City Makers; 107; Mayor John Lindsay

It all right. I sense that maybe I was talking with their parents we need this. There's got to be some you know both sides of this black and white it it's got to get reasonable and responsible. Got it and they got to shape up. What are the chances. I know it's hard to tell. It reminds me of the mention of a commission. Yeah know why I went for Bob Laird is never going to

get to me. You just look at each other talking one on just my reality just another minute before we start. I think you may have Bob ladder's over there would you come over here and let me have a word with you. I mean what if my security blanket is the lightest blanket over and later you see me. Let me be honest here. I don't know. But I haven't seen Gordon.

Gordon Gordon is supposed to be here with the with was going on in the last 24 hours. I'm trying not to have to be long enough to be released Monday Tuesday. Maybe it will make some for sure. I'm not ready yet. I think I'm going to get it. Yes. What do you do with your show. And we'll see you again. I get it. I just wanted him to know that I met with him. All right. I'm ready to go. Thank you. All right. OK Mr. Mayor you've come from a privileged background.

Buckley School for Boys at St. Paul's school Yale Law School. Certainly in public office is not a vehicle for upward mobility. When someone from your background why would you expose yourself to all of the conflicts and problems and misunderstandings involved in public office and particularly the office of mayor in the city of New York. Well if I may be permitted the rather pompous statement part of that is because of that rather special privilege that I didn't have. I went to it's true I went to a distinguished Preparatory School for Boys in this country which models itself after the English system of the English public school. And the theme of that in other schools is that the first order of service is not for the betterment of mankind. And I don't take that you know I take that I have taken that rather seriously. That's a rather

stuffy statement but it's true. Second I think that in my class at school and also my class at college we had the highest percentage of boys in my classmates killed in World War 2 than in any other class before or after us. I think my my high school or preparatory school as we called it class I think almost a third were killed and that you know and I was away in combat for three years and one goes through certain certain periods that it makes certain resolutions so that I chose the public rather than the private road. But aren't there. And then finally finally one final personal note on that same point is that in my family it hasn't always been thus. My my grandfather was an immigrant to this country bankrupted and in England in the Isle of Wight like so many other immigrants and came to the United States and got a job as a

uniformed officer as a bank security clerk. And my my own father. Because the family couldn't afford it. Went to work at age 15 and it did not even graduate from high school because he had to go to work and did that until he died at age 74. So that there's you know there's a there's a pressure there's a little bit of the history of the knowledge of pressure and the background. But aren't there less demanding ways of serving the public than the impossible job. Mayor city of New York. Oh I'm sure. And I was a very happy and and enthusiastic member of Congress of the Congress for seven years and we enjoyed that life we enjoyed living in Washington in fact during that period of time. But that was not named as during the latter part of that experience while the scene was changing. And obviously the action and the and the need is in the urban field

and this is where this is where the front line trenches are this is where the key problems are. And for years people were saying why does everybody avoid it. Well they're still avoiding it. Mediocrity in the political world has always sought the municipal field but it just can't be left constantly. And in that area I do think that it requires the attention of of everybody around who who who decides that they want to do something for the for the world. I think that the first area of pressure and I don't care whether we're talking about domestic or international affairs. The first area of pressure still remains the big cities of this country. If you look though at the mayors and the larger cities of our country you see that it seems as if the office of mayor is almost an expendable office. Certainly Mayor Daley in

Chicago has been having his problems mayor already has probably many more problems than he realizes or wants to admit. Kevin on Detroit having his problems. One almost gets the feeling that to be a mayor of a large city is almost to say well this might be the end of political service. Well one should not go in this business unless one is prepared to exhaust all the political credit cards. And if anyone has the notion that he's going to use it as a stepping stone for flats for some other political office he's wrong and should not view it as that you'll never convince the press that the press will always say that wherever it is whether it's Kavanagh or myself or somebody else or white of Boston or good fellows that always say well he's an ambitious so-and-so that just wants to be president the United States or something of this kind. And no matter how much you say it it just cannot be the fact.

