in considering the needs in the future, we could consider the increase in school enrollment which is occurring each year, and take that into consideration in determining the needs of a State. Along with that, we could consider the replacement needs which all States face as they attempt to rehabilitate obsolete plants; and so the table on the last page of this testimony is an effort to show how we could combine into one measure the expansion and replacement requirements which each State faces. Most of the States, by the way, showed an expansion in school-age population from 1946 to 1947. It is not confined to just a few States, as it was during the war. It is pretty general throughout the Nation, because the birth impact is beginning to be felt, so that if we subtract the 1946 figure from the 1947 figure (the census child figure), you obtain a measure of the increase in load which each State faces, and assuming that it costs approximately $1,000 to house that increased load, you can arrive at a relatively simple and defensible measure of what each State faces to house its increased school population, and then at the same time we can recognize that about a 40-year cycle is reasonable for replacements, and allow a certain amount for replacement based upon the total school population in each State, and by combining those two measures it seems to me you arrive at a more accurate and more equitable determination of actual school-plant needs that each State faces. I will be glad to answer any questions that may occur to you, Senator, if you have time to consider the actual table there. Senator HUMPHREY. I am just trying to get it in my own mind as to how this fundamentally differs or what partial difference there is between this and S. 287. Dr. LINDMAN. The difference is very slight. In S. 287 the measure of need is enrollment of the school-age population as of a single year. This would substitute, in place of that single measure, two measures. It would have first school-age population which would be the measure of the replacement requirements, and then it would have the annual gain in school-age population which would be the measure of the expansion requirements. Senator HUMPHREY. I understand. Dr. LINDMAN. And then those two would be combined to give you your total school-building-requirement measurement for each State. Senator HUMPHREY. In other words, you take the actual known figure and you would supplement that by some calculated decision. as to what the actual known figure plus the theoretically known figure would be. Is that right? Dr. LINDMAN. I think it would be more satisfactory to use two preceding years for which the Census Bureau has provided estimates. Senator HUMPHREY. All I am trying to get at is this: Let us take your State of Washington; 450,000 is what you had this last year. Dr. LINDMAN. In 1947, that is right, and 434,000 is what we had in 1946. The gain between those 2 years, then, would constitute the expansion requirement which that State faced. Senator HUMPHREY. So you would use the figure 26,000 plus the 450,000 is that it?-to arrive at the amount of Federal funds for the formula for Federal funds. Instead of having 450,000 as your school population, you would have some figure in between 450,000 and 476,000? Dr. LINDMAN. Note the fourth column there entitled "Expansion Allowance." To arrive at that, I simply took 16,000, which was the gain in the number of children, and multiplied it by 80 percent, because approximately 80 percent of them will be in the public schools, and I then said that will cost $1,000 per child to house them, so the expansion requirements for that particular year would be $12,800,000. That is what the State faces in expansion requirements. Senator HUMPHREY. All right. Dr. LINDMAN. Now, to obtain the replacement requirements, I simply multiplied the figure in 1946 by $25, which is one-fortieth of the annual. You see, to arrive at a replacement figure, you have to assume that you are going to rehouse one-fortieth of your school population each year. Senator HUMPHREY. That is on the basis of the deterioration of the school plant, figuring on a 40-year life. Dr. LINDMAN. That is right, before you have heavy alteration and repair bills or a replacement problem, so you would have one-fortieth of that amount allowed for replacement multiplied by the total number of children, and then $1,000 times the actual increase in children, to get the combined measure of school-building requirements. I think that is quite essential, because the people understand this as a measure designed to take care of the increase in school population which is going to occur in the next decade, and it seems to me very appropriate that we have a fairly complete measure of need which recognizes the two aspects of the school problem. That is the thing which seemed essential. I want to close by saying again we support completely the testimony that was given this morning and the basic ideas of the equalization varying from 40 to 60 percent and those various provisions, but feel that the measure would be improved somewhat if a more complete measure of school-building requirements were used instead of the simple figure of the census of children. Senator HUMPHREY. Very fine. We are very grateful to you. You have come a long way to testify, and it is material that will be very helpful. Dr. LINDMAN. