Mayor Hart received his B.S. from Delaware State College and his M.A. from Seton Hall University. He became the first black councilman in the city of East Orange; was an executive assistant to former Governor Hughes of New Jersey; was director of the New Jersey State Youth Division and then was principal of Grover Cleveland Junior High School in Elizabeth, N.J., before becoming mayor of East Orange

in 1970.

He is the first elected black mayor of a city the size of East Orange in the State and is vice president of the National Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials.

Mayor, we appreciate your being here.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM HART, MAYOR, EAST ORANGE, N.J., ACCOMPANIED BY DAVID BURNS, HEALTH OFFICER

Mr. HART. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I am here in support of S. 3080.

The city of Orange is a community of 3.9 square miles bordered on the east and south by Newark; Orange on the west; and Bloomfield and Glen Ridge on the north.

During the past 20 years, East Orange has changed from a commercial and residential suburb of mostly middle- and high-income whites to a community which is 53 percent black and 45.9 percent white, based upon the 1970 Federal census.

After World War II, the city served as a source of housing for lowand middle-income black families moved in, increasing numbers of middle-income whites moved out. The migration of black families is attributed to the drive for better housing, better schools, and better municipal government services.

Seventy-three of the housing units in East Orange are renter-occupied. This provides a variety of housing for two- to six-family dwelling units, garden apartments, walk-up apartment buildings, and modern high-rise apartment houses; 57 percent of the renter-occupied houses are white, while 42 percent of it is black; 80,000 people living there, which is really densely populated, probably something like Hong Kong or Singapore.

In 9 years, the AFDC welfare rolls increased from 60 in 1960 to 1,600 in 1970, and even today, the rate of increase per month has not stabilized.

Buildings once designed for one or two families have been converted into two-, three-, and even four-family dwellings, many of which are illegal.

Also, buildings whose tenants were unmarried adults without children have undergone a drastic change.

I am not going to go into the entire report because you have a copy; but the buildings that once housed very few people-in fact, there is one on Park Avenue in our community that housed 26 families at one time with no children, and it now has been sold and is being occupied by mostly welfare recipients who have larger families. The same building that had no children now has over 125 children living in these quarters not designed for such large numbers.

The city of East Orange Building Department estimates a total of 19,274 dwelling units in the city. 9,749 of these units were constructed

between 1921 and 1945, and were scattered through the city. Almost all housing constructed prior to 1940 has lead-based paint used on the interior surfaces.

The Federal census indicates there are 6,039 children under 6 years of age living in East Orange. The city's estimate as to the number of children receiving aid to dependent children is approximately 2,000 under 6 years of age.

Of course, we have heard testimony here about lead poisoning and about percentages, which I will not repeat.

Until 1971, the East Orange Health Department was unable to develop even the beginning of an effective screening and control program for lead poisoning. The department could only respond to reports of actual diagnosed cases of lead poisoning as reported by the New Jersey State Department of Health.

We had no effective means of conducting regular screening of children suffering or potentially suffering from the disease; nor did we have an effective ordinance to require that a poisoned child's dwelling unit be deleaded. The main reason was lack of funds.

However, in 1971, the health department was able to use State health aid funds to begin the development of a screening and control program. The amount of moneys was small, $6,000. The moneys were used for the laboratory examination of blood lead samples, laboratory examination of paint and plaster samples, and the payment of X-rays and other laboratory tests for children with elevated blood lead levels where the family was medically indigent; that is, no medicaid or insurance.

You must understand that with these financial limitations it was necessary to direct the program's effort toward identifying the child with elevated blood vessels. We could not conduct a mass screening program nor could there be a comprehensive code enforcement and inspection program; the health department simply did not have the staff to engage in this large a program and effectively provide the necessary followup services.

