Evening star., 1934-04-24
D. c. Commissioners Split
With Park Unit on
$4,000, 900 Bill.
KING TO CALL SESSION
OF SENATE COMMITTEE
City Heads Ability to Pay Back
More Than $1,250,ooo
Annually in Doubt.

A difference of opinion between the
District Commissioners and the Ma
tional Capital Park and Planning
commission as to how the $40, 600 600
Pubic works authorization for the
DlStrlct should be repaid as between
municipal construction projects and
PARK allotments prevented action on
the Dill at the joint meeting of the
senate and House District Committees
today.
Chairman King of the Senate Com
mlttee announced, however. he would
call meeting Of his committee to-
morrow and 'cut the Gordian knot"
ny endeavoring to report the bill out.
he VIII ask his colleagues to decide
al tnat time how TO settle the dis.
puted repayment provision.
1t Is probable that the House Dis
trict Committee, headed by Chairman
Mary T. Norton. also will discuss the
question separately.
Fear Law Notification.
The District Commissioners empha-
sized that the District is not in a
financial position to pay back to the
Federal Government more than ST.
100000 annually on funds that NAV
De advanced by the Public Works Ad-
mlnlstratlon or by Congress under the
Capper-Cramton park act. The Park
and Planning Commission was fearful
that the CapperCramton law would
De nullifled if the District Commis-
sloners had discretionary power to de.
eide each year how much of the 81.
25O,O0O refund was to be applied
toward funds advanced for parks and
now much for public works.
The Park Commissions final sup.
gestlon for compromise was that
So25,OOO be paid back annually on the
public works loan, leaving a similar
amount for annual repayments under
the Capper- Cramton law. Their fear of
the effect of this bill on the Capper-
Cramton law grew out of the fact
that the Capper- Cramton law requires
repayment Of funds advanced under
that law at the rate of 1000 900 a
year, and that if the District was able
to pay back only $1,250,00O a year
under both laws, the park program
would be hampered.
The District Commissioners OBJ
Jected to being required to divide
the annual repayments equally be-
tween public works program and ad-
vances that may be made under the
Cramton law because, they pointed
out, they will have to pay 4 per cent
interest after three years on the
public works loan, whereas no interest
is required on Federal funds ad-
vanced direct by Congress under the
Capper-Cramton law. They want the
right, therefore, to apply more of the
S1,2SO,000 year toward repayment
of the interest-bearing loan than on
the Capper-Cramton law repayment.
Proposal Generally Approved.
With more than 16 members of the
House and Senate present, there were
indications of general approval at the
hearing of the proposal to allow the
District to apply to the Public Works
Administration for an advance of
funds on the same terms extended to
other cities throughout the country,
namely 80 per cent as Federal
grant and 70 per cent to be repaid
over period of years
The bill contemplates asking for
s18.OO0,000 for a variety of urgent
municipal construction projects and
S2,000,000 for parks. 1t provides that
the repayment of 10 per cent of this
total should be at the rate of not
less than S1,000,000 a year. There is
a further prcviso that whenever Con-
greSs advances further funds for parks
under the remaining authorize ton Of
the Capper-Cramton law, the District
would not be required to pay back
more than sl,250,000 IN any one year
under both laws.
1t Is this proviso which caused Arno
B. Cammerer and T. S. Settle Of the
National Capital Park and Planning
Commission to express fear that the
pending bill would endanger the
Capper-Cramton park law. They
based this fear on the fact that the
Capper-Cramton law requires repay
ment Of park funds at the rate OF
$1,000,000 a year, and that Il the
Commissioners could not pay back
more than $l.250,000 o year under
both laws. $1,OO0,000 might be ap-
piled annually on public works, leav-
ing only S250,00 available for refund-
ing the park advances.
Commissioners Take Issue.
The District Commissioners, through
Corporation Counsel Prettyman, took
issue with the park officials. The
Commissioners argued that it would
not be sound financing for the Dis
trict at this time to obligate itself to
pay back 100000 a year, half en-
public works and half on park ad-
vances. They denied that the repay
ment provisions in the public works
bill would endanger the Capper-
Cramton law.
Cammerer urged an amendment to
require the District to apply not more
than S500,000 a year or $75o,0oO a
year toward refunding the public
works loan, so that the public works
projects and the park program could
go along together. Corporation Coun-
sci Prettyman said the contention Of
the park commission was difficult for
the Commissioners to understand be-
cause the park commission is with
out any further advance of funds from
Congress at this time under the Cap
per-Crampton law, whereas that COM
mission would get 100000 for parks
out of the pending bill. Prettyman
Continued on Page 4, Column S.