Why is that going to run it that way. And I really believe and I've always believed that to be the mayor of any great large city that one should expect to be expendable and particularly this particular time in history. And I don't think that's necessarily bad. It's a it's I think the reason for it is on the whole because the problems come close to being insoluble they're not insoluble. But they they come close. And it's the world's easiest thing because I've done it myself in the past and I've watched other politicians do it. It's the world's easiest thing for other politicians at other levels in state government and federal government and in between. And also for people in general to cop out by saying you know this and that's handle it this way because it will be the mayor's problem. You don't have to worry about it. And you know in the last analysis if there's a terrible shortage of money and resources to handle all of the crush of pressures in an

urban scene and other areas they can always say to themselves in the last analysis that people will storm city hall because that's the first area of complaint. And as a congressman I know this we know we all said it. We all knew it. We understood it. It was the other guy's problem. And if we shortchange the city or if we didn't do what was right we knew that in the last analysis that maybe the mayor would have to man the barricades. And and that's you know all the governors of the nation know this and all of the senators and all of the congressmen and indeed the the the established empire all the empires all around. Was been observing your relationship with the Governor Rockefeller in which you had the governor of Iowa City needs help and he said in turn. We can't give the city help unless the federal government gives the state where how are we going to go around this. Well you know everybody's right and the argument is what it comes down

to. The fact is that the that all the states and the cities are so hard pressed there for the big resolution of the problem. There has got to be a massive injection of a federal interest. It doesn't have to be the kind of interest. It doesn't have to be you know the old system the old new the old device of grants and aid and matching grants and programs that are asked to have to be administered by huge bureaucracies it can and should be something quite different and quite new rather experimental in some ways. But you see none of the mayors Jerry Cavanaugh Detroit and Kevin White in Boston and Alioto in San Francisco and so on and so for us my dear friend I have an Alan in Atlanta who is getting out of the business because he's rather discouraged over the commitment of the country. They're prepared to make not all of them can possibly find solutions to

this unless they nation as a whole which in the first instance must mean the federal government is prepared to mount something that is that is equivalent to the effort that was mounted to when World War II. In this case against the enemy the enemy or all the diseases of the city. All of the all of the pressures and tensions that exist there all have roots and sources. The only way this is going to be really liked is by a great huge Manhattan Project you know like mounding the atomic bomb. And nobody's done that yet. And very few people even talk seriously about in effect. Am I correct in understanding what you are saying that the federal government is has been in fact draining the cities and not turning back to the cities. The fiscal support which they apparently

need in order to survive. Well let's talk it too harsh. Let's talk about let's talk about money for a minute. The big pressure that in the last analysis the mayors have is for operating money capital money to build things is not too bad. We can build housing we can build schools we can build police stations we can even build very large water pollution plant facilities and tremendous Saward systems that even food housing and even subway systems and housing. We even can do that is something that all of this can be done to some extent. I mean we've committed New York City to one billion dollars of city tax money alone for mass transit for the next 10 years. That's a 100 million dollars a year 12 new subway systems. We could use three times that are big problem and the problem of Detroit and of Boston and of Lanna and Cincinnati and Cleveland you name it.

Our big problem is the shortage of operating revenue to pay wages and salaries of police firemen sanitation men maintenance men who pick up the trash in the parks and on the streets keep the beaches clean. Lifeguards inspectors in housing the operating money shortage is what's strangling the cities. And here one must point out that 50 years ago the percentage of federal money that was devoted to the urban scene for expense money type stuff was vastly higher than it is even now I'm talking about percentage. And what has got to happen is that we must have relief from this pressure. And one reason the pressure is so great is that all of the cities have increases that are automatic and mandated in the cost of doing business that varies between 15 and 20 percent a year. It's that high in the big cities lesser and the smaller ones. And yet our rate of

annual increase in return on revenue is not more than a maximum of 8 percent. And the reason for that is is that we're stuck with a fixed base on revenue. Our resources. That's the reason why I keep pushing our state and our governor and everybody else for what I call urban aid which is a tax sharing device under which the communities the counties the villages the towns and the cities would receive a Porsche. I have suggested a very minor percent of the one source of revenue that is flexible namely income tax. What are the chances of this as long as such what I think it will come. I think it'll come some day it's too innovative and too new at the present time for the powers that be. But one day it's got to come. And by the same token the federal government ought to do the same in respect of states and localities. The governor is pushing for this. There are those who argue that as long as such a high proportion of the federal budget