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. We have a very serious school problem in our State, as we do in all parts of the country. Senator HUMPHREY. Senator Magnuson did testify, as you know, before the committee, and he made a very pointed and powerful address in behalf of the State of Washington, and its tremendous school problem. Dr. LINDMAN. I did not intend this to be particularly directed to the State of Washington, because I think other States will face growth problems just as we have faced them. We have ours a little earlier, perhaps, but the Nation as a whole will face them. Senator HUMPHREY. Because of the nature of the war industries there, the State of Washington was under tremendous impact of war activity. Dr. LINDMAN. That is right. Senator HUMPHREY. And the same is true of the State of California. Dr. LINDMAN. That is right. Senator HUMPHREY. And I imagine the State of Oregon also witnessed some of that. The Southern States-Texas, for examplemany of the areas in the South where they have military establishments-all of them are affected by that. Some of this would seem to be temporary, but the strange thing about it is that it becomes somewhat permanent. Dr. LINDMAN. That is what we have found. We expected a dropping off, and it did not occur following the war. Senator HUMPHREY. Well, I must go down now to answer the quorum call. We will reconvene at 10 o'clock tomorrow. (Whereupon, at 12:10 p. m., the hearing was adjourned, to reconvene on Thursday, June 9, 1949, at 10 a. m.) FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1949 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:10 a. m. in the committee room, Capitol Building, Senator Lister Hill presiding. Present: Senator Hill (presiding). Senator HILL. The committee will come to order. Mr. Larson is on our schedule first. Mr. Larson, we would be delighted to have you proceed. You are the Administrator now of the Federal Works Agency. STATEMENT OF JESS LARSON, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL WORKS AGENCY Mr. LARSON. Yes, sir. I assumed the duties as Federal Works Administrator on Monday after at 2 o'clock, so I am very new at the job. If I may refer to my prepared statement, Senator, I think I can express rather briefly and concisely by such reference my thoughts on this matter. Senator HILL. All right, fine. We will be glad to have you proceed in your own way. Mr. LARSON. Since assuming the duties of Federal Works Administrator at 2 o'clock on last Monday afternoon, I have tried to orient myself to the responsibilities of that office. Although I have not had time to study the details of the various bills now being considered by this committee, I have familiarized myself with the administration's policy as expressed in the letter dated May 26, 1949, from the Director of the Bureau of the Budget to the chairman of the full committee. I have reviewed, also, the formal presentation of the Federal Works Agency on these bills, as prepared by the Agency staff prior to the time I became Administrator. Through loan and grant programs extending over the last 16 years, the Federal Works Agency and its predecessors have enabled thousands of school districts to construct new school buildings and facilities. The Agency is fully equipped and ready to continue that service in whatever school construction program the Congress should determine to be needed. I am completely in accord with the administration's policy that Federal assistance for the maintenance and operation of elementary and secondary schools is desirable. On the other hand, at this time there is not sufficient information available to evaluate properly the need for a general program of Federal aid for the construction of schools. Due to my associations, as War Assets Administrator, with the various State departments of education and with individual school districts, I can appreciate some of the emergency demands for additional school plant. And, at the request of the House Public Works Committee, Eightieth Congress, the Federal Works Agency made a limited survey of the needs for additional school facilities resulting from Federal activities in various school districts. Mr. Pere Seward, the Commissioner of Community Facilities of the Federal Works Agency, who is here with me today, will explain that survey to you. Within the Federal Government, however, determinations as to the need for additional local school facilities should be made not by the construction people in the Federal Works Agency but by the experienced educational people in the Federal Security Agency. I therefore urge that in any legislation for school construction there be spelled out a plenary authority in the Federal Security Administrator to ascertain and determine those localities where additional school facilities are needed due to the impact of Federal Government action, and the size and type of the facilities so required. As each school district may well pose a problem peculiar to itself, I would suggest to the committee, if I may, that you do not tie the Federal Security Administrator's hands too tightly by overrigid standards. When the Federal officials experienced in educational affairs have made the requisite determinations of need, the Federal Works Agency, with its skilled finance and construction people, will be prepared to take over the making of the loans and grants to the school districts, the review of plans, the supervision of the work, and the other functions incident to the construction of the new school facilities. The cooperative relationship which I propose was established by this committee in the Seventy-ninth Congress and proved highly successful in the development of the veterans' education-facilities program. It will be explained in more detail by Mr. Maxwell H. Elliott, the acting general counsel of the Federal Works Agency, who is here and is on my left, Senator Hill. Before he makes his remarks, may I add to the remarks which have been contained in the statement I have just made that my experience as War Assets Administrator in the disposal of surplus property to educational institutions has brought me in close communication and working relationship with the Office of Education in the security department of our Government. We, as a result of our experience, although it was not required by law, as a result of long experience in that disposal program, worked out a very happy and a very sound and economical working relationship whereby the educational people determined the need in all cases, and we carried through with the program, thereby eliminating the duplication of staffs. What I have attempted to say here is a result of that experience and other experience within the Government, which I think can well be brought about. I would secondly like to emphasize the position of the Federal Works Agency in this and similar matters which is that of a service agency. We e are a construction service agency. We do not wish to |