items having been slashed from the 

budget. The following indented statement I believe is solid justification as 

well as statistical data for restoring the said items to the budget.

In 1878 a sta tut e was passed by Congress which created a perm anen t form 

of government, known as the commission form of government, for the District 

of Columbia, which sta tut e provided that the upkeep of the Distric t should be 

borne jointly by the United States and Distric t upon a 50-50 ratio. In 1922 

this ratio was changed by statute to a ratio of 60 percent to be paid by the 

District and 40 percent by the Federal Government. This ratio was disregarded by the Federal Government in 1925 and since that time there is now 

standing in its place an annu al lump-sum appropriation. It is quite apparent 

that the Federal Government, from the time of its first lump-sum payment in 

1925 should have paid toward the maintenance of the Distric t government 

its share according to the agreement of 1922 up to the time the sta tute made 

between the pa rties was repealed in 1938.

You are respectfully requested to recommend th at the items slashed from 

the budget be restored.

Sincerely yours,

Etta L. Taggart, 

President, The Washingtonians.

Federal City Council,

February 3,1958.

Hon. Carl Hayden,

Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee,

Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator Hayden : Members of the Fed eral City Council have directed 

me to send you the enclosed resolution calling for an increased Federal payment to the District budget. This resolution was approved unanimously at 

the meeting of our full board of trustees today. With its passage our organization has mobilized in support of what we regard as an objective of top importance 

for the current session of Congress.

We ar e convinced tha t the very fut ure of Wash ington as the Nation’s Capital 

City depends heavily upon a more equitable sharing of our city’s costs between 

local and Federal Government. As our resolution indicates, we feel this shoulld 

include not only a higher Federal payment in the immediate future, but development of a more workable formula for sharing costs as well. Without such 

action, Washington will continue to move from crisis to crisis, with no real 

improvement in sight.

A glance at our city ’s present pligh t will show why this is true . During the 

last three decades, the Federal payment to our budget has falle n from 50 to 

12 percent. Our rela ted problems of urban renewal, traffic congestion, crime, 

and so forth , are also on the upswing. And, as Wash ington’s city council, 

Congress must legislate the u ltim ate solutions.

A higher Federal paym ent is an indispensable pa rt of any basic solution to 

the problems of this Capital City. Therefore, I hope tha t, as chairma n of the 

Senate Appropriations Committee, you will give careful consideratio n to the 

attached resolution, and exe rt every effort to press for congressional action this 

session gran ting an increase in the Federal payment commensurate with this 

city’s needs.

If you desire any specific information on this subject, we will be glad to supply 

it. I am also enclosing a newly published brochure explaining the purposes and 

operations of the Fed eral City Council.

Sincerely,

George A. Garrett, President.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 345

F ederal Cit y Cou ncil Resolution on th e F ederal P ortion of th e D istrict

Budget

(As approved by Federal Communication Commission’s board of trustees, 

February 3,1958)

Whereas the fiscal relationship between the District and Federal Governments 

lias always been firmly established by virtue of the fact that Washington is the 

residence of the Federal Government; and

Whereas an adequate Federal proportion is imperative due to limitations on 

the District budget arising from fixed boundaries and tax-exempt activities, 

together with unusual costs incurred through Federal operations; and

Whereas since 1920 the Federal portion of the District budget has declined 

from 50 to 12 percent, during which time the city’s problems of disrepair, decay, 

and lagging municipal services have greatly increased ; and

Whereas the present level of Federal payment is totally inadequate to meet 

Washington’s needs as a liveable city, not to mention its position as the Nation’s 

Capital City : Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, Tha t:

(1) The Federal City Council endorses an increased Federal portion of the District budget as basic to all other goals of community improvement in our city ;

(2) Our organization lend its utmost support to efforts to develop a more equitable formula for sharing the increased costs of running the city; and

(3) This support be made known to Congress, local officials and the White 

House in such manner as the council president deems most effective.

Arlin gto n, Va., January 25, 1958.

Hon. Carl H ayd en,

Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator Hayden : At its regular meeting on January 20, the InterFederation Council voted unanimously its support of the request of the Federation of Citizens Associations of the District of Columbia that the Federal Government contribute a minimum of $30 million in lieu of taxes to the cost of 

operatng the government of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year 1958-59.

The Inter-Federation Council is composed of delegates from the five federations 

of citizens associations in the metropolitan area and thereby represents around 

300 local citizens associations in Washington and nearby Maryland and Virginia.

The council feels tha t this is an altogether reasonable contribution to the 

District budget in view of the increased cost of police and fire protection, street 

maintenance, and other services rendered by the District government to the 

Federal installations in the city.

Very truly yours,

Walter Ki ngsbury,

Acting Secretary.

cr ime in th e dis trict

Senator Pastore. We shall place in the record at this point resolutions of the Business and Professional Women’s Club of the District 

of Columbia which state their attitude on the crime situation in the 

District, and asking support for continued efforts to remedy it.

(The resolutions referred to follow :)
346 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

Busine ss and Professional Women's Club

of the District of Columbia, I nc.,

Washington, D. C., April 24,1958.

Ho n. Carl Hayden,

Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

My Dear Senator Hayden : Enclosed herewith for the consideration of your 

committee is a resolution concerning the present sta te of lawlessness in Washington, which was adopted at our April business meeting.

We have in our club 776 business and professional women, and we are deeply 

concerned about the unsafe condition of our city after dark. Many of our 

members will not atte nd our meetings simply because they fea r for the ir own 

safety on the streets.

We earn estly request that you consider the proposals we have set forth in 

our resolution which might help solve this serious problem.

Sincerely yours,

Rita Heany, Pre sident.

Resolution

Whereas there presently exis ts in the city of Washington. District of Columbia, a state of lawlessness which places in je opardy the citizenry, both male and 

female, such lawlessness manifesting itself, among other ways, in the practice 

of thuggery and so-called yoking on the public stre ets at all hours of the day 

and ni gh t; a nd

Whereas this thuggery has increased in intensity over many months to the 

point where now it has become a matter of national disgrace, earning for the 

locality a reputation partic ularly deplorable with respect to the Capital City of 

our Nation which should be a center of culture an d r efin eme nt: and

Whereas by virtue of continued perpetrations of such attack s upon the citizenry and the difficulties experienced by the prese ntly constituted law enforcement bodies in the ir activities to abate such evil, the citizenry is deprived of a

basic right of citizenship and there is a res ult ant undermining of one of the 

basic foundations upon which society rests, namely, the safety of life, limb, and 

prop erty within the confines of the social group ; and

Whereas the Distric t of Columbia Business and Professional Women’s Club 

is cognizant of the foregoing and is desirous of recording its stan d with reference the re to: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, as folloivs:

1. That the efforts of the Dis trict of Columbia government and that of the 

Federal Government toward the correction of the situation herein described is 

commended.

2. That this club endorses fully the action which led to the establishm ent of 

the Subcommittee on Crime Investigation of the House Committee on the Distri ct of Columbia, which is currently studying the situation with a view to the 

form ulation of necessary corrective legislation.