budget is devoted to defense and take lessons we have not yet found a solution out of the Vietnam War that we cannot realistically expect any major increase in support of the cities with the federal funding is probably true. Well how are we going to get for example New York City as an anticipated budget deficit of a half billion dollars for next year. That's almost automatic. Every year more or less you know it's not as serious as this. No it's serious it's very serious because it has to be discovered and the process of discovering it means that you also have to have you see as the cost of doing business go up as you pay higher wages and salaries. That means that you've got to find it. That means you either have to load more more taxes and you can't do that locally all the time because you just you just drive people out. But you're a budget director he said but you have to chop heads off which means you have to deal with fewer people.

If you if you grant wage and salary increases that add on to the general costs that much and you don't have the money to meet that cost it means you have to get along with with fewer people actually. They know there are ways to make up any of this. And one of the ways is to get greater productivity out of the system and that means the introduction of systems management. The Rand Corporation is one of the great additions we've got in our city here. They've come from California to assist us in making thoroughly modern machinery the bureaucracy with which we deal. But it's a great battle that has to go on all the time because every move you make to get more production. Obviously you have to deal with fixed interests including unions that you have with good reason sometimes a stake in the status quo. And you know and not more production. And so that's a newspaper industry has been through this for a long period. Americans the Rand Corporation really help you in New York City when you have as one of your almost peculiar urban problems very strong

unions police union fire and you keep chipping away at it all the time. I saw a newspaper report the other day saying that the Rand Corporation was in New York to make a study and then but you no it's not a study it's a permanent partnership under which you you feed in inch by inch into the system management techniques that permit you to do this now. You make you make little gains and in each of the areas where we have major unions we keep chipping away at it. Simply a way of what we're at in the area of productivity to get more flexibility so that we can do we want to know that it's not me oversimplifies it. A classic example of it has to do with the struggle right now and in police science to get Albany to get rid of the really outrageous three platoon system on which even though all me doesn't give us a red cent out of the

$550 billion a year that we spend on police not a red cent to help compensate for that they still reserved themselves the right to tell us how to use them. And Albany has restricted us in the use of police to three equal groups of police eight hour eight hour shifts. And what we'd like to do would be to use more police during those hours when when people need the most protection which is between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. in the morning and this is a matter of at Albany side for you you can you can walk home from your place of worship to your home at 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning and in the knowledge that you undoubtedly will be perfectly secure. Try it at 11 o'clock at night and you may have a problem. And yet we are overstaffed on police at 4 o'clock in the morning and understaffed at 11:00 o'clock at night and all reason and logic would lead to the conclusion that you ought to have the flexibility to use your manpower in such fashion that you get maximum use

response and that can be done. I hasten to add in such fashion that it can help the police too because the shift the shift system can be so arranged that their home lives are easier. As a result of this policing you agree with the policeman leads a very difficult time because he's constantly changing his shift. All of the time each week you know he goes one week he's on from you know from 4:00 in the afternoon until 12:00 midnight the next week he's on from 12:00 midnight to 8:00 in the morning and the next week he does he's on from 8:00 in the morning for half an hour. Just imagine what this does to your home life and your habits of sleep at home assuming that this is the logical thing to do. What about the PBA. Well an investigator on paper is now in this case they're opposed. And and it's our job to reason and to demonstrate by education and whatnot.

And as you know you can understand the opposition because they thoroughly irresponsible police commissioner. He could abuse the flexibility this day and age that isn't going to happen because the first place the public is not going to tolerate irresponsible commission is police and neither are the police. And fortunately we in New York have a perfectly superb police commissioner and Howard Leerie and most other cities that I know of have struggled valiantly to see to it that they have top grade people and commanding this great uniformed service. But the point still remains that there are very powerful organizations of municipal employees do reduce the flexibility of increased efficiency increase management in the city. Certainly we saw that yes. But you know you get you can also get gains we just got through concluding a very important and very large contract with one of our largest municipal organizations that having to do with in the area of social services for the poor.

