|
Al IMHO MT
STAT!
LEGISLATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL
ACTION OI URBAN PIOBLIIS
Ill 1967
ADVISORY CWSIQI on mmm Lennon
mum, D. C. 20575
APRIL 1968
31-38
Indiana's 1967 legislative session approved legislation
enabling cities to establish cumulative capital improvement funds
for municipal building projects. Connecticut's Legislature
enacted a bill permitting regional councils of elected officials
to receive funds and to employ a staff. lllinois' Legislature
raised the debt limits for local governmental units, and authotllad
the creation of offices of Coordinator of federal and State Aid
by cities and counties. finally, Heine's Legislature passed a law
permitting municipalities to accept federal grants-in-aid for any
purpose, either directly or through the State.
The Legislatures of new Harico, North Carolina, South Carolina.
and South Dakota.approved bills either authorising or broadening the
power of local governments to invest and receive interest on idle
funds. Seven other States--Arisona, Florida, Idaho, Nebraska, lav
Jersey, Tennessee, and washington--paased laws providing for differ-
ing degrees of property tax reform, while the Alaska legislature
enacted a bill authorising State technical assistance for local
debt management.
In suns-ry, during 1967 State legislatures were active in
approving measures designed to "unshackle" local governments in
certain structural and functional areas. Of particular importance
were new laws authorising or extending local powers in annexation
and in interlocal contracts and agreements. 0n the other hand,
many States vars reluctant to enact legislation to improve the
fiscal capacity of localities.
I rovi S a e- a lotions
Among the most significant types of State legislative
activity in 1967 acre efforts to upgrade State-local relations.
These involved the establishment of State offices for local affairs,
advisory and coordinating commuttaes on State-local programs and
problems, and study groups.
One of the most aggressive and innovative actions taken to
provide solutions to the urban crisis occurred on October 8, 1967,
when Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller of New York announced the
formation of a nonpartisan States Urban Action Center, under the
Co-Chairmanship of Robert F. Wagner, former Mayor of New York City,
and Elmer L. Anderson, former Governor of Minnesota. The Center
will work closely with all State Governors in devising comprehen-
sive programs to combat the underlying causes of urban problems.
This ambitious measure will emphasise the following: improving
crime coutrol; furthering public understanding of the roles of
police and community; rehabilitating the physical environment of
neglected areas; increasing employment. educational, cultural.
and recreational Opportunities for the disadvantaged; and en-
couraging participation in coemunity affairs on the part of both
individuals and private enterprise. The Center will assign a
team of experts in various program areas to assist in gearing
programs to the needs of individual States, provide "trouble
shooting" aid to States having special problems, and furnish
information on steps taken by various States to implement action
programs.
Bight State Lagislatures--COnnecticut, Minnesota. Hissouri.
Montana. nebraska, Ohio. Hashington. and Wisconsin--approved bills
in 1967 authorising the creation of nev State agencies for local
affairs. In ten other 8tstes--Tennessee and Vsrmnnt--such units
vere established by executive order. Viva 8tates--Alaska, Arizona,
Nevada, New York, and Oregon--set up advisory or coordinating
coendttees on State-local issues, while tvo States-~North Carolina
and Texas--£oreed study groups to examine and make recoemendationa
concerning State-local relations.
State action in 1967 brought the total number of offices
for local affairs to eighteen. Bone of the State agencies for
local affairs established last year vars assigned substantive
"line" and financial responsibilities. rather than merely technical
assistance and advisory functions. New Jersey and Pennsylvania
had begun this trend in 1966. (a tabulation of the functional
responsibilities of existing State offices for local affairs is
contained in Appendix A.)
A prime 1967 example of this new approach is the Connecticut
Department of Community Affairs. which became operative July 1. 1967.
and is charged vith providing significant financial and technical
assistance to localities. An important characteristic of the
Department is its major reliance upon State initiative and financial
resources. rather than upon Federal and local funds, to implement
urban programs. During the next two years. Connecticut will provide
funds totaling $55 million for eighteen new programs in five general
areas: planning and zoning; physical inrovesnnts and necessity
development; housing, including code enforcement and tax abatemente
on lou- and anderete-income dwellings; personnel services. including
relocation assistance and rehabilitation activities in housing pro-
jects; and human rescurce development. State grants to local
governments for the above activities, with the exception of a rent
receivership program subsidized by State funds to be repaid fron rent
collected, must be renewed at the termination of the biennium.
Another significant feature is that-as a condition of eligibility
for State financial aid. localities are required to prepare compre~
henaivc "community development action plans." These plans must be
submitted to regional planning agencies for reviev and consent. The
enabling legislation also created an Advisory Council on Con-unity
Affairs to canduct studies and to advise the Coo-issioner of the
Department concerning local problems.
A bill authorising the establishment of a Washington
Planning and Community Affairs Agency was signed by Governor
Daniel J. Evans on March 21, 1967. This Agency is located in the
Office of the Governor on a coordinate basis with Hashington's
Central Budget Agency. lts duties involve providing technical
assistance, infornation, and advice to local governments in such
areas as cunicipal management. capital iaprovenent prograaming,
boundary and fringe problems, interlocal cooperation, and coordina-
tion of State activities relevant to localities. The Agency lay
make recon-endations to the Governor and the Legislature. and is
responsible for "administration or coordination of State programs
and projects relating to cor-unity affairs for the planning and
carrying out of the acquisition, preservation, use and development
of land and provision of public facilities and services for fully
carrying out the State's role in related federal grant or loan
programs." The new unit exercises substantial planning functions.
including: preparing a State long-range coqrehensive plan for
programs and services provided by all levels of government, as well
as by the private sector. in such areas as transportation, public
facilities, recreation, open space, national resources, scenic
highways, and urban and rural development patterns; assisting and
coordinating other State agencies in formulating plans and programs;
coordinating and reviewing functional plans as reQuired for the
receipt of Federal or State aid; and participating in interstate
planning. In addition, under close legislative mandate. the
Agency will distribute the $25 million appropriated by the 1967
Legislature for direct aid to localities. As with the Connecticut
unit, all State financial aid to local governments for such pro-
grans as urban renewal, poverty, and sass transit mat be chameled
for review. The Director of the Planning and Community Affairs
Agency approves all State grants administered by the Agency which
are applicable to the nonfederal share of project costs.
A second approach to State agencies for local affairs created
in 1967 consisted of the establishment of units having relatively
extensive technical, advisory, and coordinating functions and some
"line" responsibilities, although lacking broad financial powers.
the Missouri Legislature approved the creation of a new Department
of Connunity Affairs, effective October 15, 1967, and assigned to
it all functions of the Office of State and Regional Planning and
Con-unity Development. Although it does not provide direct financial
aid, this agency has a substantive role in furnishing research,
advisory, coordinating, and technical assistance to localities in
regard to fiscal matters, management techniques, engineering and
public works. personnel training. boundary and fringe problems.
interlocal cooperation, and State. regional, and local planning.
It may make program recon-endations to the Governor and tho Logia
lature. The Department also has responsibility for urban renewal
and area redevelopment activities. A Governor's Council on
Comity Affairs was founded to serve as a central connicstion
channel between the Department and local governmental units.
Ohio's Department of Urban Affairs, which began operation
on October 24, 1967, was created by legislation uniting a pre-
viously nonstatutory Urban Affairs Bureau with the State Offices
of Opportunity and Appalachia. The Department furnishes research,
technical, and advisory assistance in regard to fiscal matters.
engineering and public works, municipal management. personnel
training, boundary and fringe problems, and interlocal cooperation.
It develops recommendations for administrative or legislative
action to resolve co-msnity problems. The Departunt has indirect
program responsibilities in the fields of housing and urban renewal
and redeveIOpment, although it lacks authority to take direct
action on a statewide basis in these areas. It also coordinates
other State agency activities relating to local governmental prob-
len, and assists in the iapleamntation of calamity plans. The
Department has determined that one of its primary functiona--not
specifically provided in the enabling legislation--vill be to
furnish technical assistance to municipalities concerning such
capital improvement projects as street construction, water and
sewer systems, neighborhood facilities, and mass transportation.