3. That this club earnestly requests such Subcommittee on Crime Investigation to take into consideration in its investigation and studies the following 

po ints:

(a) The desirab ility of increasing (he present complement of foot policemen of the D istr ict of Columbia Police D epartm ent; and

(b) The adoption of safeguards, procedural or otherwise, aga inst distasteful publicity which often may deter women from making complaints on 

which prosecution may be institu ted.

4. That the Distric t of Columbia Business and Professional Women’s Club applauds the efforts of juvenile court officials in the metropolitan area to cooperate 

with each other and to coordinate the ir activities to the end tha t the work of the 

juvenile courts in such area may be made more effective and more beneficial in the 

prevention and correction of juvenile delinqu enc y: and be it furth er

Resolved:

1. That it is the wish of this club that the Appropriation Committees of the 

United States Senate and of the House of Representatives be urged to receive 

favorably requests for increased appropriations for the Dis trict of Columbia and 

that the Federal Government increase its share of th e necessary cost of a dditional 

law enforcement facilities.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 347

2. That the president of this club he authorized and instructed to send copies 

of this resolution to the follow ing:

(a) The Subcommittee on Crime Investig ation of the House Committee 

on the District of Columbia ;

( b) The Senate and the House Ap propriations C omm ittees;

(c) The Commissioners of the Distr ict of Columbia ;

(d ) The Chief of Police of th e District of Columbia ;

(e) The juvenile court of the District of Columbia ;

(/) The president, Distric t of Columbia State Federation of Business and 

Professional Women’s Club s;

(ff) The presidents of other member clubs of the Dis trict of Columbia 

State Federation aforesaid ; and

(h) Such other bodies or individuals as the president, upon advice of the 

public affairs chairman, may th ink appropriate.

Adopted by the Business and Professional Women’s Club of the Distric t of 

Columbia, Inc., a t its regular meeting on April 14,1958.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

A M ENDM EN TS RE QU ES TE D

(1) Page 35, line 13, strike out “$25,000” and inse rt in lieu thereof “$40,000” 

or an increase of $15,000 in the amount of limitation.

(2) Page 37, line 8, following “1945.” insert the following: “Provided, That 

leases for such ren tals shall be on such term s and for such periods not in excess 

of five years”.

JU S T IF IC A T IO N

(1) In order to provide the amount of limitation needed to cover the cost of 

dues and attenda nce of meetings and conventions of organizations concerned 

with the work of the District of Columbia government, it is requested that the 

amendment as requested be adopted. There has not been an increase in the 

limitation amount since the 1955 appropriation act. Travel costs, accommodations, reg istratio n fees, etc., have all increased in cost since 1954, in addition to 

increased participation by the many departm ents and agencies of the Distric t 

government. Experience has proved that the benefits obtained at these meetings 

and conventions are invaluable and that many times departm ent heads have 

had to supplement the allotment with the ir own fund s in order to be represented 

at these functions. The following is a tabulation of the estim ated costs for 

the fiscal yea r 1959:
348 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959

Statement of fund s approved by House for attendance at conventions for fiscal year 1959

Dues Travel Tota l dues 

and travel

Executive Office--------- ------------------------------------------------

Departme nt of General A dm ini stration........................ ...........

Office of Corporation Counsel........ ................... .............. ..........

$3 ,000

2,74 3

395

$763

4,05 4

367

$3 ,763

6,79 7

762

Regulatory agencies:

Control of alcoholic beverages........ ..................

Administration of parole laws...........................

Enforcement of wage, safety, and h our law s.. . 

Investigation and regulation of public utilities. 

Planning and zoning ...................................

Tota l, regulatory agencies....................

Departme nt of Occupations and Professions.

Pub lic schools.............................................. .

Public libra ry______ ______________ ____

Recreation D epa rtm ent-------------------------

Metropolitan Police.......................................

Fire D epa rtm ent------------------------------ ,..

Departme nt of Veterans’ Affairs----- ---------

Office of Civil Defense................... . ...............

Departme nt of Vocational R eh abilitat ion.. .

100 288

30 150

40 557

50 .............................

220 995

388

tao

597

50

1,21 5

1,22 5

85

10

25

30

112

3,70 0

2,12 0

665

593

850

270

505

125

300

4,9 25 

2,2 05 

675 

693 

875 

300 

617 

125 

300

Courts:

Juven ile co urt........... ................

Municipal court_______ ____

District of Colum bia ta x court.

1,55 6

960

462

1,55 6

960

462

Total, courts.

Departme nt of Public H eal th............ ......

Departme nt of Corrections..................... .

Dep artment of Public W elfare .............. .

Dep artment of Buildings and Gr ou nd s.. 

Departme nt of Licenses and Inspections.

Dep artment of H igh wa ys. .......... . ...........

Department of Vehicles and Traffic____

Motor-Vehicle Parkin g A gency..............

Department of Sanitary Engineering___

Nationa l G uar d______ ________ ____ _

Total, District of Columbia_______________________

2,97 8 2,9 78

2,0 00

275

100

975

225

375

11,795

722

158

908

2,7 22 

158

1, 18 3

1,45 0 

3,24 6 

817 

457 

1,34 7

1, 55 0 

4, 221 

1,0 42 

457 

1, 34 7 

375

27 ,390 39,1 85

(2) The Department of General Administration was granted an allotment of 

$58,500 in its appropriation for rental of office space. In order to effectively and 

economically expend this allotment, it is necessary that authority be provided to 

permit leasing of space for periods of longer than the 1 year to which the District 

is presently limited. This authority is presently granted to the General Services 

Administration and without similar authority the District would be placed a t a 

distinct disadvantage in competing for space at similar prices.

PUBLIC BUILD ING CONSTRUCTION

National Zoological P ark

CAPITAL OUTLAY

J ustification of I ncrease

Administration building (preliminary studies and definite plans), $25,600

The present administration building is 153 years old, originally constructed in

1805. Construction methods used during tha t period did not contemplate that 

this building would be subject to termites, rot, and mold. Termites have seriously 

damaged the structura l members throughout the entire building. Floors are 

sagging, wooden supports crumbling, and the ceiling dangerously unsafe. These 

conditions so alarmed the administrative staff of the zoo that on April 5, 1957, 

the Department of Buildings and Grounds of the District of Columbia completed 

a thorough and exhausting survey of the building and declared it unsafe for
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 349

occupancy. As a result of this survey the D epartment of Buildings and Grounds 

advised three altern ate proposals. Two proposals were considered, 1 covering 

temp orary repairs over a period of 1 to 2 years, and 1 for complete rehabilita tion 

of the existing building which would i>ermit temporary occupancy for a longer 

period. The extent of the present damage is so gre at that rega rdless of which 

proposal is chosen, the cost of repairs would he extremely high. To quote from 

the District’s letter of May 6, 1957, “Recom mendations: * * * In view of the 

foregoing conditions, it seems t ha t new office quarte rs will eventually have to be 

provided and the existing building abandoned. Complete rehabilita tion of the 

existing building would probably cost much more than comparable new quarters 

and in addition, would only perpetu ate the makeshift adaptation of a colonial 

residence to modern office requirements.” This building, designed as a residence, 

is tota lly unsu itable for occupancy and for use as an adm inistra tive building. 