And we've been very anxious to introduce some new management techniques and some new sciences here that would be of great benefit to the poor we believe and also save millions of dollars upwards of you know 30 to 50 million dollars a year on on cost of it. And we've finally got through after months and months of negotiations we've finally concluded it in such fashion that it was an agreement with the union. We do have the flexibility to phase out. In fact thousands of workers who have been on the full time city payroll who can be more usefully spent used in other ways and the cost savings would be very great. It really is a management productivity move in the last analysis and you know after it finally worked and we we've been able after careful negotiations and pressure and counterpressure to to chew into

it a little bit. The private sector has the same problem you can you know the we had we lost two newspapers and the City of New York and largely largely because they in the last analysis they gave up on the constant fight to put themselves on an automated basis and they were unable to do so. That was only one of the reasons. One can't say that was the whole reason but it was the cost factors were such that they finally decided that it was too much. Well a city can't go out of business and it just can't seem as if it's going out of it can't. Well you know I just can't. You just can't close down and say we're not going to have any firemen anymore. What do you consider the most important problems plaguing our cities today. And do you use your term seemingly almost impossible solution. Well it's the one that you probably wouldn't expect me to say can but we've just been talking about it it's a shortage of operating revenue. I think that's the biggest headache that all the cities are faced with. That's a rather instant answer. And it's

perhaps an oversimplification but it sums up an awful lot of it. It really does. Sure you can go on from there and talk about institutional life how you get institutional life whether it be public or private or somewhere in between to be responsive to government on one hand the leadership and the government on one and two people and neighborhoods on the other. How do you get them to be responsive and how do you establish perfect lines of communication that don't break down and in times of pressure can I come back was there. Those are all important and significant. So the the constant grind that people like me are under is the constant fight to find enough operating revenue to do business. Well if we look at this does this reflect the fact that the middle class and upper middle class people are leaving the city in greater numbers and we have found no way of

having them. Even those who work in the cities contribute in interact with this. You know there's a balance to that. It is true that since World War II particularly and especially almost paralleling and probably coincidental with the mass migration of poor in the cities many from the south. It is true that there has been an out migration of middle class to suburban communities and the great rise in population of suburbia reflects all of this that without any physical flow back into the cities. No no fiscal flowback except for those cities now that have established regional tax systems that that tax the commuter. We were one of the first to do that here in New York among others. There are now almost 40 cities that do it in the last just in the last two years of the last count I had was 36 and they do it because again as I mentioned earlier they've been not they've been denied any flexible source of

revenue. But the wet wet begins to stem the tide of out make out migration of middle class whites largely in the suburban areas. Is that is the increasing counterbalance of the pressure of the of the suburbs themselves trying to get demographic data. And this is almost impossible. And first place that sent the census is is so terrible they're not accurate. But in between there isn't any honest count but as near as we can tell has been a little slow down in the out migration and there's some movement back into central city areas. There is here in New York of young people particularly although it is a burden for them the cost is very great. But what does some of this and what we'll do more of it in the future is as it becomes increasingly apparent that the suburbs are now burdened with the same terrible problems that the central cities have. They are they're having a terrible time. They're becoming

overburdened on taxes at least they think they are. They have problems of the poor. Don't forget that. And that terrible summer of 1967 when 25 cities burned down. Fortunately New York was not one of the only riots we had in this community occurred in the suburbs. One out in Suffolk County and one in Westchester County. And people are increasingly discovering that there is no escape from the urban pressure. And when you get to suburbia now people increasingly are finding that they are having the same horrible headaches. They've got pollution they've got too many highways the automobiles of frightful cluttering up everything. They have problems of the poor. They're having agitation in their school systems. And on top of that if they happen to commute into a central city area as they do in Detroit and as they do in San Francisco and as they do in Boston as they do in New York and in other areas where there are suburban populations

beginning to find that not only do they have all the same problems that you've got in the middle of a city but they're leading double lives and they're not they're not they're thoroughly enjoying or sinking in to the really the guts of the city life. And and it is a fact I think that civilization throughout history has risen or fallen according to the strength of the central city area. And the reason one has got to operate under the assumption that these great cities are not only governable but can be civilized is that there is no alternative. And if one takes the assumption that they have to be dismembered or that they are not in any shape to continue as viable forces and in America then in effect you're saying that that you're spelling What is it is got to be the deterioration of civilization as a whole. Is there another factor that is being offered as a basis for inadequate revenue to operate our cities.