Nebraska's Division of Urban Affairs, located within a
recently organised Department of Beenomic Development, commenced
operation on July 1, 1967. the Division's functional responsi-
bilities encompass: providing technical assistance and advice to
municipalities, counties, and regions with respect to comprehensive
planning; furnishing information concerning public and private
rescurces available to meet looal governmental needs; studying
and recommending modifications in the structural and functional
provisions of lOcal lava; assisting local units in developing
cooperative procedures for the resolution of common problems;
facilitating the coordination of activities of State and local
public agencies; and conducting special cammxuty development
studies and projects.
Vermont's Office of Local Affairs, created by executive order
effective July 1. 1967. is located in the Governor's Office.
Although it was not authorised to provide financial aid, the Office
furnishes substantial technical, advisory, research, and coordi-
nating assistance to localities in such areas as fiscal and manage-
ment policy, engineering and public works, and coordination of
State activities relevant to local governments. The agency also
performs functions relating to statewide, regiOnal, and local
planning and coordination, and has program responsibility in the
field of hausing.
Finally, on September 29. 1967, by executive order Governor
Buford Ellington of Tennessee established an Office of Urban and
federal Affairs in the Governor's Office. The new unit is respon-
sible for the following: distributing information to local gov-
ernments concerning Federal grant-invaid programs; coordinating
programs involving more than one State department; providing pro-
gram direction for the Economic Opportunity Act; and administering
the Public Barks and Economic Development Program and the Appa-
lachian Re-Development Program. The Office for Local GOVernment,
created in 1963 by the Tennessee Legislature and located in the
Office of the Comptroller of the Treasury. will continue to provide
research. statistics. and information to local governments, to
assist in the coordination of State activities effecting localities,
and to aid in interlocal cooperation.
A third preference in the establishment of State offices
for local affairs last year followed the more conventional, limited
pattern. The omnibus reorganisation (Xellett) lav enacted by the
Wisconsin Legislature provided for the formatioe of a new Depart-
ment of Local Affairs and Development. This agency assumed duties
in the fields of local and regional planning. economic development.
and civil defense. It also exercises the functions of the State
Exposition Department and the Olympic Sports Board.
Minnesota's 1967 legislative session approved a hill creating
an Office of Local and Urban Affairs within the State planning
agency. The Office's responsibilities involve mainly providing
technical assistance in the areas of regional planning. research.
fiscal matters. and coordination of State programs affecting
localities.
Hontana's nee Department of Planning and Economic Develop-
ment has limited functions in the fields of local. regional, and
statewide planning, coordinatiou of State programs affecting
localities. and interlocal cooperation. The Department also pro-
vides research. statistics, and other information to localities.
More restricted actions to improve relationships with local
governments were undertaken in 1967 by a number of other States.
Oregon created a Governor's Intergovernmental Coordination Commit-
tee to inform and to otherwise assist State and local agencies
concerning Federal grant-in-aid programs, to coordinate State
agency activities affecting localities. and to advise the Governor
concerning problems of State-local relations. in Nevada, Governor
Paul Laxalt established an Advisory Council on Local Government to
facilitate continuous co-mmication beareen the State and local
levels. while Governor Jack Williams of Arisona set up an advisory
group to inform him concerning community problems and to clarify
and explain his programs to one: local needs. The 1967 Alaska
- 10 -
legislative session approved a hill creating a Rural Affairs
Co-lasion to advise the Governor concerning rural problem and
native affairs.
In regard to study groups, the North Carolina Legislature
authorised the establishment of eleven new commissions to examine
statewide issues. i'heir recon-nations will be submitted to
the 1969 legislative session. One such body is the Local Govern-
ment Study Commission, which will consider methods of strengthen-
ing local governmental structures and of reducing the large
number of local bills in the State Legislature. A Tax Study
Commission will review State and local taxation laws and will
recommend rats modifications.
Texas' 1967 Legislature appropriated $l50,000 for the
formation of Institutes of Urban Studies at the University of
Houston and the University of Texas at Arlington. Another enact-
ment provides that the Governor or an agency designated by him
nay. upon request. assist local governaental relationships with
Federal agencies. providing that Federal and State laws do not
mandate specific State agencies to perform given roles in
affected program areas.
Solgigg Areawide Problggg
Host of the legislation enacted last year pertaining to
areawide functional problems dealt with water and air pollution.
By the end of the year. twenty States were providing financial
assistance to municipal water pollution abatement efforts. Twelve
of these States had taken such action in 1967. During the year,
at least nine States entered the field of air pollution control.
With reference to State action to combat water pollution,
on Hay 2. 1967. New York established s Pure Haters Authority to
assist local governments in the construction, maintenance, and
operation of water pollution abatement systems. The program pro-
vides for thirty percent State aid and prefinancing of the thirty
percent Federal share. Texas' Legislature passed a bill detaching
the Water Pollution Control Board from the Department of health
and renaming the agency the Water Quality Board. The Board
received a $2 lullion appropriation to undertake planning and
feasibility studies of areawide sewage treatment facilities. On
June 29, 1967, Rhode island voters approved a $29 million bond
issue, of which 812 million will be used in furnishing matching
funds for local sewage treatment projects. New Hampshire legisla-
tion provided for the classification of all public waters in the
State in compliance with the Water Quality Central Act of 1965.
Connecticut's 1967 legislative session established a regional
water authority and approved a $150 million clean water bond issue.
- 11 -
State funds will be available to municipalities to undertake new
antipollution projects or to assist those plants currently under
construction. Oklahoma's Legislature passed a measure providing
tax credits for net investeent costs for the installation of
water pollution treatment and control systems. with the credit
being liuited to twenty percent annually until the full invest-
ment is recovered. The Iansas Legislature also enacted two water
pollution control bills.
Oregon's Legislature passed a series of laws dealing with
both water and air pollution. These included measures permitting
the creation of regional air quality cantrol districts. authorising
State assistance to municipalities for the establishment and
improvement of sewage treatment facilities, and providing tax
credits and exenptions for industries installing air pollution
control devices. New Jersey's Legislature adopted the Hiddle
Atlantic States Air Pollution Control Coupler-r0180 ratified by
Connecticut and New York--and authorized a training program for
water and air pollution control personnel. A Clean Water Council
was formed in the State's Depart-cut of health, and industrial tax
credits were granted for the installation of water pollution
control mechanisms .
In the field of air pollution abatenent. the Hashington
Legislature passed a low establishing State, regional. and county
air pollution control authorities and providing standards and
means of enforcement. "The Clean Air Act of Taxes, 1967" can-
tinued the existence of the Texas Air Control Board and authoritad
interlocal agreements to conduct air pollution manage-ent.
inspectiou, and enforcenent. to provide or receive technical and
educational assistance, and to transfer funds from one IOCal
government to another. In Arizona, an air pollution control unit
was formed in the State Health Department. and counties were
permitted to create five-member advisory and control boards to
deal with local smog canditions. The State nay interceda in such
activities only if the local efforts prove ineffective. The Kansas
Legislature's "A Canservation of Air Quality Act provided for a
Division of Air Quality Conservation in the State Board of Health
and for an eight-member Air Quality Conservation Commission. The
latter is responsible for the preparation of a couprehensive air
pollution control plar. All cities and taunties in the State are
authorized to form local air quality conservation commissions.
aubaeQuent to conducting tests and securing legislative approval.
Connecticut's Legislature adopted measures providing for the
appointment of a one hundred-member task force to study air polluv
tiOn, and establishing a ten-member Air Pollution Control
Con-usaion. New Hampshire also enacted a new air pollution control
program.
-12-
In other functional areas. Hichigan'a 1967 legislative
session authorized the Governor's Office to advise regional,
county. and other local planning agencies in the State. and to
consult with appropriate authorities of neighboring States and
the Federal Government. Georgia's Legislature enacted a lav
creating a State plennins bureau to facilitate the coordination
of State, regional. and local planning efforts. One of the
coastitutional amendments approved by Pennsylvania voters last year
authorized a bond issue. under which Governor Raymond P. Shafer
plans to borrow $500 million over a ten-year period for construc-
tion of sewage treatment plants. conservation, and developeent of
State recreation land, parks, and open space. California, Hawaii.
