mw^'^m^^^^ V •• ^ ^Section V > — MAJOR STATE SERVICES 12. Planning ^nd'Development .^ <\ 13. Agriculture and Conservation 14. Public Works, Highways, and Aviation _ 15. Health, Welfare, and Domestic Relations 16. Gorrections 17. Educational Services 18. State Regulatory Activities 19. Liabor and Indu;striar Relations - 20. State Enterprises • 21. V^ 22; Law Enforcement and Public Safety f r /i.' K <y- . \. .. A > ••-./, . %. --•r^- \..- »-'• ;^>« 12 Planning and Development STATE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT* HE YEAR 1933 might be assigned as the agency to plan for the physical develop- Tbeginning of the state planning move- ment of the state. This recommendation ment. ""Before this, however, there were was not carried through immediately and evicjences of planning on the state level, further planning activity was discontinued .\ City planning had been expanded into a as a result of the new constitution reor- cbnsideration of the metropolitan area and. ganizing the state government, to the county, so that it was a logical step Due to the strength of local planning in this regional planning to consider the and rural zoning in Wisconsin, the state state as a unit for planning. The conser­ Legislature in 1929 required the Highway vation movement had shown the need for Gommission to employ a director of region­ integrated development of the state's re­ al planning to cooperate and assist this sources. State planning agencies were later local planning activity. In 1931 the legis­ to draw on this conservation experience. lature created a Regional Planning Com­ mittee which exists today as the State Plan- EARLY HISTORY ning Board after additional powers were From the combination of the various granted in 1935. elements in the city planning and conser- A joint resolution of the Nevv Jersey vatioii movements, there emerged two ac- Legislature set up a commission oif assem- tive, full-fledged Qfficial state planning blyrhenand senators in 1929 "to study and agencies, and'ta couple of temporary plan- make recommendations to the next legisr ning committees before 1933, The earliest lature a plan or plans to carry out and ad- of these agencies was the New York State minister _.in^ermunicipal, intercourity or Commission; on Housing and Regional interstate projects."^ The commission made Planning. Created in 1923 by legislative ac- recommendations for the divisidn of the tion^ the Gommission was charged vvith the state into four administrative districts for prirri%i-y function of investigating the hous- financing such public works, but this prd- ing shjDrtage resulting froin World War L posal was defeated and further planning The Commission was also to "assist in the activity in this line was discontinued, preparation of legislation and regula.tion . The Illinois Legislature by joint resolu- in relation to housing, zoning and planning tion created a State Planning Commission throughout the state."^ In 1926 the Com- in 1931 upon the recommendation of the mis.siog<€ubmitted a brief report describing Chamber of Commerce which had pri­ the resources of the state and recommend- vately financed a report on the state's re­ mg the establishment of a permanent sources'. Although such a Commission was ^"New Ydrk General Lam, 1923, p. 235. appointed, it was ineiffective because no ap­ , *Prepared by the Association of State Planning propriations were made. : and Developmental Agencies. *New Jersey Joint Resolutions, 1929, No. 12. 269 r.^ * "•'-SW 270 THE BOOK OF STATES • i.% power\o appoiiit advisory boards. In 1935 1933 TO THE WAR PERIOD planningiroards were established in Alaska With the depression, a number of new by legislative action and in Puerto Rico by federal agencies were established, among executive order. The Territorial Legisla­ them the Public Works Administration ture of Hawaii created a planning agency which through its public works program in 1937. In the same year, 1937, Maine was to creat#newjobs, revitalize the build­ was the first to abolish her State Planning ing industry and aid in general recovery. Board and Connecticut allowed hers to . Under the PuBlic Works Administration lapse v\/ithout renewing the enabling- legis­ the National Planning Board was created lation. (For a short period the Connecticut to assist the Public Works Administrator' Legislative Council and later the present in the preparation of a comprehensive Development Commission carried on plan­ program of public works with supporting ning programs.) In succeeding years some studies of needs and justifications. In De­ planning boards were abolished, and others cember, 1933, Secretary Harold Ickes as were replaced by agencies with different Public Works Administrator, suggested to •names or combined with ^other agencies the state governors that they appoint state having