The very high proportion of tax exempt real estate in the cities. Do you consider that an important factor in the art. It's a factor everywhere. My dear friend Teddy cholic them the mayor of Jerusalem and Israel. He tells me that one of the biggest problems that he has is the is the incredible amount of property is tax exempt there. And it's it's a big struggle. We have somewhere near to a third in our town. There are ways that you can make adjustments here and should very carefully. Obviously you don't start taxing religious institutions and eleemosynary institutions that are of great importance importance to the to the involvement of the private sector and and religiously oriented organizations and public work. But what you can do is make various adjustments and we're beginning to do that with religious organizations in our city that by agreement understand that if they operate an office building for profit that is an

area where you ought to talk about proper contribution of taxes some of our foundations are now voluntarily making contributions of in lieu of taxation voluntarily. Quite a few of them that are doing that. Then the other one of the great areas of tax exemption is in governmental property in municipal area. If there are federal and state buildings of some of and they're all tax exempt that can quite properly be adjusted to inserting New York has its share of course I mean of course we have huge post offices and heaven knows what else. And this is an area where we're entitled to some support. I think we ought to get and most everybody else agrees we should get it. But we never seem to be able get anything done about it. It's some contribution from the federal government for the massive support that we give to the United Nations. That is a terribly important institution in our city and we are we're about to make some massive investments in expanding areas and whatnot for their use and

benefit as we want them here. We're proud of them and they're a great part of our city. Nevertheless the cost effect is on police for example alone a very large New York City barriers all of that cause when we wear it all we have a huge international body. Here we have I think 96 consul general in New York City all of which is good and right and proper and in fact I have two separate institutions and departments. Each of them do nothing but worry about the health education welfare and happiness of the United Nations family and of the council's generals and their families and whatnot. This is expensive. We do this is a world city. And as a as the last remaining city state as it were a remaining city state but without the revenue to operate as a city state. Now how do we get around that.

And again that's the same the same question we've just been talking about and obviously there has to be adjustments I think. Tax sharing is one of the key I think is one of the most important ones. It's it's strengthening some congressional programs that have proved even though experimental to be workable and good and it most certainly means a an innovation in the area of new experiments on urban life. You know you've got to what we are doing in our cities is creating devices under which large neighborhoods and communities can so organize themselves that with reasonable governmental supervision they may receive federal money city money sometimes state money if it's available and private money

and do it all in such fashion that it can. The strategy for its total use can be such that you not only not only if you wish to build a can build housing but also provide you know sanitation services maintenance for parks and whatnot. You know I mean you mentioned a moment ago the whereas a shortage of money and I and I said and I said capital money is not too difficult. Let me give you a good example of that. We're building at the moment something like 10 intermediate sized swimming pools in New York City and construction now intermediate size for this city is very big. There are huge pools but they're not that great monster ones that you've seen. You know that are twice the size of the Olympic pool with massive facilities for dressing and changing is somewhat smaller than that but still with great facilities and we're building a lot of smaller pools in that and we build vest pocket parks the problem is in maintaining them after you've built

it you must have a lifeguard or more because you don't want a 6 year old child to be found drowned at the bottom of the pool or the end of the day and you've got to have maintenance people and watch it. And this is the cost. This is the murderous thing that is so difficult. And this is one reason why we are increasingly taking our budgets that have been separate capital budget here expense budget there and are now gradually combining them into combined budgets so that we always know every time we plan a new school or swimming pool or a museum or library so that case may be. We know exactly what the shadow areas in the shadow area is that is that expense cost to carry it where we we're now you know we're we're in a crash program on certain hospitals museums and libraries. But the killer of this is who's going to be in that library to staff it.