Indiana. Hichigan, Minnesota, and Haahington enacted bills either
authorizing or expanding local governmental powers to form
authorities for the management of sreavide transportation facili-
ties. A Department of transportation was established by New York
to coordinate the activities of State agencies in this field.
Pinilly. the Legislatures of Montana and New Mexico passed
measures for the provision of vocational educational facilities
on an areawide basis. (A tabulation of State aid to localities
supplementing the local matching contribution under selected
Federal grant-in-aid programs is contained in Appendix 3.)
From the above. it is evident that State action in 1967
concerning the solution of areauide problems was largely confined
to the fields of water and air pollution abatement, although a
few States enacted measures in such areas as planning. trans-
portation, vocational education, conservation, and recreation.
The marked increase in State participation in pollution control
efforts may be viewed mainly in terms of being a response to the
special incentive provision in the Hater Quality Act of 1965,
which provides for a Federal aid bonus for projects when the State
"buys in," and a combination of the Federal "carrot and club"
technique in the Air Quality Act of 1967. As such. in these areas
it was the Federal Government. rather than the States, which in
1967 was primarily responsible for exercising the initiatch and
leadership required for meeting urban needs and problems of an
areavide nature .
Providing Direct Financial Assistance
In 1967. State measures providing direct financial assistance
to localities were mainly related to specific functional programs.
As indicated in the previOus section, most of this State activity
concerned water and air pollution abatement. In other functional
areas. on November 7. 1967. New York's $2.5 billion transportation
bond lssue--the largest State gavernment bond issue in the Nation's
history--for highways. mass-transit facilities, and airports
received voter approval. "sine voters approved a $2.8 million bond
- 13 -
issue for airport construction sod improvaaeot in seventeen cities
and towns. In 1967, for the first tine in new Jersey's history
there was a concerted effort to furnish State funds for mass
transportatiOn. Cannecticut's legislative session enacted a bill
increasing the States share of local welfare costs fron fifty to
seventy-five percent. and establishing a Cost of Living Conldssion
to adjust welfare benefits. Under a law passed last year. effec-
tive July 1. 1968, the responsibility for public welfare in
Massachusetts will be transferred free local governments to the
State's newly organised Department of Public welfare.
The Maryland Legislature passed a bill revamping the State's
fiscal structure and providing substantial new grant-in-aid PTO
stale to localities, for the first time on an equalizing basis.
South Carolina's 1967 legislative session enacted a law authorizing
a thirty-three percent increase in revenues distributed to munici-
palities from State-collected liquor taxes. The North Carolina
Legislature approved measures increasing the city share of the
utilities franchise tax and the county portion of a tax on real
estate transfers. indiana's Legislature passed a property tax
relief bill. providing for a return of eight percent of the sales
tax revenue and a sililar percentage of the individual income
tax to the county from which the tax was collected and to the tax
payer's county or residence, respectively. Twenty-five percent
of Minnesota's new three percent sales and use tax will be
distributed to local governments and schools. Nevada's 1967
Legislature eliminated the State's share of receipts from the
seven cent cigarette tax. allotting all of the $5 sillion annual
income from this saurce to cities and counties. Localities may
assume the three cent reductiOn in the State's ad valorsn tax.
In Nev Hampshire. 33.7 million of the estimated $9.2 million
resulting iron the imposition of a five percent rooms-and-meals
levy will be allocated to cities and towns. Portions of the
increases in the sales and gasoline taxes in Illinois and in the
gasoline tax in New Mexico will be distributed to local govern-
ments. Finally, after a proposal which provided for returning
ten percent of the State sales tax receipts to cities and towns
was rejected by Washington voters in 1966, the State's 1967 legis-
lative session appropriated $25 nillion in direct aid to local
governments .
tate inaction
The preceding overview of 1967 Stats action clearly indicates
increasing responsiveness on the part of State governments to the
problems of urban areas. However. while there verc many important
successes, certain disappointments sh0uld also be recognized.
- 14 -
with reference to State legislative inaction, the Texas
Legislature defeated two major proposals affecting urban areas
recounended by Governor John B. Connolly. The first would have
provided for the adoption of optional county reorganization
plans, while the second would have authorized urban counties to
assume areauide service functions in such fields as health,
welfare, planning, transit. flood control. refuse disposal,
airports. hospitals, parks. and libraries, end to levy additional
property taxes as a means of financing these activities. Georgia's
1967 legislative session failed to enact a bill permitting
municipalities to initiate joint city-county extraterritorial
planning or zoning. Both the Georgia and the North Carolina
Legislatures rejected measures providing for a local option
sales tax. Despite the passage of two important urban bills--
the Urban Cooperation Act of 1967 and the Transfer of Functions
Act of l967--Hichigan'a Legislature again failed to approve
Governor George Romney's repeated recommendation concerning the
establishment of a Department of Urban Affairs. Similarly, last
year the Maryland legislative session neglected to enact a bill
providing for the creation of a State agency for local affairs.
By the end of 1967, twenty-two States were engaged in
either complete or restricted coastitutional revision activity.
However, in regard to the results of such action, only limited
success was apparent. The 1967 record of State constitutional
reform indicates that the debate over the merits and drawbacks
of the piecemeal as against the wholesale revision approaches is
still far from settled.
-- Even though Rhode Island's Constitutional Convention
has been in session since December 8, 1954, a new
constitution has yet to be submitted for voter
approval. A revised document was approved by the
Convention in September 1967, to be voted on in
November, but in the wake of adverse public re-
action the Convention vaa reconvened and further
changes were adopted. A vote on the new draft
constitution is scheduled for April, 1968.
-- 0n Hay 18, 1967. Pennsylvania's voters approved
a call for a State Constitutional Convention. but
delegates are limited to revising constitutional
articles in only faur fields: taxation and
finance; lacal government; legislative apportion-
ment; and the judiciary. In the Hay vote, hov-
ever,the electorate also approved eight consti-
tutional amendments dealing with such substantive
areas as bond issues, length of legislative
sessions, special sessions procedure, and
gubernatorial succession.
-15-
IABLB 0! CONTEHTS
Preface
Acknowledgenonts
STATE LEGISLATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL ACTION O!
W P303126 IN 1967
"Uneheckling" Local Govern-eat
Improving State-Local Relations
Solving Areluide Problem-
Providing Direct rinancial Aseietence
State Inaction
In Retrospect
Appendix A Su-nnry of Information on Existing State
Offices of Local Affairs
Appendix B State Aid to Localities Supplenonting the
Local Contribution Under Selected tederol
Grout Programs
Appendix c ~ Published leporte of the Advisory
Concussion on Intergovernmental Relations
ll
13
16
16
18
25
27
The greatest disappointment in the area of consti-
tutional reform was the rejectioo of the proposed
New York constitution by a three-to-one margin in
a November 7, 1967, referendum. The document con-
tained a number of significant articles pertaining
to local government. These included provisions:
permitting counties-~or counties and New York City--
to form regional agencies to conduct specific
governmental services; reQuiring local legislative
districts to he as equitable in population as
practicable; and prohibiting members of local
legislative bodies from assuming other local
governmental offices. furthermore. responsi-
bility for welfare services would have been
transferred to the State government over a ten-
year period.
In Retrospect
The measures undertaken during 1967 thrOugh State legisla-
tion, constitutional revision, and referendum proposals are
indicative of the evolution of certain trends in the direction
of a "revitalization" in the role of State government in the
American federal system.
follows:
.-
These may be briefly summarized as
Same States are making notable efforts toward
"unshackling" local governments and providing
means for dealing with sreaeide problems.
Some States are establishing agencies for local
affairs, a few of which having substantial
financial, program, and coordination responsi-
bilities, as well as technical assistance.
advisory, and research functions.
Some States are beginning to appropriate siseable
amounts of funds to assist local governments and
are continuing to "buy into" Federal-local grant-
in-aid pragrams. with much of this activity being
a response to Federal incentives.