It is inadequa te in size and its inte rior is not designed properly to house the 

present adm inistrative staff. This condition does not permit efficient ad minis tration of the operations of th e National Zoological Park.

The location of the building is 1.6 miles from the main entrance at Connecticut 

Avenue and 1.1 miles from the cen ter of the exhibit area. This distance hampers 

the adm inistrative staff in giving dire ct and immediate supervision of operations. This estimate is required to make preliminary studies, prepare detailed 

plans, and ascertain the cost of replacing the present mak eshift adm inistrative 

building with one designed expressly for adm inistrative offices.

(2) Antelope building (preliminary study and definite plans), $39,li00

The title “antelope building” is more properly defined as the hooved stock 

complex, a main exhibition building surrounded by paddocks and shelters. The 

area involved will extend from the Connecticut Avenue e ntra nce 1,100 fee t down 

the main road to the zoo, and in depth 200 feet to 600 feet.

The present building which is commonly designated as the antelope building 

was hastily constructed at a cost of $3,500 by our own crew in the mid-1890’s. 

Over the years, cement floors have been added, new roofs, etc., un til at th e present 

time there is patc h upon patch. This building is so designed as to be poorly 

lighted, inadequa tely ventilated, conta ining too small cages. It has proved unsatisfactory from the public stan dpoint of seeing the anim als to their best 

advantage and from the animal stan dpoint of being sati sfactory living qua rters.

Over the years tuberculosis and toxoplasmosis (liver and blood disease) have 

become established in the building, resulting in grievous losses in animal life. 

These diseases cann ot be eliminated because of this poorly constructed frame 

building. The building is entirely unsu ited for exhibition of delicate hooved 

stock that require heat and shelter during inclement weather. The present 

building is in a con stan t state of repa ir, cannot be economically maintain ed, and 

is unsatisfactory for public exhib ition of animals.

At the present so-called antelope building, if it w’ere not for the unhe althly 

conditions, we could possibly exhibit 5 species of animals of about 15 individuals. 

The proposed new complex would be of a unique and origin al design which would 

enable the zoo to present up to 200 individuals of over 35 species of ruminan ts and 

the ir close rela tive s with the least possible cost in operation and maintenance, 

and with the maximum of safety, enjoyment, and education for the public.

The anim als that we propose to exhibit in the hooved stock complex have been 

carefully selected to exhibit special trai ts or body forms to illu strate the wide 

variety found in the general group of animals. They have also been selected in 

size groups so that there would be an interchangeability between cages and 

species, depending upon their availability. At the present time the National 

Zoological Park is not equipped to exhibit this gre at class of animals.

This e stim ate is requ ired to make preliminary studies, prepare detailed plans, 

and asce rtain the cost of replacing the prese nt ramshackle, disease-ridden building with one designed in accordance with modern zoological park standards.

(3 ) Anim al paddocks, $50,000

The existing paddocks and paddock are as have been in continuous use for over 

40 years. During this period f unds for prop er main tenance a nd essential repairs 

have been inadequate. Continuing deterio ration and lack of money for rehabilitation have resulted in the abandonment of 6 paddocks, and 7 enclosures. The 

loss of these paddocks and enclosures has caused the overcrowding of animals, 

creating the possibility of collapse of some critical parts of enclosures and conse-
350 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

quent inju ry not only to the anim als and employees, but also to the visiting 

public. The most urgent re pairs have been made only by the curtailm ent of other 

vital items of supply. This practice has caused such serious deficiencies in the 

zoo’s general maintenance and repair program th at the satisfa ctory showing in 

the open areas of the National Zoological Park's splendid hooved anim al collections is not possible. The present discouraging condition of these paddocks is 

becoming the subject of deep concern on the pa rt of those charged with the safe 

custody of the zoo’s collections, and is also the subject of increasing criticism on 

the pa rt of th e supporters of the National Zoological Park. It is our considered 

belief tha t the paddock conditions are a matter for u rgent action by the Congress.
27235—51

P ubl ic Sch oo ls of t h e D is tric t of C ol um bi a

Summ ary of memberships

Lev el 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957

T eac her s coll eg e. . . .................................................................. 608 

13, 428

912

10,651

1,023

16,127

1,764

18,589

36

53,8 82

1,402

257

1,081

17,503

1,445

20,644

58

50,357

1,325

397

> 1,082 

14, 724 

1,363

19,680

256

49,821 

1,402 

482

1,085

12,359

1,840

19,319 

272

57,693

1,116 

589 

40 

403

> 1,023 

12,196 

2,095

22,0 80

362

63,437

1,360

572

40

668

1 1,144 

12,377 

2,42 0

21,426 

1,021

64,404 

1,298 

565 

33 

806

1,344

13, 218

2,311

20,314

1,280

66,484

1,361

603

30

700

1,169

13,112

2,122

18, 959

1,571

67,935

2,290

683

30

610

1,073

13, 599

2,38 8

18,177

1,733

69,9 65

2,801

728

37

613

Sen io r hi gh sc hoo l...... ...............................................................V oc at io na l hi gh sc ho ol .............................................................

Ju n io r high scho ol:

G ra d e d ............................................................... . . . .

U n g ra d e d ........................................................

E le m e n ta ry s ch oo l:

O ra d e d .......................................... 51,680

852

327

U n g ra d ed ..............................................................................

A m eri caniz ati on................. .............

C ap it o l Pag e Sch oo l.......... ........... ..................... .....................V et era ns C en te r____ _____ _________ 81

G ra n d t o t a l . .............................................. 78,458 93,0 80 

+14 , 622

92,8 10 

-2 7 0

88,891 

-3 ,9 1 9

94,7 16 

+ 5,8 25

103,833 

+9, 11 7

105, 494 

+1, 66 1

107,645 +2, 15 1

108, 481 

+8 36

111,114+2, 633 In cr ea se ov er or d ec re as e u n d er pr ec edin g p eri o d ..........

1 T h is to ta l for t h e te ac her s colle ge ex ce ed s th a t origin al ly r eport ed for th e sa m e d ate , be ca us e it in clu des s tu d e n t n urs es a n d in -s er vi ce te ac her s n o t pre vio usl y r eport ed.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

CO
Mem bership reports of Nov. 1, 1930, Nov. 1, 1935, Nov. 1, 1940, Oct. 86, 1945, Oct. 80, 1950, Oct. 83, 1953, Oct. 88, 1954, Oct. 81, 1955, Oct. 19, 1956, and Oct. 18, 1957

M E M B E R S H IP S IN T E A C H E R S C O L L E G E S

Sc ho ol 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957

M in e 414 556 601 467 570 572 676

194 467 480 615 515 451 468

1,344 1,169 1,073

T o ta l.................... ............................................................... 608 1,023 1,081 1,082 1,085 1,023 1,144 1,344 1,169 1,073

In cr ea se ov er or de cr ea se u n d e r pr ec ed in g p eri od........- +4 15 + 58 + 1 + 3 - 6 2 +1 21 +2 00 -1 7 5 - 9 6

M E M B E R S H IP S IN S E N IO R H IG H S C H O O L S

A n ac o sti a .. . .............................. 735 1,027 1,066 1,231 1,284 1, 514 1,569 1,674