additional functions.; In a few in­ Nplanning boards to work in. conjunction stances, as in Oregon and the Dakotas, with the National Planning Board. On where the planning board was abolished, the basis of surveys afid evaluations of the the goyernor again created, through ex­ resources of the state, the planning boards ecutive order, another planning agency. were to prepare a ten-year program of In Arizona, where the act to create a State public works. After the planning boards, Planning Board was lost in the legislative were establish^ the governors were re­ jam of'1935, the governor revived a ^1919 quested to sponsor legislation for the statu­ statute authorizing a State Resources tory creation of the planning boards, Board to investigate arid make recdni- By the end of 1933 nine governors had mendations for the state's water resources. appointed state planning boards, and one Minnesota, Kansas, Delaware, and Ohio legislature, that of Maryland, had ratified are the only states where no legislation has the governor's action by giving the board . been enacted to create a planning board, a permanent statutory position. Joint although they later had postwar planning resolutions in Colorado created a Sta'te or development agencies. Plannitig Coriimittee, and in Illinois revived The organization of the planning boards the old Planning Commission. This does , followed the general suggestions of the not include Wisconsin where the 1931 National. Planning Board. There was a Regional Planning Cofnmittee was con­ board or commission composed of heads of tinued. In 1934 twenty-eight additi|)nal state departments (such as highway, con­ governors iappointed planning boards and servation, health, and finarice) and/or the legislatures of Kentucky, Montana, prominent citizens of the state. In many New Jersey, and. Washington passed^ acts states the governor served on the board. creating planning agencies. The governor Membership averaged nine. The board of Michigan appointed as State Planning was appointed by^the governor usually for , Commission under the authority of a 1.931 . a term of four years. Often the terms of the act permitting him to set up special com­ members overlapped. Except for expenses missions to study such problems as the inyolved with their duties, the board mem­ governor directed. The Virginia Legisla­ bers were unpaid. ; Consultants and the ture passed a joint resolution commending staflf employees in the early years were ob­ the goveFnor's apjpdihtment of a planning tained through the National Resources board. In 1935 when many of the state Board and relief agencies respectively. • legislatures met for their biennial session With few exceptions the state planning the total number of statutory boards was boards were granted independent or semi- raised to thirty-three. The peak came in autonornous status as a protection against 1936 when every state except Delaware political interference. had established a planning board either The activities of these new planning by legislative action or by the governor's boards were mpre diversified, although PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 271 they have tended to follow a general pat­ tern throughout the years. The suggestions GROWTH OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL of the National Resources Board gave some FUNCTIONS direction to programs undertaken. After There has been a pronounced trend •ff. their creation the planning boards con­ within recent years for the planning boards centrated their efforts in producing in­ to take on functions generally referred to ventories and reports on the.natural re­ as developmental or promotional. Ac­ sources of the state. A few attempted to tivities in this field range from direct ad­ produce master plans as the city planners vertising for tourist trade and ericourage- had done, but the magnitude of the task ment of new industries to the planning of delayed completions of a state master plan. the state and its communities for industrial Public works programming was the first or commercial development which would order of business. These programs tended be most beneficial to the state. ' to be-lists of desirable projects which gave Development agencies had been created • little attention to priority or need. They as early as 1897 in Vermont and in 1917 in were made in anticipation that the Federal South Carolina. JDuring the 1920's the Govei'nment through its pjLiblic works growth continued. ""Wiixi liiC growth of the agencies would select construction projects state planning boards there was an increas­ from these programs. ing tendency to. combine the functions of. The early programs' of the' planning development and planning in one agency boards tendejl to cover a wide range of since there is an overlapping of fields! In fields of