And when you have a shortage of money where it really gets you is in that area not so much in the bricks and mortar. Now the problem of shortage of money is certainly common to all of our cities and you pointed out and the related problems of inadequate services housing health and welfare sanitation services means salaries for your wages. But as you pointed out these are common to all of our large cities. Are there some. Well I can think offhand of one problem it seems me to be peculiar to New York or certainly exaggerated in the ark. And that's the problem of the competition among the various ethnic groups that comprise in New York. I watched in the last year or two you become almost the scapegoat center of negroes and competing with other ethnic groups than the other ethnic groups and needing to keep the negroes from

being out. Do you find this a particularly exacerbating problem whereas the mayor of New York said it's a problem and allowed to be exacerbating but it's one that every city in the country has to go through and will go through. But that didn't seem particularly disturbing or focused in New York. New York City Well it is some of the most cosmopolitan and liberal it is in New York is the lead. And New York is always out in front and as these We've had a lot of pressure on our school system and a lot of difficulties generalizations you are certainly very well familiar with it because you know something about being an educator yourself and having been interested in a reorganization of the school system. Well this is happening not only in the other central cities but it's also happening in the suburbs of this country as you as I think you're well familiar. But two things that need need to. One has to take note of it. One is that most of the things that

are happening in New York in this respect are because there is innovation and there is change and we are the vanguard when it comes to trying to figure out the ultimate long run solutions to new urban pressures that are there. Second one should understand too that that even though we are first in everything in New York in my judgment I sound like a chamber of commerce now but once in a while to use a great New York word I'm entitled to we. We are not that great in a liberal city that everyone in the whole country thinks we are the whole country thinks that New York is just a massive kind of radicalism is the way they say it. Certainly liberalism liberal they see it as the great liberal town you know votes automatically democratic and way out democratic and and all the old all the old molds that people have in their minds in which they associate

liberalism with certain results. They picked on New York. Fact of the matter is that New York was never a melting pot. It's always been called that. It is not. It's a myth. New York is a community of many many communities and neighborhoods and each of them has its own roots and its own habits and its own ideas sometimes its own biases. And when you when you find in New York that this they say this is an Italian neighborhood and this is an Irish neighborhood and this is a Jewish community here and so forth and so on. There's some value in this if you find a neighborhood where the people say this is our neighborhood and we have our own shops and markets we sell special kinds of food. We have street festivals and fairs that are ours they're Italian they're Irish. It's it's a Jewish festival. You name it.

And there's great traditions and history that go with this sometimes with a religious background to it that is all good it's good and it provides stability. But what happens when these groups compete as they seem to be and the education issue. Well the arguable they started competing they start to I mean sometimes the competition begins when new groups try to break again. And this has been the history of this has been the whole history of migration in the United States. New York City is the first point of migration and Irishman came in great numbers to our city and many of them went in the police department this was the government of first and last resort for many Irishmen. There is great migration from the old world and from Eastern and Western Europe of Jews to New York City communes. And

because of history tradition and background they became the most important aspect of our school system. All good and right and again here government which is municipal government was the employer of first and last resort in this case. Italians came to the United States and they came to New York first and they found that that that place that crack in the system that they could move into for employment was in the area of sanitation and so it went. And finally and then finally the then finally there was there was after all of this there was black migration. It so happened it didn't come from across the water it came from another part of the United States but it was still in migration. And one of the areas of tension and problem that is resulted here is it is that they found no chink in the system no area of government or first and last resort no other private sector didn't bend fast enough. So this created terrible pressures. I have to point out one very encouraging thing to you and I'm sure that you've

notices and know about yourself so far as the government is concerned just like the police became the great area for Irish and so on that in our system here. Health services is the area that has increasingly become the crack in the system for the black man to come to England and the result for the Puerto Rican too and the result is that the health services which is a massive institution public and private in this city the result is that you are beginning to see that great wonderful thing happening here with these massive hospitals and clinics. Other things are being staffed by this particular ethnic migration group and it is led to increasingly leading. To blacks becoming the technicians moving on from there into the in the area highly skilled areas of nursing. Moving on from there and into medicine and I view it as one of the great openings

and one of the great areas of stability for the future of this city and other cities too. You're a mayor of a city with this history of ethnic groups competing with each other and often in conflict in your term. You've been the pivot or the butt of many ethnic conflicts. I think the decentralization struggle for example is an ethnic racial conflict among other things. And you are not yourself identified or a member of any one of these ethnic groups. You believe that a great silent minority majority white anglo saxon protestant either Jewish talian Puerto Rican negro well that you are now required are city in New York City group if you wish to call it that which I happen to be a member of