Some States are becoming increasingly concerned
with the replacement of antiquated constitutional
articles by provisions equipping them with the
necessary tools to meet twentieth century needs.
- 15 -
In a number of States, however, some of the above trends
are hardly discernible. In a few States. none of them is visible.
Quite clearly, it has taken a considerable period of time for most
States to recognize their role, responsibility, and stake in
facing existing or potential problems attending the urbanizetioa
of the Nation and in providing adequate remedial measures. The
chaos which occurred in some of the central cities during 1967
attested to the failure on the part of all three levels of
government to take effective sction. The possibility of its
reoccurrence in the immediate future suggests that the urban
challenge must be dealt with in terms of concentrated action
emphasising new approaches to old problems on the part of Federal,
St't. and local governments, in cooperation with private enter-
prise. Hhile many of the steps taken by State governments in
1967 with respect to urban problems were important, much remains
to be accomplished if the States are to serve as active and
innovative members of the intergovernmental partnership. Now.
more than ever before, the federal system must be truly "creative"
and "cooperative."
- 17 -
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY 0? INFORMATION ON EXISTING SIATE OFFICES OF LOCAL AFFAIRS. nzczunza 1967
Rhode Island
California
Nan. of agcncy Local affairs Division of local Intergovernnnntal
agency a letr0politnn council on urban
;overnlont :rovth3
Xcar establighgd 195;_
:1 000
H- an
n < m
7 a w
H n n
D :10
n 80
3 a n
o n
o H
a 8
o I!
n H
5
Location Office of Governor Department of 0££1c2 of Governor
tive dear---- Adminiotrotion
2355:1093
Advisory, Coordinating & Itchnical
Assistance
Pineal :- i -
i. 1.1 manaene __I
p-ine'.ig- a oub c cr.
Logislative aspects of intra-
I ate ,0 relatio.s
Research, statistics &
tutor-a o! coll. -.
;-r:cnnol :8 It:
oda -, I~'_ II-
Asoiot Gov. in coordg. State
a ivite I act. I cal on
Re 3;. .r-- Lf ~ 10 1 lat -n
xggcgloca; goo-e_: 1-;
:ina: I As _ata 0
Su 3e .1 1 a
Planning Yunctionn
Stgtggidt ginnnigg
Wumm
Egggd. with Eeg=_g}annii;
;.gd. v 1 "tote d= '15:-
III
II
E" Ill 1 I
:I
-61-
____-
Fractal Responsibility
ed A-
Pm:tz
nggggg
Arc r 010 c
StatuCOry Citations
\
ark
NY Consolidated
Laws Chapter 335
P.L. 1961 Chnpter
93
Chapter 1809,
1963 Stltl;Cb8p.
.uuom uqasuoa
wood .Ncn uo<
.~ chat .wuoox
04 dean3
mead com d
coma nabuUIUMU thuaqum
1%
nlllllllld
u 090.
d 1.: CIA.
anal..ao>uv w
haununuaaonaoa IquaOuu
Illlljhmdwmmwmw
accuuuasm wauna¢am
clllnmdmuwm gamma 03?". aw
oonnu unw< uadch
nouuadc .uuouu- owuupduuo
ououm .nuuoau ca .900 u-un<
IIIIauuummmuxmmmmuMleHmmmmmmu
cIIIIIIIIIIIImemmmwlmmmmummu
llama
a uuuumauaua .Aouoamua
uIIIIIIIImQMAMMNMMIJMMmmImummMI
v.33 mo 30¢an 03::qu
Jag
. .. 23%
i3
ousnunauu< ~auuanuok
a 2233.38 .3833.
3%
uculuu .au
unotauaovow
coma
. auu a a :-
-IOu uo uculuucauo
ouch ~_acao.
caducuoa
. I I unal.:.._lu a. 4mm.
unwoun-
-aou uo ucuauunun anuo~ mo ouuuuo ~noo~ a acaw>n
IE 22:: 8:28
v28 u.o a ¢-u< :03 0:03;
Auden- uc In:
u au H a o... w. scan: on H o allsm
- 10 -
head a. ...
"mama .oa.q .n~.e
.Na.c .-.c .ooom mead ~Nn .< .&
noon and .n .m
I
H
ucqiuun on
.avu uauvaoaouau
acouuu.uv ocu.u Ugandan. u cauno.ov
.ivu unoccunoucu nudum a uoquuo .va uuovconovcu
nun-unnumuuu-IIIIII-----nuuu-------HMHM----
nouuumwa huuuna
anu>oo aqua:
-oou w udunaadm
no uconuuunon
mug-mu. can: oquuuq zuuani
¢ mac no oouuuo coco mo quauuaaoa
.800 no use-nuance
nun-unnaaaunumi-un-nun-unuwnmuunm-III-nun-numnmmnunnm-III
vusaauao on a < a. o .ouuu on.
..uqunm so coda-nuou
anewuauuo huOusuuum
ace-..Hn u.ou -J <
..a. .m
.IIIIIII||I||||||||||||ulnmmuumu
uvou w an) an
nuaaunwacOA-ou Iquaoum
.u a. o.uso sum 3 ..uoo
. GOSH. .....w 0...
mo .unun I :uncuu. ,I.4
55.3. 03.4.. u
acouuocam mawaa-Hm
..onqcmxmumquwmwmmmumm
mmmumwammummmmumu
cwuauo 000 n Mucucw
no unaunoa u;u..u. .180:
..dudau .n .uoouwmluuwmmuammm:
ououm .wuuoou : .>bo unann<
IIIImemwmmmulmM¢Mu.d Huunanon
1IIIIIIIlllllummmAMWWImmmmummu
u
acquuca ou
¢ ouauauuuua .nuunoucm
acouunau u ounuu
-quuca uo ouuonna o>qu-ouuua
IIIImmmmmumwHJWJmmmmwwmm
.IIIIIIIlllmmmmmmmumlumwmmmmm
J3
qua-una-d dcuucnooa
a unuucwuuooo .auo.u>v<
ummwwummu
coda-00A
vosouupouou no
hoaomu we can:
-21-
1|l|llil
acouu~uuo huouauuum
u. ..o~o>uvou do <
IIIIIIIIII|IIIIIll|Idmmmmm
an. .m
LAOHO n... d .nauu .UA.
huuaununaomuuu laymanm
.u oua30uc .uua an
. a nu. .o ;u: ..uoo
Ill dodmlluomndaldmmazm Team
I
" Hr .d
n ,.
II
I
I
|
mood .c
.n .2 uusuuu-n:
0< :8. .< 32
.Aus< o>uu=ouxn
cod M .a .4
scan on d .n
- v
x'k
accuuuaah anaconda
.cuu coca on >uo.s
mi N x l
u
Amway-19.3 933%
ouaum .nvuoou cu .>oo unuua<
IIuauumaummmmxmumqwuxanumuwmmmm
aIIlIIIIIlllllumwamMMMImmmmuuwM
.u1uIIIIImmqmmmamamlmmmmmmuuumql
a uuuuoaunuo .auudo-ou
accuuaauu .u>o ou-uu
-auun youuounan o>wunaouuua
uxuoa odds: a wooed u
IIIIIIIIIIIIumuaouu-a qumqudmmm
(maul.43.