Given the limitations in 1971, the board of health passed an ordinance to do three things: (a) prohibit the use of lead based paint on interior surfaces; (b) authorize the health officer to declare a dwelling unit a hazard when paint and plaster samples in excess of 1 percent by weight were found in the environment; (c) empower the health officer to order a dwelling unit rendered such that leaded material is inaccesible to a child when a child has been diagnosed as having lead poisoning or leaded content exceeds 1 percent by weight.

In addition, the board of health authorized the health officer to organize a screening program and to refer all children found with blood lead levels in excess of 40 percent micrograms for medical evaluation and followup. This figure was recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

The screening program was organized in the following manner: (a) all East Orange physicians were encouraged to screen children for the disease. The health department would provide for the laboratory examination of the blood and report results to the physician; (b) children could be referred to the screening clinic by local physicians

and by Child Health Conference physicians; (c) referral by health department staff; that is, public health nurse, sanitarians, when in the opinion of the taff member there was cause to believe the child may be living in a hazardous environment, showing signs of pica, or whose family situation is such that the child is at "high risk"; (d) and, naturally, we would accept all children whose mothers called to inquire about having the child tested.

As you can see, this is a selective screening program. We are the first to admit this is not the optimum, but it was a start and the most we could do given the staff and available funds.

These are the results of our screening efforts during 1971: (a) there were 149 blood lead samples taken; (b) there were 39 of these 149 samples in excess of 40 microgram percent; (c) results of investigation by sanitarians from January 1971 to date are: (1) 32 investigations of possible leaded environment; (2) 39 patients referred to sanitarians; (3) 22 paint samples taken; (4) 16 positive paint samples and (5) 20 cases abated.

(d) Distribution of cases by census tracts: 1. 99-118; 101-1; 103-5; 104-2; 105-2; 106-3; 108-9; 109-2; 111-1; 112-3; 116-2; and 118-2. (e) Explanation of results. 1. There were 32 investigations as a result of 39 referrals. Some investigations are a result of two children in the same household with high lead levels.

2. Twenty-two samples were taken of which 16 were in excess of 1 percent lead. Paint samples are not taken in cases where sanitarians deem it unnecessary; that is, condition of environment is good-no chipping or flaking; or coupled with No. 1, children spend majority of time at different location in another community or have moved into East Orange from that community.

(f) Abatement.

1. All cases in which laboratory analysis proved environment painted with lead-based paint (16) were abated.

In the 16 dwelling units having paint and/or plastic samples exceeding 1 percent by weight or more, the department was successful in rendering the environment free of leaded material and, thereby, preventing further intoxication of the child.

In all 16 cases, this was done without court action and the abatement of the hazardous condition was done with the cooperation of the property owner.

In addition, four cases were abated by education of parents about lead poisoning and persuading them to keep their children in a leadfree environment.

All these cases were done without court action, with the cooperation of the landowners. In such cases, the child's home would be in good condition but the child would be spending the majority of his time in another setting which may or may not be a leaded environment.

In all cases a public health nurse also made a home visit just as the sanitarian had made an inspection.

Three children were diagnosed and treated for the disease. Since the health department uses the conservative lower level of 40-percent microgram, further X-ray and laboratory studies did not indicate disease; however, the family was counseled as to the hazard of lead poisoning and what should be done to prevent the disease.

Other children with high levels received the benefits of having leaded materials removed to prevent further intoxication.

It is my feeling that the hazard of lead poisoning and its control should be considered just as important as the control and prevention of other diseases such as tuberculosis, rubella, PKU-phenylketonuria— sickle cell anemia, and other diseases which prohibit a child from developing as a normal healthy human being.

Now, what would be the level of funding to provide a comprehensive program in the city of East Orange? If we set a goal of screening 3,000 children in 1 year, the city would need $72,900 from the Federal Government. If we assume 30 percent of the children have blood level of lead over 40 micrograms—this estimate is based upon the following need for personnel, equipment, and professional services-I won't go through the report item by item at the present time.