is 11 percent voting minority here. How do you resolve the the ethnic conflicts that are brought to your doorstep interview. Well I prefer not to. I prefer not to think in ethnic terms. I don't I don't like it and that's the reason everyone else does. It's a reality it's there. I have never I've never like thinking in ethnic terms. But I mean the fact of the matter is that my job is to be the mayor of all the people and that I've sought to do. There are others who will quarrel about one way or the other about the relative merits of that success as the case may be. But anyway that's as I see it and what you are required to placate one or another of these groups at various times if you make a decision which the Jewish group I would think would be to probe Puerto Rican or Negro. Aren't you required to sort of balance that your next decision well I you know

I can't say it in that fashion. As I said what has to be done is to is to lead to be innovative to bring about change or change is needed and to try to communicate and educate in the process and to do it in such fashion that there is fair treatment for all. And obviously that's not easy. And obviously there are problems with that. But you know it's it's got to be said that we've made the effort to lead programs to develop them and move them and that in the last analysis has got to be the business of government if it's going to be a government at a time of history that is out in front and you cannot sweep all these things under the rug and you cannot. There's no such thing as standing still. You were the vice chairman of the Kerner Commission and the outstanding thing about that commission was that it said rather bluntly

that racism was a basic problem in American society and I presume also in American cities and that our society was moving too rapidly for comfort toward two societies one black one white. I noticed that recently the current commission came up with a draft report which suggested that the rate of racial polarization is increasing. Yes. Is that true in New York City to the commission that came up with an evaluation. It wasn't just the commission. There are a group of people who were assigned to this who were outside of the kind of commission they were. They represented various aspects of life in the United States. And this crowd came forward with a conclusion that a year after the kind of report that America was still was still in a state of probably increasing polarization from East Coast to West coast from north to south

and that in our cities that is and most especially in the urban centers and this is. And it also noted this was increasingly on the rise in suburbia. I mean this is this I think is probably accurate evaluation of the situation that exists in the United States and it is one that it has to be dealt with. It's a matter I think a very grave concern. These this group of evaluators have pointed out that quite little had been done since that kind of commission report by way of concrete positive programs designed to attack the problem. And I think that's true. And the other hand on the other hand it may be that we're going through a period of time when out of which can come some some new attitudes. You get to a

point where there's where there's only one thing to do and that's and that's to to come together again. Now this is going to require a commitment as I said earlier on the part of the country and it's going to require some very difficult decisions on the part of the government in Washington and on state governments and all local governments and all private people and individuals with soundings to handle and the likelihood of that type of commitment would be necessary in the part of the federal government in Washington the Nixon administration to deal with the what seemed to me to be the inextricable problem of race and instability of our cities. Well it's hard it's hard to tell. We have not yet seen the development of programmatic systems. We have not the Congress has not been on the receiving end of the ideas for the development of a of a different society in this country that is to say a one society rather than a split society.

And I'm quite sure that the administration in Washington is working overtime on this question see how to how to structure legislation that makes sense. I think the government in Washington is very sensitive and conscious of the problem. And you had better communication with this administration perhaps in terms of your sense of the urgency. Well there's good communication there's good communication. It's different it's it's a different administration. It's hard to compare it really in many ways that you know the last six months a year the Johnson administration why New York City was treated very generously. I have no complaint. We received 83 million dollars in neighborhood renewal funds which was the most massive Grant in modern times to any single locality and another 65 million and reservation in model city money which was a very generous allocation too. I have no no complaint there really on the specifics of the administration and other administration. There is good communication with the cabinet with the White House and so far as I'm concerned

and I know that you know they are they know how much trouble the country is in. And that's half the battle to know it. There are some very specific things I think has to be had that have to be done. And it's good to get specific because a conversation like this can get too fuzzy. The welfare system. Now this has got to be this has got to be the the area I think of first attack by the administration in Washington to relieve the pressures of the cities. This cannot be handled by any single locality in the first place. We're too hidebound with the rules and regulations. It's too difficult to change it. We can't teach new york about the welfare caseload. Yet in fact we can do nothing about it. We're guided by federal laws to who goes on welfare and doesn't use it and keep people out of New York City. It's a national problem. It's one of great migration.

