Evening star., 1952-02-14
Budget Bureau
|AssaiIs Shifting
0fU. Agencies
Fears Serious Loss
Of Efficiency in
Decentralization
By Froncis P. DouqIos

gress today that q mandatory pro-
gram Of decentralizing Govern
ment agencies would result In q
serious loss of efficiency.
The statement was made in q
letter from Budget Bureau Di-
rector Frederick j. Lawton to
Chairman Holif1eld Of a House
Expenditures Subcommittee.
The subcommittee today held q
hearing on a pending bill to move
Government activities with $4,000
jobs to other cities. The measure
at the same time would permit
provision for $4,000 additional
jobs here, resulting in a net re-
moval Of $4,000 jobs from the
Capital area.
May Defer Action.
The subcommittee hearing,
which began this morning, was to
be resumed this afternoon, after
which, it was believed, the group
would decide to defer action on
the decentralization bill.
Mr.. Lawton's letter was read
into the record by Roger w.
Jones, assistant director Of the
Budget Bureau.
The text Of Mr.. Lawton's letter
follows:
I'm response to your request for
the views Of the Bureau of the
Budget with respect to s 225i (the
decentralization bilD now pending
before your committee, / am au-
thorized to advise you that its
enactment at this time would not
be in accord with the program Of
the President for the following
reasons:
First. over the past year and Q
half. this Office has co-operated
with other Federal agencies in an
intensive study Of possible al
ternatives for alleviating the crit
ical Office space situation at the
seat OF Government and for so
locating agencies of the Govern
ment as to insure maximum Sc
curity without undue loss of ef.
ficiency in Government opera
tions.
Loss Of Efficiency Seen.
"The results Of this study Con
vince us that the possibilities Of
permanent and effective decen-
tralization Of activities at con-
siderable distance from Washing
ton were at first overestimated
and that no mandatory decen-
tralization program would accom-
plish its purposes without serious
loss Of efficiency. Government
programs are not static and inter-
relationships between change fire.
quently and often rapidly with re-
sulting needs for reorganization
and relocation.
Second, the General Services
Administration has found It in
creasingly difficult to obtain large
blocks Of satisfactory Office space
in other metropolitan centers
around the country. For this rea-
son, little effective decentralization
could be undertaken unless the
Federal Government embarked
upon an extensive building pro-
gram or unless the Congress should
enact authority which would per-
nit the acquisition of existing
buildings through long time lease
or purchase, or the construction
Of buildings under ease-purchase
agreements. It is also doubtful
whether the transfer to other
communities Of large numbers Of
together with their
families. could be effectively car
ried out until adequate housing
could be made available.
Area Move Supported.
Third, and. most important,
dispersal Of key agencies within Q
reasonable distance Of Washington
would provide better security than
decentralization to other congest-
ed metropolitan areas. Such dis.
persal would, In the event Of at
tack on the United States, also
insure much better continuity Of
operations which must be closely
co-ordinated for the successful
prosecution of a war effort.
Under any conditions short Of
total war, We believe that the
Federal employment situation In
the metropolitan area has been
largely stabilized and that fore
seeable fluctuations viii create no
highly critical Office space situa-
tion. This does not mean, however.
that the very dangerous situation
Of over concentration in the down.
town area has been alleviated or
that even under normal conditions
the hazard Of continued occupa-
tion Of World War II temporary
buildings should be permitted.
ITO meet this situation. the
President, in his 1853 budget mes
sage. has strongly recommended
the immediate enactment Of q
modified dispersal program which