uucuuuuuuc H-uunsoou
a wauuuavuooo .auo.>v<
mmmwmmmmu
i
i
:
aua.o~o u no
coo. uo unuauuuaoa
uculuq.ot
.av- ucouzunuoau
cauuquoa
jag
.Egu HO OwamO
uoaum>oo mo oowuuo
auuuuua human! uuwauuu uuunuwu aqnua uuunuu< can: ¢
naou.a mauauo~m auuo~ mm cuauuo uo ucuuuwnon ouuum uo couou>qo
3:328 a: :03 no 32:3 33
aucown we .42
.,uqxm o COuu; Ouwu . L:
- 22 -
-z-
ded
_ennessee
Office of Urban
& Federal Affairs
a e offices of L5 A airs co
Wiscon: a
Department of local Office for local
affairs and devel- government
Sunni of n - tion on L s i
Name of agency
ear estsb i d
Location
i
i
5
Office of Conp- Office of Governor
troller of
Trassur
Independent encou-
tivc department
Functiggg
Advisory, Coordinating &
Technical Assistance
iscal s ice
i i s1 a can t
i e i a ubl c works
Legislative aspects of intra-
sta e t. rels ions
Research. statistics 5
info ion colle tiou
ersonne rainin
30 da a it n e robl
Assist Gov. in coordg. State
a t it e affect. aliti s
necnd. ram: 5 1e islat on
Ingeglocal cooperation
inancia Asai.tan e
gpgggise Local Fina e
Planning Functions
8 at ide aun
ngsl planning assio ance
r with re lanni
00 d. wit, ftatevid- -lan:iic
Prograa Responsibility
W
T
f
1
F
i
lillllilillllil
i
T
||||I
i
i
h
Area edev l--ment
Statutory Citations Executive Authorit
1'67
Laws 1963
Che-tar 2
8. B. 135 967
M
Summary of Information on Existing Stats Offices of
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Local Affairs
[me
In New York, the State Comptroller, an elective officer. super-
vises certain aspects of local fiscal affairs, audits and exanines
then on a continuing basis, naintaina a State data bank on local
governments, and advises and gives technical assistance on natters
of law and finance. (8. 1. Consolidated Laws, Ch. 26.)
Refers to administration of the Rural Redevelopment Fund.
Department and Coaniaaion of Housing and Con-unity Development
shinisters other programs, notably those of direct ministra-
tion (poverty progran. housing, etc.) rather than those of
supervision and assistance. It renders advice on fiscal problems
related to its program, collects statistics and recosrsenda
legislation.
All State financial aid to localities for urban renewal. poverty
programs. mass transit, etc.. is channeled at the discretionof
the Director (or Commissioner) of the Agency (or Depart-cut).
Effective October 15. l967.
Refers solely to the functions of the Ohio Office of Appalachia
within the Department of Urban Affairs.
The Vernont Office was set up by executive authority only, and
is awaiting statutory authority to undertake the functions
proposed.
The Washington State Agency is given responsibility for "Admin-
iatration or coordination of state programs and projects relating
to connunity affairs for the planning and carrying out of the
acquisition, preservation, use and development of land and
provisiOn of public facilities and cerviCea for fully carrying
out the state's role in related federal grant or loan programs."
Includes administration of the Appalachian Re-DeveIOpnent and
the Public orka and Economic Development Programs.
- 24 -
.z-
APPENDIX I
5111! AID TO LOCALITIES SUPPLEHERTING THE LOCAL CONTRIBUTION
UNDER SELECTED IIDBIAL GRAB! PROGRAMS
DECEMBER 1967
___-_
Haste Urban Water and
traatncnt Airport Roapital Renewal Sever Urban Hana
State ggrks _§9natguc;ion gonatruction ll {acilitiaa rganagortacign
Alabama x* X
Alaaka x2 :3
Arizona X
Arkansas
California 8* Z X x
Colorado 1
Connect icu: x7 x" x x5 x
Dalavare x :5
Florida
Georgia 1
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana 1 16
Iowa X
{loans
Kantucky
Louisiana
Kain:
Maryland
Haaaachuaatta
Michigan
Hinneaota
Hiaaiaaippi
Hiaaouri 1
Montana
abraaka
Nov-4a
N§¢X
N
on
HNN
zgggmb x
PREYACE
In this Report. the Advisory Connieeion has eeeeobled e
substential body of current inforeltion concerning the repidly
changing area of State-local relations. This effort is designed
to update Inch of the enterial that has appeared in earlier '
editions of the Conniesion's Annual Report and to summarise many
of the findings contained in its revised study Egghgghligg Local '
Government.
One of the focal points in the traditional debate over the
viability of the Alerican federal system is the proper role of the
States in relationship to local governments. The purpose of this
Report is to provide current background esteriel on the dynamics
of Stete-lOcel relations. This is done by exanining the amount and
significance of State legislative end constitutional actions during
1967 as they affect urban areas.
Efforts node by the States last year to resolve urban needs
and probleue have been classified into four broad categories:
"unshackling" local government; i-proving State-local relations;
solving areeuide problems; and providing direct financial assistance.
An atteupt has been ude both to sunrise the major State activities
in these areas end to enslyze their inplicatione in tern: of the
emergence and dCVlOpmnnt of certain broad trends in Stste-loeel
relations.
This Report contains no nev suggestions of a policy character.
and is issued strictly as an informational end reference document.
Ferris Bryant
Chair-en
_9z-
ggnge Aid to Localities. ..
veste Urban water and
Treltunt Airport Hospital Renrsl Sever Urban lieu
grate Horks traction Const tion 1 Facilities Iransgortation
New Helpshire x 3*
New Jersey X x X
New Hexico
New York 1 x7 x x x
North Caroline x
north Dakota x
Ohio :7
Oklnhons 1
Oregon X 1*
Pennsylvania :7 x x x x
Rhode Island :7 x2 x x
South Carolin: x
South Dakota xt
rennessee x x
Texas X X
Uteh X'
Vet-Ont X X x8
Virginia 1*
washington X X
Heat Virginia
Uisconsin X X : 9
MM...
1 typicslly provides one-half of local contribution
Sever only
Loans only
Bond issue
ICONOUFUN
Owns all or lost of the airports
Provides or has provided sid in specified instances
Owns end operstes sane of the airports
Only in cases of proven hardship
Limited sppliestion
Some or sll sid from aviation-related taxes end revenue
APPENDIX C
PUBLISHED arrears or me ADVISORY mssxm cu
mnecovmmx. tenuous y
ggogdgoegion of State end Pedegsl Ighegitonce. Estes; end gift taxeg.
Report A-1. Januery 1961. 134 p., prlnted.
estmen o 61 e 1e ee tete e ernme t .
Report A-J. January 1961. 61 p., printed. (Out of print; sulnery
aveileble.)
t o d s s s t te a el e --A
gpplmnt to Report A-3. Jeouery 1965. 16 p., offset.
Cove n e no u re end A n t tsn
Argsg. Report A-S. July 1961. 83 p., U. 8. Rouee of Represente-
tivee, Coulittee on Government Operations, Committee Print. 87th
Congress, 1st Session.
Ste 6 Loc stel ed P o t sted
legging Aggsgz Propoeed Amendment to the Buck Act. Report A-6.
June 1961. 34 p.. offset. (Out of print; sun-Iry available.)
In to a e eti ex Ad n s 3 ion. Report A-7.
June 1961. 20 p.. offset.
Pergodtg gong eggiggg] geeegggguent of zederel rgggg-gn-Ald to stage
r
and ngel gggeggggnts. Report A-8. June 1961. 67 p., offset.
(Reproduced in Appendix of heerings on S. 2116 before the U. S.
Seuete Subcouittee an Intergovernmental Reletions of the Count
on Government Operations, Jenusry 14, 15, end 16, 1964, 88th
Congress, 2d Session.)
e d d nsti R f e Stete.
Report A-9. September 1961. 68 p.. offset.
I iv a s e s Reor enleeti n ftsn
Argos. Report 6-11. June 1962. 88 p., offset.
In e n s es 0 51 i i s r at l e Sew e
i as i o Aresa. Report A-13. October 1962.
135 p.. offset.
a rabi o e or omen d t n to
2£_§ggg;gg§g§. Report A-l6. North 1963. 92 p., offset.
h 6 ex. Report A-17.
June 1963. Volume I (187 p.) and Volume II (182 p.), printed
($1.25 each).
nd 31 c c a me nd nsncf Report A-lB. June 1963.
96 p.. offset.
13¢ 30;; of {gullitsggon in zederel Qrents. Report A-19. Jenuery
1966. 258 p.. offset.
- 27 -
Grant-in-Aid Programs Enacted g! the 29d egsigg of the 88th nggress--
A ugglenent to Rggort A- 2. March 1965. 22 p., offset.