A rm str o n g ............... ........... . .............................................. 1,234 1,639 1,672 1,596 1,286 928 709 757 598 460 1 214

C ard ozo.................................... .................................. ....... '37 9 1,104 1,411 1,493 2, 074 1,947 1,925 1,704 1,488 1,408

2,665 1,891 1,031

Coolidge, '63 0 1,277 1,044 1,106 1,165 1,279 1,406 1,512

D u n b a r__________ _______________________ ____ ______ 1,449 1,407 1,516 1,380 1,628 1,156 1,124 965 928 927

E a ste rn ____ ______ ____ . - ________ _________ 2,15 8 2,976 2, 458 1,843 1,269 894 923 1,198 1,326 1, 500

M cK in le y ...................................................................................... 2,511 2,190 2,39 2 1,699 1,147 747 982 1,180 1, 139 1,262

R oo se ve lt __________ _______ ____ 1,822 1,599 951 1,012 747 883 1,152 1,02 6 899 1,683 1, 659 1,593 1,615 1,698

W e ste rn .............. ............................. ............................................. 1,810 1,559 1,452 973 623 547 541 643 730 816

W ilso n _ _.................... ...... 765 1,747 1, 454 1,192 1,182 1,155 1,207 1,263 1,416 18 26 27 26 24 27

T o ta l.................... ................. . ............... ....................... .. 13, 428 16,127 17, 503 14, 724 12,359 12,196 12,377 13,218 13,112 13,599

In cr ea se ov er or de cr ea se u n d e r p re ce din g p eri o d .......... + 2,6 99 +1, 376 - 2 , 779 -2 ,3 6 5 -1 6 3 +1 81 +8 41 — 106 +4 87

M E M B E R S H IP S IN V O C A T IO N A L H IG H S C H O O L S

B ell .................................................................. ............................... 177 400 242 170 268 294 308 274 262 331

B u rd ic k .......................................................... - 101 222 148 226 334 346 349 313 302 366

C h am b erla in ................................................................................

231

327 238 352 333 352 391 388 480

172

P help s ........................................................ 210 415 353 396 433 561 679 666 583 599

W ash in g to n .................................- ............................................... 252 496 375 333 453 561 732 667 587 612

T o ta l ................ ............................. 912 1,764 1,445 1,363 1,840 2,095 2,420 2.311 2,122 2,388

In cr ea se o ver o r de cr ea se u n d e r pr ec ed in g p eri o d .......... +8 52 -3 1 9 - 8 2 +4 77 +2 55 +3 25 -1 0 9 -1 8 9 +2 66

352 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59
MEM BER SH IP S IN JU NI OR HIG H SCHOOLS

Anac ost ia .......................... ................... ................................... 437 905 

767 

1,358

B an n ek er................................... ............. ..................................... 835

1,251

992 

1,174

1,243 

1,451

1, 117 

1,166

1,022

1,023

933

788

898

727 B ro w n e............................................ ....................... 584 C ar doz o A nnex..................................................... ................... .. 296

335 C olu m bia - .................... ................... ....................... D e a l. ................................................................................... 1,132 1,425 1,123 1,145

352

1,216

965

336

1,088

794

983

726

1,254

1,048

917

611

745

801

756

1,249

967

634

839

593

624

766

1,211

876

1,219

776 D ougla ss ........................................................ ........... ................... E a ste rn ........................................ .......................

E lio t..................... ............... ..................... . ............... 801 

1,044 

1,156 

1,361

1,011

934

951

1,22 9

899

1,118

775

948

502

925

925

691

676

478

544

799

927

723

454

679

691

1,166

692

416

497

829

933

634

350

894

673

1,123

F ra n cis ....................................... . ................ 691

1,118

664

G arn et- P att ers o n ............ ............. .............................................

G ord on.........................................................................

H a r t.............................. ................. ...........................

H ln e.................................................................................. 966

624

1,147 

625

1,009

687

830

502

1,415

1,082

1,003

418

519

452

1,097

530

957

463 

305 

1,294 

1,139 

995

513

446

1,434

984

1,158

698 

492 

1, 510 

844 

1,224

Je ff er so n........................... ......................... . .................................

K ra m er..... .....................................

L angle y.......................................................................................... 1,195

861

1,360

1,424

1,221

1,280 M acfa rl an d ......................................... . ..................... M e rrit t................................................. . .................

M il le r.............. ........... ..................................... 1,602

1,232

1,460 

1,358

1,449

1,278

1,552

1,227

1,184 

1,398

974

1,341 P a u l..................... ................................................... 742 1,308 (222)

1,162 

880

1,496

1,435 1,326 B ri ght w oo d A n n ex .................................................................... P o w e ll ........ ........................... ................. ............... 593

648

1,172

983 

1,189 

1,546

653

1,708

1,327

R a n d a ll ______________________________ 1,801

1,530

691

660

628

914

1,674

1,353

836

529

784

1,088

1,255

1,242

848

567

879

958

764

1,146

862 

609 

1,007 

662

549

937

757

607

902

792

888

18, 959 

1,571

499

866

569

531

983

762

991

18.177 

1,733

S h a w .. ........................... ..................... .......................

Sousa .....................................................................

S tu a rt.............. ................................................... 746 1,261 

732 

679

1,126

807

781

925

663

879

T a ft..........................................................................

T e rre ll ______________ _______ _____ ____ . W oodso n.................. ............................. .........

T o ta l ju n io r hi gh :

G ra ded .......................................................... 10,651 18, 589 

36

20,6 44

58

19,680

256

19,319 

272

22,080 

362

21,4 26 

1.021

20,314

1.280 U n g rad ed ...........................................................

T o ta l........ ............................................. . ............ 10,651 18,625 

+ 7 , 974

20,702 

+ 2,0 77

19,936 

-7 6 6

19,591 

—345

22,4 42 

4-2. 851

22, 447 

+ 5

21. 594 

-8 5 3

20,530

-1 ,0 6 4

19,910 

-6 2 0 In cr ea se o ver o r de cr ea se u n d er pr ec ed in g pe riod

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 353
Mem be rsh ip reports of Nov. 1, 1980. Nov. 1, 1935, Nov. 1, 1940 , Oct. 26, 1945, Oct. 20, 1950, Oct. 23, 1953 , Oct. 22, 1954, Oct. 21, 1955 , Oct. 19,

1956, an d Oct. 18, 1957— Con tinu ed

M E M B E R S H I P S I N E L E M E N T A R Y S C H O O L S

C O

C 3

HS c h o o l 1930 1935 1940 1945 19 50 19 53 1954 1955 19 56 19 57

5 1 ,6 8 0 5 3 ,8 8 2 22 ,3 6 1

2 7 ,9 9 6

5 0 ,3 5 7

►—< 

03

K i n d e r g a r t e n to g r a d e 6 ..................... 4 9 ,8 2 1 5 7 ,6 9 3 6 3 ,4 3 7 64 , 40 4 6 6 ,4 8 4 6 7 ,9 3 5 6 9 ,9 6 5 HWi—i Q T o t a l e l e m e n t a r y G r a d e d ............ ....................... . .............. ........ 5 1 ,6 8 0

