Evening star., 1952-05-25
NcNayr Denies
Stand Threatens
Civil Defense
Work Would Continue
Under q Department
Head, He Declares

uS ~SPOt tttsbSbt :
Head, He Declares
Montgomery County Manager
Irving G., McNayr and State Civil
Defense Director David G. McIn-
toSh are still at odds over Mr..
McNayr's recommendation that
the county civil defense Office be
abolished.
In q clarifying statement yes
terday, Mr.. McNayr said his rec
ommendation that the civil de-
tense appropriation be discon-
tinued did not mean the program
was to die.
"I recommended against an
appropriation for a defense staff"
Mr.. McNayr said. "The civil de-
fenSe organization will remain"
Prefers Department Head.
Mr.. McNayr said he felt that
one of the county department
heads could function efficiently as
director of the civil defense pro-
gram.
"We will use q regular depart
ment head-aS many other areas
are doing-to head up the pro-
gram If my recommendation is
adopted" Mr.. McNayr said.
Mr.. Mcintosh, however, took
issue with the county managers
reasoning.
Experience has shown us that
the civil defense program in each
area needs a full-time director
and at least one secretary" he
said.
Mr.. Mcintosh pointed out that
Baltimore. Anne Arundel and
Frederick Counties and Baltimore
City al have full-tine paid civil
defense directors.
In Prince Georges County, the
civil defense program is admin
istered by County Agent P. E..
Clark. This years county budget
included funds for equipment and
to set up casualty clearing sta
tions but nothing for salaries.
Upsets Volunteer Program.
The State director asserted that
the Montgomery budget recon-
mendation, mot providing for even
one clerk, really pulls the rug out
from under the volunteer workers. I"
He also declined to retract any
statments made in letter Thurs
day to Mr.. McNayr until he had
carefully studied the letters an
swer.
Mr.. Mcintosh had called the
county heads recommendation
shocking" and Gin direct contra
vention Of the laws Of the State"
s Mr.. McNayr termed the state
inent untrue and requested a re-
traction. ss
"The charge borders closely on
a charge Of nonfeasance in Office.
I cannot. nor can you, afford to-
ignore such completely untrue
statements" MIR. McNayr replied
in q letter.
Opposed Budget Request.
Mr.. McNayr had recommended
against a $59,185 budget request
Of the Office of Civil Defense. The
request included $13,5l8 for SAL
aries for present director, a dep
uty director and two Office work
erS.
The county managers recon-
mendations also would deny $2O,-
967 in funds to be matched by the
State to buy civil defense equip
ment. Included in the request was
$500 toward purchase of radio
logical counters; 1000 for AZ air.
raid warning sirens; $3.50 for "a
handle -talkie radio sets; $500 for
four rescue service equipment sets,
and $500 for fire. fighting equip
ment.
In his budget message Mr.. Nc
Nayr said residents apathy had
resulted in something less than a
well-rounded civil defense pro-
gram. He also charged Federal
and State officials with failure to
provide sufficient funds for a we'll
integrated program.
81 Million Appropriated.
Mr.. Mcintosh denied the charge.
He said the State had appropri-
ated 81 million of the $2.5 million
asked for civil defense in 1851 by
Gov. McKeldin.
The State director said $125, 900
went for administrative expenses
and that some $480,O0O of the
remainder already had been al
lotted ON matched-fund bases
throughout the State. He said
about $4,000 had been spent in
Montgomery by county, State and
Federal governments.
The county managers budget
message reported that a skeleton
organization had been created
around existing county depart
ments which would continue to
function. Yesterday he said the
organization existed only on paper.
Mr.. McNayr. however, asserted
IN his blistering letter. that the
county intended to maintain an
organization to work with regular
disaster agencies.