California's got the biggest burden at the moment more than New York because the migration is hit west very rapidly and California has not only the migration of the poor but the migration of the retired the old and they've got real troubles about it being so big and being now a suburban problem also and still in one of migration. It has got to be handled on a national basis. There must be uniform standards as near uniform as you can produce. It must be funded nationally and federally because it's that big a problem. And if one could point to a single area that would relieve the pressure I would point to this one from these localities. Not only that the system is the Kerner Commission pointed out that the system is not only costly and therefore bankrupt but it's no good that keeps people trapped in the cycle of dependency it

encourages illegitimacy it it it reduces dignity and therefore whatever federal national approach is adopted has got to be such that they overhaul the approach to it. Same time. And that can be done. In fact Mr. Nixon appointed a task force that was a distinguished group headed by Dr. Nathan of Columbia. Dr. Ginzburg the administrator of the human resources administration in New York was a member of it and others and came up with a series of recommendations to the government that are perfectly sound and represents I think the basis for a national program. Mr. Mayor you are so knowledgeable and so involved and committed to our cities and urban problem that it's very difficult for me to conceive of your voluntarily not continuing in some way or

involvement. What do you see for yourself in the future as far as New York City is concerned. Well I don't know Ken. First of all I shall have to make fairly soon because we're in an election year and there will be a primary primary dates for choosing of candidates is quite early. And in the middle of June I shall have to make a decision fairly soon as to whether or not I should stand for re-election for mayor. And that's not an easy one obviously for a collection of reasons to explore this a little. Your decision involves some judgment as to the degree to which some of these major problems are not solved naturally. Naturally as it evolves now that some judgment as to whether is you always is that where you can have the most impact in getting other people to wake up to the fact that there is an urban problem. Some mayors have been discouraged out of the business in part because they do not think that federal and

state governments are really prepared to do something about it. That includes my friend I have an alum from Atlanta. I think one of the great mayors of all times and it would say sadness to the country I think that he's decided that the country he's got personal reasons too obviously. But part of his problem is that he is he like a great many other mayors is of the view that that the federal government or state governments or are are going to get rid of the out. You know what I'm saying it's not going to come on this. I will come back to the question I asked earlier why does anyone run for mayor or any other large cities. Are they learning that maybe they enjoy the hairshirt and maybe there's always that human optimism that maybe some of the problems that seem so difficult are some people like the action you know and others don't they really you know they really do.

I'm I'm not a born hero. And I don't much like hero X.. On the other hand there are a lot of people who whose hunch and whose urge is kind of like mine in World War Two has spent three years in combat that it actually was a preference. I did not want to be in the frontlines. I wanted to be in the front and in back lines I wanted to be in the frontlines and that wasn't because of any heroics. It was just because I would I would rather see what comes out at the end of the pipeline rather than be stuffing stuff in the pipeline. And I found that in the Congress that enjoyable and as productive as I found it I thoroughly enjoyed seven years in the House of Representatives. I found that even now even though it was action oriented to some extent it's it still wasn't really the front lines.

Now these front lines are a little too hard at times. It gets really blistering. And it's it's too easy to say would there be some peace and quiet because there's not going to be peace and quiet in this country as long as we have in all of those cities across the land and underemployment rate of 30 percent in the big cities. That's bad. And as long as we have in all of the big cities school systems where in disadvantaged communities the dropout rate is over 50 percent and 80 percent of the youngsters are not going on in a high school which is true of all the big cities the District of Columbia which I've just come back from has the worst problem of all. And here's the nation's capital right in the center of things. And things are not good when even though there have not been really earthshaking Tolmach proportion riots since the summer of 67 when we was on the

summer before last when we had 25 major riots in which parts of whole cities burned to the ground. Since then we've had we've had a greater quantity of urban civil disturbances than we even had that. And again New York fortunately has been spared this kind of fire bombing technique problem but nevertheless something is wrong. And one has to understand that and you just cannot you just cannot run away from it. Someone who voluntarily chose combat. And for someone who is what we met about all of the flack the exposed mayor must meet. And I cannot conceive of any more intense series of problems than you had during your first term as mayor. It is my hunch that you will not see the peace and quiet less exposed area of public

service. Thank you very very much. Thank you. Dan