Bonner, William S.

English

ScholarWorks@UARK

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of ScienceVolume 5 Article 211952Planning agency in State GovernmentWilliam S. BonnerUniversity of Arkansas, FayettevilleFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaasPart of the Urban Studies and Planning CommonsThis article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able toread, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking priorpermission from the publisher or the author.This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academyof Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu, ccmiddle@uark.edu.Recommended CitationBonner, William S. (1952) "Planning agency in State Government," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 5 , Article 21.Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21THE PLANNING AGENCY IN STATE GOVERNMENT*WILLIAM S. BONNERUniversity of ArkansasDevelopment of State P IanningBefore 1933, little had been done in the way of state planning. Previousto that date, Wisconsin and New York had made a beginning in the field. Withthe creation of the National Planning Board in that year came the impetus whichresulted in the creation of state planning boards in nearly every state of thenation.In 1933, the National Planning Board suggested to the governors of the var-ious states that they create state planning boards in order to aid the federalgovernment in public works planning. The response was overwhelming, and withintwo years 47 states had created such boards.State planning boards were granted federal aid if they met certain condi-tions. The major conditions imposed on the states involved: the appointment ofan unpaid planning board by the governor consisting of at least four state de-partment heads as well as citizens, assurance by the governor that he wouldsponsor legislation to put the planning board on a continuing basis, securing bythe governor of necessary personnel to staff the board, development of a plan-ning program, selection of a qualified planner to direct the work, and willing-ness to cooperate in an interstate agency if one was formed. In return formeeting these conditions, the National Planning Board assigned full-time con-sultants to the state agencies, assigned relief personnel to help carry out itsprogram, and offered to coordinate their activities. 1No two state planning agencies were similar as to programs undertaken. Thestate agencies cooperated with the National Planning Board especially in makinginventories of various resources of the nation. Generally, the work within thestate agencies was not too well coordinated.In the late 30' s the number of active planning agencies began to decreaseas state legislatures failed to make appropriations. With the abolition of theNational Resources Planning Board in 1943, the position of the state agencieswas further weakened.With the entrance of the United States in World War II,many agencies aidedgovernors with war planning and later post-war planning. After the conclusionof the war, a few agencies were abolished, and a number of others had theirfunctions transferred to development agencies.State planning and state development agencies have dealt with a number ofproblems. These have included: land use; water and mineral resources; economicsurveys and industrial development; industrial promotion; tourist promotion;state public works, highways and airports; social services including health, ed-ucation, and recreation; the general role of state development; and managementplanning and research.Organization of the State Planning AgencyState planning agencies have been headed by an unpaid commission or board.This was the direct result of one of the conditions set forth in 1933 by theNational Planning Board if states desired federal aid. It also followed thegeneral policy of making a public agency multiheaded in order to protect it frompolitics and outside influence. When a permanent staff is maintained for theplanning agency, the director of the staff is in theory responsible to the com-mission, and in theory the commission determines the planning policy.In practice, the organization functions differently. Planning is a compre-hensive matter and it is difficult to find persons who have the background andNational Resources Board, State Planning (Washington: United States Government PrintingOffice, 1935), pp. 8-9.•Research Paper No. 1043 Journal Series. University of Arkansas.115Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1952116 ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEthe time to serve on an unpaid commission that is to formulate planning policy.A director of one state planning agency made the statement that while his com-mission was composed of capable men, the commission accepted the policies of theplanning director. 2 Perhaps it is too much to expect persons engaged in a full-time pursuit of their own to find the time to become acquainted in any detailwithin the broad field that state planning encompasses.One of the arguments used to support the commission type agency is that itgives different interests representation on the planning agency. But can suchrepresentation be broad enough at the state level even on large commissions?One representative, of say business, is not representative of all types andkinds of business.The commission form does relieve the planning staff of political pressureand interference. A change of administration does not generally effect theplanning staff. This is vital if long-range unbiased planning is to be accom-plished.There may at times be a need in the planning agency of utilizing an advi-sory committee to work on a specific problem. When such a committee is deemedadvisable, broad representation can be secured. This would provide the planningagency with the opportunity of conferring with and seeking the advice of thecommittee on the particular problem. The North Carolina State Planning Boardused such a committee successfully in studying children and youth in 1946.A properly organized and staffed planning agency can relieve the governorof much pressure brought against him by varying interests. The agency can pro-vide the governor with an almost unlimited source of nonpartisan informationproduced by the best brain power and experience the state has to