Iggggt of Federal Urggn pggelggggng Prggrans 23 Local nggggggnt
Oglagigggigg and glannigg. Report A-ZO. January 1964. 198 p.,
U. 5. Senate. Committee on Government Operations. Committee Print.
88th Congress, 2nd Session.
Statutory and Administratigg ggnsrgla Aggggiateg with [edegal grants
for Public Agsigtange. Report 1-21. May 1966. 108 p., printed.
Ibo Egogleg of Spggia; ngtgiggg in American government. Report A-22.
Hay 1964. 112 p.. printed.
Th er a A a o cumenta T Report A-23.
September 196A. 29 p., offset.
§ta§getede§sl Qgeglgpgigg in Clggxgtge Iaxgg. Report A-26. September
l96h. 62 p., offset.
1 tan S a e mi s a 5 i a o
r e a elation: in tral it e d uburbs. Report A-
25. January 1965. 253 p., offset.
Re 0 ati 1 tea t a neases Di a
92331335355. Report A-26. January 1965. 161 p.. offset.
a t i e nal cone ea. Report A-27.
October 1965. 203 p.. offset.
ui ea' r or ter e tal story. Report
A028. January 1966. 103 p., offset.
* n ta a a P ra Report A-29.
April 1966. 278 p., offset ($1.50).
ta a a due e1 location. Report A-30. April
1967. m. p., offset ($0.60).
[ilggl Balange Lg the Aggricen [eggral ggtan. Report A-3l. (lo press)
(two volunes).
Factors A ecti t e Voter Reactions e ntsl eo a a on
in Metropolitan Areas. Report M-lS. Hay 1962. 80 p., offset.
*Heasurea of §tate and local Fiscal Capacity gag Iax Effort. Report
u-l6. October 1962. 150 p.. printed ($1.00).
e o e o ban unctions- Local and Ar avide. Report H-Zl.
September 1963. 281 p., offset ($1.50).
*Iax_nuarla in the U i e Report H-23. July 1966.
233 p., pr nte .
rst: Igghgiga; Aggilgangg tg Local Deb; gagegenant. Report H-26.
January 1965. 80 p., offset.
an gndhggg (g; Interlocal Agreements and Contrggts. Report 8-29.
March 1967. 197 p., offset ($1.00).
- 23 -
tr ii e Amer e' e o e to n. leport H-Jl. August
1966. 176 p., offset.
Me on G Report H-32. August 1966.
69 p., offset.
e a o A e ion on n e -
ggxggnglgtel Relationg. Report M035. September 1967. 629 p.,
offset.
Annual 3gpggg, ninth. Report 3-36. Jennery 1968. 63 p., offset.
Stet e e1 f c at r e 1 Report ~37.
Jennery 1968. 212 p., olfeet.
tete elative end Co tituti 1 Acti oblene i
126 Report H-38. April 1968. 29 p., niueogrephed.
1/ Single copies of reporte may be obtained without charge from
the Advisory Connieeion on Intergovernmental Reietione, Heehing-
ton, D. c. 20575. Multiple copies of iteue nerked with eeteriek
(*) Ily be purcheeed from the Superintendent of noon-ante.
Govern-eat Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 20602.
-29.
ACKNMMNTS
this review drove on intornltion from I Mr of eourcee.
including: cmicetione with legieietive service egencieo;
State, mnicipel, and county league journele; publications of
the Council of Sun Governments; the Iotionel Civig 531w;
end the Hetrggglitg Area Dige- While strenuous efforte
have been node to perfect our lyeten of reporting State legisla-
tive end mending activities, the Advieory Couieeion concedes
that this survey is by no menu ell-inclusive.
Wu. G. Colman
Executive Director
David a. walker
Auietmt Director
STATE LEGISLATIVE AND CONSTITUTIONAL ACTION
ON URBAN PROBLEHS IN 1967
The racial unrest and civil disorder which occurred in many
of the Nation's cities during 1967 clearly revealed the necessity
for increased action by all three levels of govern-ant. in addition
to private enterprise, to resolve the urban crisis. Such problems
as blight and decay, congestion, inadequate housing, poor educa-
tional facilities, discrimination, and unemployment predominated in.
but were not limited to, central cities. While many of these prob-
lems have traditionally characterised the urban environment. the
rioting and general breakdown of law and order highlighted the
implications of the failure to provide effective and innovative
remedial measures. The urban challenge in 1967 basically reflected
the need for a federal system which is "creative" as well as
"cooperative."
Hhile some observers have focused on the need for greater
Federal action, both the sources of and the solutions to many of
the basic problems of urban areas rest with State constitutions
and statutes. The widespread State legislative activity in 1967.
which is typical of odd-numbered years, resulted in the enact-eat
of a number of significant measures affecting urban areas. Other
State responses--though of more limited success--were through
constitutional revision and referendum measures.
In 1967. regular legislative sessions--including both general
and budget sessions--were convened in forty-seven States. Thirty-
one of these States held only regular sessions, while Mississippi
had only a special session. Sixteen States held both regular and
special sessions. Two States--Kentucky and Virginia--failed to
convene either regular or special sessions. The results of this
State legislative activity generally fall under four broad headings:
strengthening the powers of local governments to deal with urban
problems; improving State-local relations; providing solutions to
problems of an areawide nature; and expanding the resources avail-
able to meet urban needs through the provision of State financial
assistance to local governments.
"gnshackligg" Eggal Gggcrnnent
Hany State legislatures passed bills in 1967 expanding
existing or creating new local governeental powers to deal with
urban problems. Of particular importance were legislative actions
pertaining to home rule, annexation. consolidation. and other inter-
local cooperative devices. Measures designed to strengthen local
fiscal capacity were of less significance.
There is a lack of general consensus concerning the exact
number of States which have enacted laws providing for municipal
home rule. It has frequently been asserted that about twenty-five
States have taken such action. however, other sourcea--particulsrly
the Bureau of Public Affairs at Boston Collegeo-have contended that
approximately forty States have provided some measure of home rule
for one or more of their cities.
Only a few of the 1967 State legislative scssionsengaged in
home rule activity. The washington Legislature passed a law.
effective 1969, which will enable adopting municipalities to
exercise all powers not specifically reserved to the State. A
constitutional onendnent providing home rule for cities and towns
will be submitted to Iowa voters in 1968. Although in a 1966
Massachusetts referandun a "residual powers" constitutional
anendment was approved by a seven-to-ono margin, and in Decenber of
that year the General Court passed initial legislation ieplenenting
the new provision, little progress was made during 1967 on further
enabling legislation recon-ended by the Special Connoion on
Implementation of the Home Rule Anendment.
Five State Legislatures--Arisona. Kansas, Oregon, South
Carolina, and Hashington--passed laws liberalising nunicipal
annexation of adjacent territory, bringing the total number of
States which have acted in this field to at least fourteen. South
Carolina's legislative body enacted a bill permitting annexation
by cities and towns without holding elections, provided that
seventy-five percent of the fraeholders owning seventy-five per-
cent of the prOperty in the area affected petition for such action.
Arizona's amended annexation law provides for a somewhat similar
procedure, although the petition must be signed by the owners of
not less than fifty percent of the value of the taxable property
to be annexed. The Oregon Legislature apprOVed new annexation
methods in cases where conditions dangerous to public health
exist in adjacent areas. Under the statute, territory may be
annexed without owner consent through ordinance if the State
Board of Hesklndeterndnes that a public health danger may be
removed by facilities furnished through annexation. The annexing
city oust submittplans for these facilities one year after action
has been taken.
washington's Legislature passed hills last year which
established new procedures for the creation of municipal corpo-
ations and for the annexation or consolidation of territory to
existing municipalities. In addition, as a means of combattins
the proliferation of special districts. an act was approved pro-
viding for the establishment of bOundary review boards to regulate
the development and formation of municipalities in metropolitan
areas. Previously, only three States had passed measures authorising
the review and apprOval of the creation of special districts by
agencies representing the affected areas.
It should also be noted that New chico'a Legislature enacted
a law providing for stricter standards for the incorporation of new
municipalities. Prior to 1967, ten States had approved bills to
provide tighter control of municipal incorporation.
