EXTENSIONS of REMARKS 35167 Burden of Financing Elementary and Second by Mr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
October 11, 1972 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 35167 burden of financing elementary and second By Mr. VANIK (for himself, Mr. BING remaining portion of such year; to the ary education to improve the quality of HAM, Mr. BLANTON, Mr. BLATNIK, Mr. Committee on the Judiciary. their education programs; to the Committee BOLAND, Mr. BRADEMAS, Mr. BROOM By Mr. ADDABBO: on Education and Labor. FIELD, Mr. BURTON, Mr. CARNEY, Mr. H. Res. 1157. Resolution to abolish the By Mr. McKAY: CoNTE, Mr. CoTTER, Mr. FLooD, Mr. Committee on Internal Security and enlarge H.R. 17096. A blll to amend title 18 of the GUDE, Mr. HICKS of Washington, Mr. the jurisdiction of the Committee on the United States Code to define and limit the KEATING, Mr. KEMP, Mr. RIEGLE, Mr. Judiciary; to the Committee on Rules. exclusionary rule in Federal criminal pro RoYBAL, Mr. STEELE, and Mr. THOMP By Mr. BLACKBURN: ceedings, and to amend title 28, United States SON of New Jersey) : H. Res. 1158. Resolution to amend the Code, to extend the tort 11ab111tY of the H.R. 17099. A bill to prohibit most-favored Rules of the House of Representatives to United States; to the Committee on the nation treatment and commercial and guar provide for the efficient operation of con Judiciary. antee agreements with respect to any non gressional committees and to insure the By Mr. McKINNEY (for himself and market-economy country which denies to its rights of all committee members to have equal voice in committee business; to the Mr. PREYER of North Carolina): citizens the right to emigrate or which im poses more than nominal fees upon its citi Comi:nittee on Rules. H.R. 17097. A blll to permit the transpor By Mr. KEMP (for himself and Mr. tation in interstate commerce of goods man zens as a condition to emigration; to the Committee on Ways and Means. RHODES): ufactured by prisoners engaged in Federal or By Mr. CLEVELAND: H. Res. 1159. Resolution designating May 8 State work release programs and to permit H.J. Res. 1325. Joint resolution proposing as "Polish Constitution Day; to the Com the employment of such prisoners under an amendment to the Constitution of the mittee on the Judiciary. Federal contracts; to the Committee on the United States relating to the ratification of Judiciary. treaties; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. RUPPE: By Mr. MYERS: PRIVATE BilLS AND RESOLUTIONS H.R. 17098. A blll to require no-fault motor H.J. Res. 1326. Joint resolution proposing Under clause 1 of rule XXII, vehicle insurance as a condition precedent an amendment to the Constitution of the Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin introduced a bill to using the public streets, roads, and high United St!lltes requiring the Congress to (H.R. 17100) for the relief of Raymond W. ways in order to promote and regulate in adjourn by July 31 of every even numbered Suchy, second lieutenant, U.S. Army (re terstate commerce; to the Committee on In year, and to restrict the power of the Presi tired), which was referred to the Committee terstate and Foreign Commerce. dent to convene the Congress during the on the Judiciary. EXTENSIONS O ~F REMARKS A MILITARY PLANNING FIASCO AT Why should a high density housing proj planned effort; two, that to meet the FORT MAcARTHUR ect be constructed without planning ade housing needs of our Navy families, which quate for schools, streets, and sewers? I support and believe to be a must in This all became of major concern. order to adequately provide for our serv HON. GLENN M. ANDERSON Fortunately, and for which I want to ice personnel, a comprehensive planning OF CALIFORNIA thank the Department of Defense, they effort be undertaken; three, that the IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES did-following many requests, including communities and local governments be Wednesday, October 11, 1972 several on my par~agree to hold a pub consulted and their recommendations lic hearing. hopefully worked into the overall plans; Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr. While we appreciate the public hear and four, that the highest and best use of Speaker, major Federal Government de ing, reported by the press as follows- land resources be a required criteria in velopments such as construction proj A mostly hostile crowd of about 500 local planning for the location of military ects, land area use changes, and so forth, residents and government officials expressed housing and service buildings. The loca even though on Federal-owned lands, overwhelming disagreement with a Navy tion of service buildings by an agency of occur rarely without major concern and plan to build 700 military housing units our Government not having a water interest to the surrounding communities. while