85 2

5 3 ,8 8 2 4 9,8 21 5 7 ,6 9 3 6 3 ,4 3 7 6 4 ,4 0 4 6 6 ,4 8 4 6 7 ,9 3 5 6 9 ,9 6 5

U n g r a d e d _____ ....................... 1 ,4 0 2 1 ,3 2 5 1 ,4 0 2 1 ,1 1 6 1 ,3 6 0 1 ,2 9 8 1 ,3 61 2 ,2 9 0 2 ,8 01

T o t a l ............ ..................................... 5 2 ,5 3 2 5 5 ,2 8 4 

+ 2 ,7 5 2

5 1 ,6 8 2 5 1 ,2 2 3 5 8 ,8 0 9 6 4 ,7 9 7 6 5 ,7 0 2 6 7 ,8 4 5 7 0 ,2 2 5 7 2 ,7 6 6 O

I n c r e a s e o v e r o r d e c r e a s e u n d e r p r e c e d i n g p e r io d - - - 3 , 6 0 2 - 4 5 9 + 7 ,5 8 6 + 5 ,9 8 8 + 9 0 5 + 2 ,1 4 3 + 2 ,3 8 0 + 2 , 541

o

o

M E M B E R S H I P S I N S P E C I A L S C H O O L S

A m e r ic a n i z a t io n ......................................... ............................................. 32 7 25 7 39 7 48 2 589 572 56 5 60 3 68 3 72 8 w

C a p i t o l P a g e S c h o o l __ 40 40 33 30 30 37

V e te r a n s C e n t e r ........................ ................................... ......................... .. 81 40 3 66 8 80 6 70 0 61 0 61 3 >

T o t a l ..........- ..................... .............. ..................... ........ - 327 25 7 39 7 56 3 1 ,0 3 2 1 ,2 8 0 1 ,4 0 4 1 ,3 3 3 1 ,3 2 3 1 ,3 7 8 ►

I n c r e a s e o v e r o r d e c r e a s e u n d e r p r e c e d i n g p e r io d ____ - 7 0 + 1 4 0 + 1 6 6 + 4 6 9 + 2 4 8 + 124 - 7 1 - 1 0 + 5 5 hi

s

2

8

AM

o

g

co

Oi

co
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 355

Government oftiie District of Columbia, 

Department of P ublic Health, D. C. General Hospital,

June 20,1958.

Explanation of Revised Request for Additional P ositions

Included in the Department’s original request for District of 

Columbia General Hospital was an item of $1,013,090 for 270 positions. The House Subcommittee approved $560,000 and the Department originally applied this amount to 162 positions for Administration, Dietary, Nursing, Maintenance and Utilities, Medical Records 

Library, and Housekeeping services.

The nonapproved amount of $453,000 to pay for the remaining 

108 positions in the categories of Nursing, Treatm ent and Diagnostic 

Services was requested of the Senate Subcommittee on Appropriations. After further consideration the Department revised their 

application of the $560,000 recommended by the House in order to 

provide for a more equitable distribution to all services of the Hospital. This redistribution finances 142 positions in all categories in 

lieu of the original 162. The remaining 20 positions added to the 

108 submitted to the Senate Subcommittee, making 128 positions in 

all, are included in the amended request for $453,000.

Frederick C. Heath, M. D., M. P. H.,

Acting Director of Public Health.

Prio rity listing of the 128 positions (in lieu of the 108 positions) 

requested restored in the amount of $453,000.

Typ e of serv ice

Num be r 

of positions

Perso nal

service

Re tir emen t

fund

To tal

M os t u rgen t, categor y A:

Nurs ing se rvi ce................................................................... ........... 10 $34,150 $2,220 $36,370 X-ra y ser vic e. _______ _______________ ____ __________ 3 9, 765 663 10,428 Me dic ine se rvi ce................... . ........................ .......... .................... 1 2,800 182 2,982 Surgery service _______ ______ ______ _________ __________ 1 3,415 222 3,637 Obstetrics an d gynecology ser vic es____ _______ __________ 2 6, 275 407 6,682 O ut pa tie nt s ervice........ ................................................. ............ . 2 6,350 412 6,762 Housekee ping service____ ______ _____ __________________ 10 21,424 1,071 22,495 Dietary service________________ ____ _____________ ____ _ 8 14,994 974 15,968

To tal of most u rg en t items , catego ry A________________ 37 99.173 6,151 105,324 Ad minist ratio n: To tal of less urge nt item s, catego ry B _______ 14 50,180 6,840 57,020 M ain tena nc e an d u tilities: To tal of less ur ge nt item s, catego ry C. 13 53,677 3,489 57,166 All o the rs on list: Tot al of less u rg en t items , catego ry D ______ 64 222,100 14,771 236,871

To ta l for e nti re lis t...................... . .......................... .................. 128 425,130 27,673 453,000
356 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59

Distributio n by services of amendments requested

Nu rsing ed ucation:

Secre tary, OS -4-----------------------------

Clerk , GS- 3................ -..............- ..........

S ubto ta l, ............. ..................—..........

Nu rsing service:

As sis tan t Directo r of N ursin g, GS-11.

Nurs ing assistan t, GS -4------- ----------

Nurs ing as sista nt, GS -3____________

Clerk , wa rd, GS -3________________

Clerk-typist, GS -3________________

Su bt ot al......................................................

X-ray service:

Cl erk-typist, G S-4_________ _________

File clerk, OS -3................. ...........................

X-ray atten dan t, G S-3_______________

Su bt ot al__________________________

Tre at m en t se rvice:

In tern s, unclass ified............. .....................

Pu lm on ary disease:

Ca rdio- pu lm on ary technician, GS-7.

Clerk-ty pist, GS -4--------------- -------

2d-year re side nt —.................................

Su bt ot al ___________ _________ -

Medi cin e service:

Clerk -ty pist, GS -3-----------------------

2d-y ear re side nt ............. . . . . . . . . . . . .

lst-y ea r re side nt ...................................

Sub to ta l______________________

Surge ry serv ice:

Medica l officer, GS-13-------------- .

Secre tary, GS -4........ . ......................

3d-yea r re side nt------------------------

2d-y ear re side nt --------------- --------

Anesth esiologist technician, GS-9.

An est hesia ai d, GS -3------- ----------

Subt ota l..................- ......................

Obstetrics-gynecology :

Medic al officer, GS-13......................................

Cl erk-typist, GS-3.....................- ------ ----------

3d-year re si de nt -................................................ .

2d-yea r res id en t.................................................

Sub to ta l................................-....................... .

Pe diatric service Clerk-ty pist, (a dm in istra tiv e: 

GS -3......................................................................

Ps yc hiatry service:

’ M edi cal officer, GS-13.......

Psy cho logist, GS-11...........

Social wo rke r, GS -7...........

Cie rk- ste nogra pher, GS-4 

S u b to ta l. .------- ----------

Social serv ice:

Social worke r, GS-9.

Secre tary, GS-4........

Sub to ta l.................