Other more limited measures to strengthen the structure of
10cal governments included a bill passed by the North Dakota Legis-
lature which eliminated the village as a unit of government, and
provided for the transition of villages to the city form of government.
The 1967 Alaska legislative session enacted a law permitting cities
and rural areas in firstclass boroughs to merge into single govern-
mental unite.
Stale legislatures in 1967 were particularly active in en-
couraging interlocal cOOperation through contracts and agree-ante.
Late in the year. Governor George Bouncy of Michigan signed two
important hills in this area. The Urban Cooperation Act of 1967
provides that any local governmental unit. including school districts,
may exercise powers jointly or undertake service activities in
cooperation with other local units. This Act also authorises the
formation of voluntary councila of governments and the establishment
of interlocal contractual agreements with both Michigan public agencies
and local governments in other States and in Canada. The Transfer of
functions Act of 1967 permits local governments to transfer functions
through interlocal contractual agreements.
Six other States-'Arkanaae, Kansas, Montana, South Carolina,
Tennessee. and washington--enacted hills in 1967 authorizing local
governmental units to exercise functions jointly or to contract with
one another for the performance of certain activities. In South
Carolina, a "muni-county" act was passed, which is designed to foster
closer cooperation and coordination among cities and counties in
furnishing joint services and facilities. Arkansae' Legislature
approved a bill which provided that the powers of cities, towns, and
counties may be exercised jointly with any other public agency in
Arkansas and other States, as well as with the Federal Government.
The Kansas legislature enacted a number of laws facilitating inter-
local cooperation. These included measures which authorised:
cities and/or counties to establish air conservation authorities;
counties to dispose of solid waste natarials separately or through
contractual agreements with cities; agree-ants providing for county
construction and maintenance of municipal streets; agreements between
counties or cities and rederal agencies for the construction and
operation of certain recreational facilities; and public agencies to
jointly purchase. own, or cooperate in the use of equipnent or
supplies. As a result of legislation passed in 1967. the total
number of States which have authorised broad interlocal contracting
and the joint exercise of powers has increased to at least twenty-
three.
The Legislatures of Arkansas, North Carolina, Ohio, and
Tennessee enacted bills last year permitting the formation of
councils of local officials. A new approach to metropolitan govarn-
nent organisation was adopted by Minnesota. Despite early advarle
reaction concerning local representation restrictions and the extent
of State involve-eat, the Minnesota Legislature created a Metropolitan
Council for the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. rather than suhnitting the
propOsal for referendum. The bill as enacted provides for a fourteen-
member Council as the governing body of the seven-county Twin Cities
area. The Council members are appointed by the Governor after con-
sultation with appropriate State legislators. iron districts aPPr
tinned on the "one man one vote" principle. The Governor also
appoints the Council Chairman, who serves as the executive head of
the metropolitan governnent. The Council has extensive responsi-
bilities in the following areas: planning; operation of the astro-
politan developnent pragran; preparation and adoption of the metro-
politan development guide; review and approval of special district
project plans for censistency with the guide; review and connect
concerning all .micipal activities affecting utropolitan area
development; and intervention on behalf of the metropolitan area
in annexation and incorporation proceedings conducted before the
Minnesota Municipal Commission. The Council also may recon-end
neasures to the Legislature with respect to such issues as tax
resource equalisation. pollution abatement, local services con-
solidation. and land acquisition.
Several State legislatures in 1967 authorized local govern-
ments to assume new or expanded powers in such functional areas
as planning, development. zoning. and Open space." Measures were
enacted by Kansas. Minnesota, Montana, and Utah authorising or
increasing local pover to adapt building codes by reference. The
Iowa Legislature approved a bill permitting cities and counties to
create regional health services. Colorado, Connecticut, and
washington passed laws enabling State and heal governments to
acquire and preserve "Open space, and to grant tax credits for
scenic easements. Utah's 1967 legislative session approved the
establishment of county subordinate service areas. the Indiana
Legislature passed a bill which permitted cities to form economic
deveIOpment commissions.
A 1967 Michigan law enabled regional planning cos-lesions to
transfer functions to regional councils of government, while the
lows Legislature authorised cities and towns to join metropolitan
or regional planning coondssions. The Legislatures of nine other
Stetss--lllinois, Indiana, Missouri. New Mexico, New York, North
Dakota, Ohio, Vermont. and Wisconsin--enacted laws permitting or
expanding the authorisation for metropolitan, regional, or county
planning, and establishing sreawide planning and development
agencies. Previously. seventeen States had taken action in this
field.
North Dakota's legislative session approved a measure
granting municipalities the power to exercise planning, zoning.
and subdivision control in urban fringe areas. New Mexico's legis-
lative body enacted a hill providing for the creation of six-member
city-county commissions to regulate soning outside municipal limits
and a threeene-ber arbitration board to resolve commission conflicts
and atalemates. Prior to 1967, eight States had passed laws
authorising extraterritorial planning. toning, and subdivision
control.
Some State legislatures enacted bills last year which were
designed to improve local fiscal capacity. Maryland and Michigan
approved measures enabling local governments which adopted local
income tax ordinances to contract to have State agencies collect
such taxes. The Legislatures of Colorado, Ohio, Texas, and Utah
passed laws authorising State collection of broad-based local
sales taxes.
In Maryland, the income taxes of three counties and the
Baltimore city tax will be replaced by an optional "piggy back"
local income tax which will he at least twenty and no more than
fifty percent of the State tax. Colorados 1967 legislative
session enacted a bill permitting, subsequent to voter approval,
non-home rule cities, towns, and counties to impose a sales tax.
Cities and counties were also authorised to acquire, lease, im-
prove, and dispose of property, and to issue forty-year revenue
bonds for industrial development purposes. The Texas Legislature
approved Governor John B. Connally's recon-endation that cities
be permitted to levy a one percent sales tax, upon approval by
local referendum. A dashington law granted counties the power to
borrow money, tax. or assess charges as a means of providing
sewage and enter drainage systems.
PAGE 1
S T A T E LEGis LA TIVE AND COTS TITUTIONAL A C T 1 O N O N G R B A M P R O R L E M 5 1 M i 9 6 7
PAGE 2
...aa' .96 ... satv .. sio ..r edlgslt
PAGE 3
negleered ~ ~ p-r1;.cesigeslypet dctonl utrl ..... .eraita .p.ruite .o h iavntgd n
PAGE 4
enabling legislation also created an Advlacry Council on Comimunity Affairs to conduct studies and to advise the Coonienioner of the Departmient concerning local problems. A bill authoriging the establishment of a Washington Planning and Comisiunity Affairs Agency was signed by Governor Daniel J. Evans on March Zl, 190. This Agency is located in the Offtee of the Governor on a coordinate basis with washington's Central Budget Agency. Its duties involve providing technical assistance, information, and advice to local governmiente in such areas as eiunicipal 1manageaient, capital isnprovellent progransning, boundary and fringe problenia, interlocal cooperation, and coordination of State activities relevant to localities. yhe Agency miny inake recallsliendations to the Governor and the Legislature, and is responsible for ''adininistration or coordination of State programis and projects relating to coilsnunity affaira for the planning and carrying out of the acquiettion, preservation, use and developnient of Land and provision of public facilities and services for fully carrying out the State's role in related federal grant or loan programis." The new unit exercises substantial planning functions, includirg; prepadog a State long-range comiprehensive plan for proErams and services provided by all levels of govet'asilent, as well as by the private sector, in such areas sa transportation, public facilities, recreation, open space, national resources, scenic highways, and urban and rural developulent patterns; assistin5 and coordinating other State agercies in foranslating plana and programis' coordinating and reviewing functional plans as required Eor the receipt of Faderal or State aid; and participating in interstate planning. In addition, under close legislative inandate, the Agency will distribute the $25 inillion appropriated by the 1967 Legislature Ear direct aid to localitLes, As with the Connecticut unit, all state financial aid to local Sovernoients for such programis as urban renewal, poverty, and 1mass transit alust be channeled far revtev. The Director af the Planning and Com11munity Affairs Agency approves all State grants admiinistered by the Agency which are applicable to the nonfedvral share of project costs. A second approach to State agencies for local affairs created in 1967 consisted of r.he establishment of units having relatively extensive technical, advisory, and coordinating functions and soise "line" responsibilities, althauBh lacking broad financial powers. The Missouri Legielsture approved the creation of a new Departinent af Comawaity Affaire, effective October 15, 1967, and assigned to it all functione of the Office o[ State and ReBional Planni"5 and Casamun-ty Development. Althou5h it does not provide direct financial aid, this agency has a substantive role in furnishing research, advisory, coordinating, and technical assistance to localities in regard ta flecal niatters, alanageaient te.chniques, engineering and public works, personnel training, boundary and fringe problems, interlucal cooperation, and state, regional, and local planning.