consolidating facil1ties with Fort oriented mission on waterfront property This is e®ecially true if the proposal MacArthur. critically needed for recreation does not occurs in a high population density area. All this opposition could have been meet this criteria. In such cases, it should be obvious to avoided if Defense officials would only It is high time that our military de the Federal agencies involved that they have discussed the proposal and the far partment officials recognize the differ must have a close-working relationship reaching ramifications with local officials ence between planning for land use in a with the surrounding communities and in advance, thus learning of the many high-population density area, as com local governments. adverse, poorly planned and objectional pared to that in a remote area. At Fort MacArthur, which is in my aspects of their proposal. Going ahead Below are a few newspaper clippings congressional district, the Department in a vacuum as to any local concern, has reporting on the September 28, 1972, of Defense proposed to construct 700 resulted in a most disturbed community public hearing in San Pedro, Calif., and Navy family housing units in an area and local officials. one of the many statements made at where the location of such housing will, The following is a typical local com the hearing: according to local government officials, ment and reaction: [From the South Bay Daily Breeze, Sept. 29, cause serious problems of traffic, sani Los Angeles City Council President John 1972] tation, and schooling in a community un Gibson criticized the Navy for its failure to SAN PEDRO Boos NAVAL HOUSING aware of the proposecl. acti'1ty and to notify city officials that such a plan was (By Leo Wolinsky) tally unprepared for it. The housing as being contemplated. "The most confusing planned would also force a consolidation thing," he said, "is we get one statement Hoots and howls were the order of the night Thursday as a packed audience turned of Army facilities and require the locat from Washington that the President wants government to get back to local control, and out to protest proposed Navy housing in San ing of Army service buildings on a water Pedro. front area that is critically needed for at the same time not knowing one thing about the project until we see surveyors. The A mostly hostile crowd of about 500 local recreation and for a small boat marina. residents and government officials expressed City Council resents that kind of action~· Thus, the proposal immediately became said Gibson. overwhelming disagreement with a Navy plan of major local concern, because of the to build 700 military housing units while con• impact on the surrounding communities In summary, I can only say that this solidating facilities with Ft. MacArthur. The major concerns of officials and resi as well as upon local government. Department of Defense construction dents alike reflected fears that the housing Residents and local government offi proposal that has been loaded on the would create serious problems of school cials, caught by surprise when the pro backs of the local communities and local government officials, is one of the poorest crowding, traffic, sewer inadequacy and mis posal was announced, reacted with strong use of valuable waterfront land. opposition for various reasons. Why planned efforts it has been my experience Although Navy Capt. John Biederman, should a waterfront area on San Pedro to encounter in my many years of public chairman of the hearing, told the audience he Bay-an area needed for recreation and service. would try to answer their questions as best for a small boat marina-be used for At this point, I recommend the follow as he could, residents appeared unconvinced military service buildings when the in ing: one, that all action be immediately "There is no way we could argue and con stallation has no water-oriented mission? suspended with respect to this poorly vince you of what we're trying to do," he 35168 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS October 11, 1972 said. "We're just trying to get information knowing one thing about the project untU His concerns were repeated in state that can be discussed by higher offi.cia.ls at a we see surveyors. ments by representatives of Sen. John Tun more leisurely time." His comments were met "The city council resents that kind of ney, Rep. Glenn Anderson, Assemblymen by boos and outbursts from the crowd. action," said Gibson. Robert Beverly and Vincent Thomas and Su The statement of one San Pedro resident pervisor James Hayes. was greeted with loud cheers as she appeared Anderson's statement suggested as one al to reflect the audience's host111ty. [From The News-Pilot, Sept. 29, 1972] ternative a 120-acre site at Los Alamitos Air "What we are concerned with are tra.ffi.c and HosTn.E CROWD PROTESTS NAVY'S HoUSING Station.