Ad dit iona l 

pos itio ns 

req ue ste d 

in 1959

Ad dit iona l 

pos itio ns 

allowed 

un de r 

Ho use bill

Position s 

elimina ted 

un de r 

House bill: 

req ueste d 

of S ena te

Fun ds requested

1 0 1

1 0 1

2 2 $7,018

1 0 1

45 6 39

8 8

30 30

2 2

86 46 40 148,662

1 0 1

2 0 2

6 6

9 6 3 10,428

5 5 0 0

2 2

1 0 1

1 1

4 3 1 3,637

3 3

1 1

1 1

5 4 1 2,982

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

6 5 1 3,637

1 1

1 1

1 1 6,682

1 1

4 2 2

2 0 2 6,762

2 1 1

1 1 25,770

2 1 1

1 1

6 2 4

3 3 3,637

1 1

4 3 1
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 19 59 357

Distribution by services of amendments requested—Continued

Tre at m en t ser vic e—Co nt in ue d

La bo ratory service:

Supervisor , pe diatric che mist ry te chnic ian , GS-7.

Cy tology tec hn ici an , GS- 6........................ ...............

My colo gy tec hn ici an , GS -6-----------------------------

Hystopa tholog y tec hn ici an , GS -5-------- -----------

Che mist ry te ch nicia n, GS -5....................... .............

Bacte riology tech nician , GS-5..... ........................... .

Clerk-ty pist, GS-3........ .................................- ..........

4th -ye ar re side nt ........ ..................... ............ . ............

3d-y ear res iden t - . ......................................................

Ja ni to r, W BR-1 ............................................................

Sub to ta l.....................................................................

Ph ysica l me dicine a nd re ha bilitation:

Medic al officer, GS- 13........... .....................................

M an ua l ar ts i ns tru ctor , GS-11............................ .

Ph ysica l th erap ist, GS- 7............................................

Spee ch th er ap ist, GS -7......................... .................

Clerk-ty pist, GS-3......................................................

Subt ota l.....................................................................

O ut pa tie nt service:

Me dic al officer, GS-13................................................

Po diatrist, GS -9....................................... . .................

Clerk -re ceptionist (adm inistra tiv e), GS -3...........

Su bt ot al____ ___ ____ ______________________

Adm inist ratio n:

Adm inistra tiv e s ervice officer, GS-11............. ...............

Ch ief ac co un tant, GS-11___ _____ ________________

Classificatio n an alyst, GS-11_____________________

Bu dg et examin er, GS-9_____ _____ _______________

Cla ssification a na lyst, GS-9____________ ____ _____

Accou ntan t, GS-7 ____________________ _________

Pr op er ty and s up ply clerk, GS-5......... ..........................

Ac cou nting clerk, GS-4_____________________ ____ _

Secre tary-clerk-sten ograph er, GS -4_________ ______

Cash accounting clerk, GS- 4______________________

Pro pe rty an d su pp ly clerk, GS-4....................................

Cl erk-typist, GS-3______________________ ____ ____

Sto rekeep er, G S -3 ___ ____ ______________ _______

Te lep hone operator, GS -3.......................... .......................

Sub to ta l___________ _____ . . ____ _______________

Die ta ry service: Food servers, W BS -2 .............................. .

Hospital service s:

Medica l records lib rary:

Sta tis tic al cler k, GS -5_______________ ____ ____

Clerk , G S- 3_________________________________

Cl erk-typist, G S -3 __________________________

Clerk-m essenger, GS -2........ .......................................

O ut pa tie nt u nit:

Clerk-typist, GS -3_________ _________________

Clerk-m esse nger, GS -2___ ____ ________________

Office of As sis tan t Su pe rin tend en t: Secre tary, GS-5.

Sub to ta l.............................. .......... ....................................

Ho use keeping service:

Group foreman, W B R -4 _________________________

Clean ers , W BR-2 ................................................................

Cle ane rs, W BR -1 ................................................................

S u b to ta l. .. ._______ ________________

Ad dit iona l 

pos itions 

req ueste d 

in 1959

Ad dition al 

pos itions 

allowed 

un de r 

Ho use bill

Pos itio ns 

eli minated 

un de r 

House bill; 

req ueste d 

of Sena te

Fun ds requested

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

1 1

2 2

1 1

1 1

1 1 25,241

12 5 7

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 3,381

5 4 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

4 2 2 6,762

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 0 1

1 0 1

- 1 1

1 1

1 0 1

3 1 2

2 1 1

1 0 1

3 0 3

2 1 1

3 0 3

22 8 14 57,020

15 7 8 15,968

1 1

3 0 3

6 3 3

2 2

3 3

3 3

1 1

19 13 6 20.288

8 8

5 0 5

15 0 15

28

—

8 20 47,959
358 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 195 9

Distribution by services of amendments requested—Continued

M ain te nance a n d u tilities :

Sh op f or em an , GS- 11 ...................................... ............. .........

C le rk , G S - 5 .. ............. .............................................................

G uar d, G S-2 ............ ........... ........... ..........................................

H eati n g sy st em le ad m an , W B R -1 5.............................

C ar pente r le ad m an , W B R -1 4..............................................

S te am fl tter -p lu m ber lead m an , W B R -1 4.........................

R ef rige ra tion -a ir c on di tione r le ad m an , W B R -1 4 -------

Gen er al m ec ha ni c, W B R -1 4 ,............. ................................

Ele ct rici an , W B R -1 3 . . ______________ ______ ______

R ef rige ra tion -a ir c on di tione r m ec ha ni c, W B R -1 2........

Ste am fl tter -p lu m ber , W B R -1 2............................ . . ...........

G en er al m as on , W B R -1 2-............ ........... ........................ ..

G en er al m ec ha ni c, W B R -1 2........... . ..................................

P ai nte rs , W B R -1 1____________________________ ____

R ef rige ra tion -a ir c onditio ner h el per , W B R -5 ________

E le ct ri ci an’s hel pe r, W B R -5 ______________ _________

P ain te r’s h el pe r, W B R -5 ......................................................

S u b to ta l.......... ........................................................................

A d m it ti n g an d e m er ge nc y: X -r ay cl er k, G S -3 .. ..................

D en ta l service:

D en ti st , G S-1 3................ . .......................................................

D en ta l in te rn (u n cla ssi fi ed ). .. ............................................

S u b to ta l...................................................................................

P h arm acy :

P har m aci st , G S-6 .......... .................................................. ..

P h arm acy hel per , G S -3 ................ ................. . .....................

S u b to ta l...................................................................................

G ra n d t o ta l.......................... ..................................................

A dditio nal 

po sition s 

re ques te d 

in 1959

A dditio nal 

po si tions 

al lo w ed 

under 

H ous e bill

Posi tions 

el im in at ed 

u n d er 

H ou se bi ll; 

re ques te d 

of S en at e

F u n d s r eques te d

1 1

4 4

2 2

1 I

1 1

1 1

1 1 1

1 0 1

1 0 1

1 0 1

1 0 1

1 0 1

2 0 2

2 0 2

1 0 1

1 0 1

2 0 2

24 11 13 57,1 66

3 3 0 0

1 1 0

2 2 0

3 3

1 1

1 1 0

2 2

270 1 4 2 128 4.53,000

(The follow ing com munica tions were received subseque nt to the 

close o f the he arings :)

Clerk for Western High School

Superintendent of Schools, 

Washington, D. C., June 23, 1958.