PAGE 5
It~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..y..k...aa eo:Iedton oth oeno n heLga M t;e Th1= Meatin lohsrsosblTy f .r urbn ren.w an rMrdvlo~etatvtM. A .Ten =onclo
PAGE 6
....... y .nSpebr2.16,b eeuieodrCvro
PAGE 7
0eiltv eso 0prvdabilcetn 00 00000 ura000l0 A 0' 00 C0000 000000 000dis 00he G00r0 o 00000 rn00 g0000000r00000000 00000v, 0000000000000000000 00.00
PAGE 8
Ltt M.H.ilb aalbet uncplte o netk e .niolto p ...... .... t ..sis .hs lnacurnl n cn ru i. .k... pa .e~ltr p..daspaueprvdn ....x .rd.s ...... .net n ......s ...e .ntlain .ae ....tio .r... ndcnrlsytmwthtecei b....... ........ ... ..n ..r..n ...ual .ni h ul et
PAGE 9
.... .te ..cioa .,Mihgns 97lgiltv session~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~. .u.hr.. th.....% ~ie oavierginl
PAGE 10
M E S A toons n16,frtefrtLsEi e esy there~ osacnetdefr ofrihSaefnafrM .,
PAGE 11
...... ....c o tt eilaieiaton h ea
PAGE 12
-dr bace :
PAGE 13
-The greatest disappointsient in the area of constitutional reform was the rejection of the proposed 1;ew York constitution by a three-to-ane alargin in a :rovember 7, 1957, referendum. The document nontained a number of significant articles pertaining to local governaient. These included provisions: permiteing counties--or counties and tiew York City-to Earni regional agencies ta conduct specific governmiental services; requiring local legislative districts to be as equitable in population as practicable; and prohibiting siembers of local legislative bodies froni assuming other local gavernmental offices. Furtherinore, responsibility for welEare services would have been transferred to the State government over a tenyear period. In Retrospect The gleasures undertaken during 1967 through State legisla tion, egnetitutional revision, and referendum propaeals are indicative of the evolution at certain trends in the direction of a "revitalization" in the role of state government in the Avierican federal system. These may be briefly sunlinarined as follows: -soon states are making notable eEEarts raward "omhack.ling" local governnients and providing nicans for dealing with areaside problems. -Some States are establishing agencies for local affair.., a few of which having substantial financial, program, and coordination responsibilities, as well as technical assistancel advisory, and research functions. -Soule States are beginning to appropriate sizeable auments or funds ta assist local governments and are continuing to "buy into" Federal-lacal Stantin-aid programs, with eluch of this activity being a response to Federal incentives. -son* States are becoming increasingly cancerned with the replacement of antiquated constitutional articles by provisions equipping them with the necessary tools to ineet twentieth century needs.
PAGE 14
In a number =[ States, however, sosie of the abave trends are hardly discernible, In a few states, none of them is visible. Quite clearly, it has taken a considerable period of time for mi>st states to recognize their role, responsibility, and stake in facing existing or potential problems attending the urbanitation of the Nation and in providing adequate resiedial measures. The chaos which accurred in same of the central cities duririg 1967 attested to the failure on the part of all three levels of governpient to take effective action. The possibility of its reoccurrence in the imaaediate future suggests that the urban challenge est be dealt with in terms af concentrated action emphasizing new approaches to old problemis on the part of Federal, State, and local governalents, in caoperation with private enter-prise. While piany of the steps taken by State governmients in 1967 with respect to urban problems were tapportant, meh remains to be ac.complished if the States are to serve as active and innovative uleinbers of the intergovernmental partnership. Now, more than ever before, the federal system elust be truly ''creative" and "cooperative."
PAGE 15
._ _AP .END_ A
PAGE 16
--New Yorf Alaska i Rhode Island California Program Responsibility Urban renewal & redevelopment -Poverty Housing -se e a gy consolidated | A.S. 44.19 180 P.L. 1961 Chapter pt at chap. Laws Chapter 335 et. seg. 23, 1965 Stats.
PAGE 17
II V H V *:>j~H 1 1{ ;i I H Ii ~!l; ii i-lu 2 t 2
PAGE 18
ru ;u 5] II 1~ I 1
PAGE 19
TT I l 4I
PAGE 20
.....n ... ...
PAGE 21
-b-nar 11.fraio nIxstn tt Ofcs l..... .. ... fnnm 1ES
PAGE 22
3 33~3~~~3 3 33 N3 33 3TT A3 L3LTISSFLMN~lCTl AALCNRBTO U3D 3EL3T3 3EEALGAT R 3ilM DE E33 396 3 3t 33a wtr n T33t33t Arprt '3t3 3 3l eer Ura Ms 3tt ok C 3s3gg g Cntu~~o___ .aiiis Fasotta Al33333 .33 33 3333333k 33 332
PAGE 23
In ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... .....r, h dior ot:oso a ssnbe
PAGE 24
at a a toLcliis. a ate Water and Sewer Urberi Mass Facilities fransportation X X
PAGE 25
Report ~ ~ 11 A-1. J..dr 196, -34 p.1-itd
PAGE 26
Gr %-nAdPormsEatdb h n_,sio fte_8thCmes A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1upe1. o eotA1. ac 95 2 .fs
PAGE 27
Metropolitan America: Challeppe to Federalism. Report M-31. August 1966. 176 p., offse t. Metropolitan Councils of Governaient.a, Report 3-32. August 1966. 69 p., offset. 1968 State Legis lati ve Program of the Advisonr ['MasiononI.ntergovertunental Relations. Report M-35. September 1967. 629 p., offset, Annual itevart _|finel, Report M-36. January 1968. 43 p., offset, State and Imeal Taxes. Sirrnificant Features a 1968. Regnet M-37. January 1968. 212 p., offset. State layielative and Constitutional Action on LTrban Problems in 1961. Report MJB, April 1968. 29 p., inigleographed,
PAGE 28
this review draws on infattention from a number of sources including: conommications with legLslative service agencies; State, amnicipal, and county league jnurnals; publications of the Council of State Gevernments; the National Civic Reviewi and the MetropoUtan Area Digest. While strenuous efforts have been made to perfect our system of reporting State legisiative and amending activities, the Advisory Coonission eencedes that this survey is by no means ali-inclusive.
PAGE 29
.... r .ia .nes .. ii iodrwic curdi nn of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~.... .. ainscte uig16 ceryrvae h eest
PAGE 30
"[nhcl.:." L2ca Goernen. -.1_Many~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ....... ... eilaue asd il n167epni ...tin .......ne oalgvrnetl oes odalw ban prob:ed,: h=pr Mcda :!pr "ne= %e7giltieacin pertain.1-n. -bhnerlaxemtocnoiaioadohrit loa ooeaie e~es esre eige tM teghe oa
PAGE 31
...iito' ..isatr p. s ...... .. tyerwhc .salse .e pr. du. ... .. rain fnuiiplero
PAGE 32
coniesto dpose of soli waste materials zeprt=, o tro
PAGE 33
.emi ..eena ..... 97. giltvessio proe h establishaient ~ ~ ... .f .on ..odnaesric ra ..h nin ...gltr p.. e ... lwihprlitdcte ofa11eoeli d ENRpONn o"~sios
|