In the interest of time, and having heard the statements that have gone before, I would like to make the following recommendations: (a) That $50 million be appropriated for a program to control and prevent lead poisoning in children; (b) that industry be made to be more responsive to the problems they help create and that the manufacturers of paint be forced to limit the lead content of the paint to 0.06 percent by weight as required by the proposed legislation, or as will be deemed after the studies we heard about this morning, but it must be lower than it is at the present time; (c) that the legislation be changed to provide for in- and out-patient treatment of children with the disease when the family does not have insurance or medicaid. Local government cannot and should not assume the cost of this most important part of the program. What is the use of identifying a diseased child and not being able to have the child receive adequate treatment? (d) Also, local government should not assume the cost of abatement; that is, the de-leading of the environment. Granted it is the property owner's responsibility to remove the lead; however, funds must be made available for the situation where the child can be protected and the cost could then be recovered at a later time.

I disagree with some of the statements I heard here this morning. I think that in a community such as East Orange, and many other communities around this Nation, we are not in the limelight as Newark, which is very close to us, or the larger communities; but these communities in dealing with these problems at the present time have it; we have it also, and ours is going to increase as more of the poorer families are forced from these communities into the neighboring communities.

I heard the industry just a while ago say perhaps another study would reveal .01 would be sufficient. Certainly, if that is, .06 should not be arbitrary but should be sufficient.

I think that Dr. Chisolm's answer was a much fairer answer. In labeling things, things have been labeled for years, they have labeled cigarettes, and the industry has increased. Children cannot read labels.

The thing that has been discussed here today is that many of these children's parents cannot read labels, either, nor can many of the poor store owners in these areas, or if they do, they may not care.

My name is William S. Hart, Sr., which happens to be the name of the first cowboy in the movies, as many of you know. Even in the

old western movies, things were labeled, but no one paid much attention to them, because they could not read the signs that there were poisoned wells and things of that nature.

I have heard a great deal of discussion concerning chipping of paint from walls, but it is not only walls that people use paint for. These families paint their chairs and tables and lamps, baby cribs and high chairs, play pens, that are chewed upon by infants.

I am sure not many of these infants I am talking about chew upon the Capitol dome that I heard discussed here today; but they do chew upon the play pens and cribs.

I am from Appalachia. It was discussed earlier this morning. I know as a child there have been signs for years, but until the Federal Government stepped in and sealed the mines, the children were falling in the shafts.

We are asking the Federal Government to move in and make mandatory legislation to protect the children in the central cities. Signs, labels, warnings, are not enough. We have been listening to mothers talking about children who were victims of this environment.

I hope the priority will be that something must be done immediately in the industry to reduce the percentage in the paint so that we can do something about saving children's lives and stop other children from having such bad health records.

In our area, it is very strange. In recent years, a company that produced soup I think a couple of people died from this soup from that company-it was put out of business immediately.

Strangely, poor people need that type of soup. And so all of a sudden that company is out of business. I am quite sure that if this affected all of America as much as it does the central city, poor people, black, Spanish, poor white people, there would be a greater push toward it.

I really admire those of you who are pushing for such legislation, and I wish that it would pass.

If you have any questions concerning the small program that we have in our community, I have brought our health officer with me who could possibly talk more to you on the medical aspects of our small program.

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you, Mayor Hart. That is very eloquent testimony that you gave to us about what this means in human terms to the people of the community that you represent.

I think it is enormously valuable, and a tribute to you as an administrator and someone charged with this responsibility. Obviously, from your comments, you have a very keen awareness of the importance of this kind of program and this kind of legislation.

It is very, very compelling comment and testimony.

I want to come back to some questions I have for you, but perhaps Mr. Byrnes could tell us a little bit about your program.

Mr. BYRNES. AS Mayor Hart stated, this is our beginning. You have to crawl before you walk. We did identify the problem. We knew we had old housing; we knew we had young children in families who would have pica and who would be a high risk.

We did have a case reported in 1970 which was investigated. We did secure abatement.

76-737 0-72-8