Mr. Harold E. Merrick,

Staff Assistant, Senate District Subcommittee on Appropriations,

United States Capitol, Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Merrick : This is furth er information concerning the need for the 

additional clerk at Western High School. It is essential that help he given to 

conduct the work of the senior school office which requires completing tra nsscripts, answering the telephone, answ ering correspondence, and recordkeeping. 

The Western High School staff is responsible for handling the records of Central 

High School, .now no longer in existence. This requires using the records when 

the information is asked for by the FBI, employees, and agencies of various 

kinds. In some cases colleges inquire for inform ation.

This is additional information from which to predicate the request for the 

position of the second clerk of the Western High School.

Sincerely yours,

Carl F. Hansen, 

Superintendent of Schools.

Western High School, 

Washington, D. C., June 23, 1958.

Hon. J ohn O. I’astore,

Chairman, District of Columbia Subcommittee, Senate Appropriations

Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

Dear Senator I’astore : May I make an appeal for the inclusion in the curren t appropriation bill for the District of Columbia of the salary for a second 

clerk at W estern High School.

Before statin g the reasons why this is necessary, I would call your attention.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATIONS, 1959 359

to the fact that Western High School is the only senior high in the District 

of Columbia with a single clerk salary.

A second clerk salary at Western High School is e ssential to effective administratio n of the school for the following reasons:

1. Since the closing of the local Central High School, the business office of 

Western High School has carried the additional responsibility for the records 

of all graduates and former stud ents of that school. This involves furn ishing 

information for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Civil Service, dr af t boards, 

etc., and the preparatio n of transc ripts for colleges and other inquiries.

2. The volume of work in the business office of a senior high school is not 

wholly proportionate to the enrollment of the school, since all schools must 

meet the same basic demands for records, reports, etc., regardless of the number 

of stud ents enrolled. However, the steadily increasing pupil population at Western High School is increasing tha t pa rt of th e clerical load of the business office 

which may vary with enrollment.

3. With out a second clerk it will continue to be necessary to use the time 

of counselors and administrators for clerical service at the expense of the taxpayer and to the detriment of the educational program for which they are 

responsible.

4. It will also be necessary to contin ue the undesirable practice of using stu ­

dent help when dealing with confidential office information.

Very sincerely yours,

I rene Rice, Principal.

L anguage Relative to E mp loym ent of Riti re es as Temporary T eac her s

(Submitte d by Selma Borch ard)

The current Distric t of Columbia appropriation bill, as passed by the House, 

carries a provision which expressly permits Distric t of Columbia public-school 

teachers to work in the Federal Government during the summer. Substantive 

law has alre ady been enacted to permit reti red teac hers to serve as substitutes 

in the District of Columbia schools.

To give equal treatm ent to all activ e and retired public employees in the 

District of Columbia public schools and to qualified personnel of the Federal 

Government, and to secure more applicants for the work in the schools and in 

certain fields in the Federal Government it is suggested that the provision now 

written into the pending District of Columbia appropriation bill be amended to—

(1) Make i t possible f or a retired teacher to accept employment in the F ederal 

Government. (N ote.—There are several, at least a half dozen, science teachers 

who feel that they cannot physically go on teaching, but who would welcome 

work in the Federal Government. There are also a number of business practice 

teachers who would welcome stenographic work in a Federal departm ent, but 

who would not be willing to continue to teach .)

(2) Make it possible for retired Federal or District of Columbia classified 

workers who are willing and in some cases eager to teach languages, business 

subjects, or special subjects such as shopwork, draftin g, drawing, mechanics, etc., 

to be employed as temp orary teachers, or a s night-school or summer-school teachers without effect on the ir retirement pay.

Language to thi s effect could perhaps be used :

“Notwith standing provisions in Public Law —, any person receiving retirement pay from the public schools of the District of Columbia or the classified 

service of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia shall 

be eligible for furth er appointment in the public schools of the Distric t of Columbia or classified service of the United States or the government of the Distri ct of Columbia, under such rules and regulations as may be adopted by the 

agencies affected, and such employment shall in no way impair or affect their 

pen sion: And provided further, th at such employment shall not be used in the 

computation of years of service in the classified service or in the public schools 

of the Distric t of Colum bia: And provided further, that such service shall be 

covered by th e provisions of the social-security laws.

comm ittee ad jour nm en t

Senator Pastore. Is there anyone else here who desires to be heard ? 

(No response.)

Senator Pastore. Since there is none, the meeting is adjourned. 

Thank you very very much.

(Whereupon, at 10:25 p. m. Wednesday, June 18, 1958, the committee adjourned.)
\
IN D E X

A Page

Auld, David V_________________________________________________ 55, 73

B

Back, Kenneth_______________________________________________ 37, 52, 62

Bailey, Mrs. Donald E____________________________________________ 307

Banks, Mrs. Robert L ____________________________________________ 322

Blaser, James A______________________________________________ 237, 255

Bowman, William E., J r __________________________________________ 105

Brandborg, Mr. Stew art---------------------------------------------------------------- 341

Brooks, Maj. William D., J r_____________________________________ 292

Buildings and Grounds, Department of_____________________________ 241

C

Cha rts:

Chart showing correctional institu tional inmates compared to population______________________________________________________ 50

Chart showing public assistance recip ients compared to p opula tio n,. 51

Cha rt showing school enrollment compared to population------------------- 49

Civil Defense, Office of__________________________________________ 88

Clemmer, Donald_________________________________________________ 253

Clerk for Western High School, lette rs------------------------------------------ 358, 359

Commissioners’ Youth Council-------------------------------------------------------- 113

Coordination of public-works prog ram______________________________ 191

Corporation Counsel, Office of_____________________________________ 82

Corrections, Departm ent of_________________________________________ 253

Cox, Mrs. C. Rhodes________________________________._____________ 290

Craver, Mrs. Florence V___________________________________________ 305

D

Denbo, Milton C__________________________________________________ 270

District of Columbia public-works program, Public Law 85-451------------- 31

Donohue, Joseph__________________________________________________ 288

Duncan, Charles T________________________________________________ 283

E

Election of Delegates_____________________________________________ 105

Estimated method of financing general fund cost of pay increases for 1958

and 1959_____________________________________________________ 36

Executive Office_________________________________________________ 98

F

Fazekas, Dr. Joseph______________________________________________ 200

Federal paym ent________________________________________________ 32, 37

Record of payments, 1920 to 1958, inclusive_______________________ 44

Fisher, Mrs. Rosaline_____________________________________________ 331

Fish ladders a t Little Falls Dam____________________________________ 32

Fondahl, John E ________________________________________________ 90

Fowler, Walter L___________________________________________ 34, 250, 258

Statement on Federal paymen t_________________________________ 37

G

General adm inistration___________________________________________ 74

Reassignment program progress rep ort __________________________ 74

General provisions_______________________________________________ 357

I
II LIST OF WITNESSES

Pag e

Gilliland, Jo hn ____________________________________________________ 310

Goodloe, Donal d___________________________________________________ 323

Gray, Ch ester _______________________________________________________ 84

II

Han sen, Dr. Carl F _______________________________________________ 126, 135

lla wortli , Dr. Ellis_________________________________________________ 327

Heath, Dr. Fre derick C_____________________________________________ 101

Hennings, Sen ato r Tho mas C________________________________________ 114

H erb st , D r. W illiam 1’_____________________________________________________ 200

Herman , David P ________________________________________________ 248, 258

Hig hway pro gra m--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 56

Ilorsk y, Cha rles A_________________________________________________ 280

I

Ilg enfritz, J. J _____________________________________________________ 227

J

Juv enile co urt_____________________________________________________ 167

K

Kam pelm an, Max M____________________

Ka nfer, Mo rris________________________

Karric k, Com missioner David B_________

Keddy, Dr. Joh n L_____________________

___________________________ 338

___________________________ 277

37, 47, 54, 121, 191, 229, 238, 250, 258 

------------------------------------------ 250

L

Language, tem porary tea chers, sugg ested.

Lemon, Jam es II _____________________

Levy, Arn old________________________

Licenses and Insp ections, Dep artm en t of

Allo tments below ac tiv ity lev el_____

Lowe, Schuyler_______________________

Low enstein, Mrs. Rollie, statem en t of ___

Lyon, Ric hard K_____________________

____________________________ 359

____________________________ 265

____________________________ 105

------------------------------------------- 223

____________________________ 226

5, 35, 47, 53, 78, 177, 243, 252, 256, 258

____________________________ 313

____________________________ 118

M

Ma rtin , Robert E______________________________

Mathe, Lt. Col. R obe rt E _______________________

McCane, Mrs. M arga ret________________________

Ma cFarl and Guidance Clinic___________________

McLa ughlin, Com miss ioner Ro be rt E ____________

Mermel, T. W_________________________________

McDonnell, Mrs. Richa rd T____________________

____________________ 298

____________________ 101

____________________ 312

____________________ 306

3, 32, 46, 52, 105, 109, 118, 197

____________________ 330

____________________ 269

N

Na tio nal Zoological P ark _________________________________________ 248, 347

1‘

Pa y incre ases, Dist ric t of Colum bia_________________________________21, 33

Pierson, Norm an W________________________________________________ 160

Pollard, Lt. Col. R obert L___________________________________________ 325

Po tte r, Alden A____________________________________________________ 333

Public build ing constru cti on_________________________________________ 230

Equipment for tes tin g stat io n___________________________________ 247

Receiving Dome fo r Ch ild ren____________________________________ 236

W are h o u se ____________________________________________________________ 241

Pu bli c he alth______________________________________________________ 181

Additional positions, revised lis t__________________________________ 355

Allotm ents below t he activ ity level________________________________ 189

D. C. Ge neral__________________________________________________ 194

Equip me nt rep lac em ent _____________________________________ 201

Perso nnel requ ests_________________________________________ 205

Perso nnel req ues t, revised___________________________________ 209
LIST OF WITNESSES III

Public h ealth—Continued Page

Medical charities, allocations for 1959---------------------------------------- 210

Ringworm control prog ram___________________________________ 191

Tra nsfer of Dog Pound_______________________________________ 193

Public schools___________________________________________________ 122

Allotments below the activity level_____________________________ 137

Hansen, Dr. Carl F„ stateme nt of---------------------------------------------- 135

Instructional supplies and textb ooks------------------------------------------ 154

Table showing per pupil allo tme nts--------------------------------------- 157

Part-tim e classes___________________________________________ 133,141

Schedule of part-time classes_______________________________ 139

Statement of permanent positions in th e Teachers’ Sala ry Act--------- 136

Statement showing distribu tion of classes over 30 pupils in elementary schools_______________________________________________ 132

Summary of memberships____________________________________ 350

Table showing use of 48 salarie s to reduce pupil-teacher ratio --------- 138

Tea ch er s___________________________________________________ 120

Teacher vacancies__________________________________________ 127,146

Temporary teache rs__________________________________________ 127

Public Welfare, Department of____________________________________ 210

Allotments below the activity level--------------------------------------------- 213

Children’s Cen ter____________________________________________ 219

Child Welfare Division_______________________________________ 215

Pri ori ty list of personnel needs_________________________________ 222

Puntch, Guy____________________________________________________ 239

R

Reassessment program, progress rep ort -------------------------------------------- 18

Record of actual Federal payments to the District of Columbia, general

fund, fiscal yea rs 1920 to 1958, inclusive----------------------------------------- 44

Reed, Dr. T. H__________________________________________________ 249

Reynolds, George E. S____________________________________________ 155

Rich, William___________________________________________________ 315

Riedl, Beatrice Cogan____________________________________________ 280

Riecks, John M__________________________________________________ 242

Roberts. Gloria K_______________________________________________ 325

Robertson, J. X_________________________________________________ 50

S

Shea, Gerard M________________________________________________214, 236

SliifTer, Mrs. Benjamin___________________________________________ 313

Simonson, Mrs. Richard C_______________________________________ 271

Snell, Mrs. Edwin________________________________________________ 296

State me nts :

Pupil membership in public elementary and secondary day schools of 

the Distric t of Columbia and adjoining county school systems at or 

near the end of the first 6 weeks of school in certain yea rs_______ 48

Schedule of taxable and exempt properties in the District of Columbia, fiscal year 1958____________________________________ 15

Schedules of tax comparisons of major taxes in the Washington 

metropolitan area, March 18, 1958___________________________ 22

Statement of a naly sis of new positions allowed by the Commissioners, 

allowed by House, and requested to be restored in Senate---------- 36

Stateme nt of percent change in retail store sales, 1948 to 1954, group 

II cities, cen tral business distric ts and sta nda rd metropolitan 

are as_____________________________________________________ 48

Stateme nt of proposed pay increases, District of Columbia_________ 21

State ment of rea l estate assessments (tax able, United States, Distri ct of Columbia, and priv ately owned exem pt)________________ 10

Stateme nt of revenues of th e general, highway, water, san itary sewage 

works, and motor-vehicle parking funds of the Dis trict of Columbia, 

showing actu al revenues for 8 fiscal years and estim ates for the

current year and budget year_________________________________ 16

State ment showing comparison of revenue estimate included in 1959 

budget and revisions of May 7, 1958___________________________ 7
IV LIST OF WITNESSES

Statements—Continued

Statement showing estim ates by operating expenses and capital outlay P fte

e

for 1958 and 1959__________________________________________ 4

Summary of 1959 estim ated available revenues, obligations, and sur ­

pluses as of J une 30, 1959---------------------------- -— ---------------- -- 3

Summary of revenue effect of Public Law 460, District of Columbia

Revenue Act of 1956, approved March 31, 1956--------------------------- 10

T

Tax revenue of all State and local governments and of the District of 

Columbia, 1946-56_____________________________________________ 42

Tax revenue of the Distric t of Columbia, 1946-57------------------------------ 42

Temko, Mrs. Francine_____________________________________________ 169

Tra nsfer of “Traffic engineering” to Departm ent of Highways--------------- 73

V

Van Sanford, Mrs. Gordon------------------------------------------------------------ 301

Vocational Rehabilitation, Department of------ :---------------------------------- 158

W

Washington Metropolitan Regional Conference------------------------------------ 109

Welling, Col. A. C------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32

Wise, William C------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 318

o
Gf COLLE

KANSAS

■■

ED