offer. Whenthe agency has the confidence of the governor and is respected by those who workwith it, it can save the state many times the cost of its operation and contrib-ute to improved state government.The Need for a State P Ianning AgencyIn a departmental system of state administration, there is a number ofweaknesses that can be strengthened through proper use of a state planningagency.One of these weaknesses is the lack of coordination and combined actionamong departments. State government has become so complex that the governorcannot personally coordinate its activities.Another weakness is the lack of technical advice from the best expert opin-ion. Employees of the state are generally so busy with their day-to-day tasksthat they do not have opportunity to give adequate attention to long rangeprobl ems.There has generally been a lack of an organized thinking body in state gov-ernment which can take the initiative in submitting to the governor, and throughhim to the legislature, the long-range programs which seem of little importanceat the moment to the average law-maker and citizen.Department heads are generally busy satisfying public opinion, not creatingit. The need for an agency that can present facts to the public is genuine.The utilization by local political subdivisions of the powers and responsi-bilities granted them in the planning field under the state constitution andlegislative enactments generally fall far short of expectations. An agency isneeded that can provide technical and advisory service to aid those local unitsin developing their own programs for improvement.The Func t ion s of a State P Ianning AgencyIfthe need for a state planning agency is recognized, the functions of theagency become apparent.A basic function of the state planning agency is to gather intormation,through research, on the various problems and resources of the state and to pre-Hayden Johnson, former director of the Tennessee State Planning Commission, made thisstatement to a graduate planning seminar at the University of North Carolina in 1947.116Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21rTHE PLANNING AGENCY IN STATE GOVERNMENT 117e long-range plans concerning those problems and resources for the governor*f r his approval and action. In the preparation of these long-range plans, con-- deration must be given to the programs and activities of the various statedepartments in order to prevent duplication of effort.The planning agency can serve a useful function by aiding the governor withthe preparation of legislation, especially that of a technical nature.The state planning agency can serve as a clearing house of information be-tween the various agencies of state government and between local governmentalagencies and the state.A technical and advisory service should be provided by the state agency toaid local governmental units with their planning problems and programs.The state planning agency should not be assigned administrative functions,that is, made responsible for the execution of any plan or program. When super-visory or administrative functions are assigned a planning agency, the planningfunction suffers. 3 Planning is a full-time job itself.The Theories of Func t ions of a State Planning AgencyThree theories of functions of a state planning agency can be recognized atthe present time. These theories are:(1) The reorientation theory(2) The development-planning theory(3) The planning-development theoryThe first of the three theories is concerned with coordinating state serv-ices and giving these existing services a long-range development plan. The lat-ter two theories are concerned with the physical development of the state,geared to a long- ranged plan, and differing as to emphasis and procedure.The reorientation theory holds that the function of the planning agency isto prepare long-range plans for the activities of the various departments incooperation with the staffs of those departments.*This theory recognizes thatlong-range comprehensive planning is desirable for every activity carried on bystate government. This theory also recognizes that department heads are oftentoo busy to plan for future needs and changes, and that the department head isnot in position to coordinate his department's program with the programs andplans of other departments. The planning agency thus provides the assistance toget the planning done, and being interested solely in the state's bettermentrather than individual service, can coordinate the various plans into a compre-hensive state plan.The reorientation theory holds that state agencies charged with the admin-istration of various programs must themselves become a part of the planningprocess that develops the programs. If the administrative agencies are to takepart in the planning process, department heads would have to be made free fromday-to-day tasks in order that they may turn their attention to the developmentof long-range plans and programs.The planning agency takes on the role of a catalytic agent by getting thevarious state departments together to work out plans and programs. This ofcourse would be an ideal solution to carrying out the planning function. How-ever, certain practical problems may arise. In a corporate form of organiza-tion, the head can direct the subordinate units to present a unified program orplan before any consideration will be given to budgets. There is no escapearound the head. In state government, this may not always be true. Many timesJohn D. Millett, "Planning and Administration," Elements of Public Administration, Editedby Fritz Morstein Marx, (New York: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1946), p. 132.John E. Ivey, Jr. advanced the reorientation theory in his graduate planning seminar onState Planning at the University of North Carolina in 1947.Ivey held that the broad policies and procedures which had been followed by state planningagencies had not produced, to that date, as effective a working relationship as might be desir-ed either within state government or among the people of the state. These unsuccessful poli-cies and procedures were: "(1) planning and administration should be separate responsibili-ties; (2) the planning board should make the plans and turn them over to other branches ofKovernment; and (3) the planning process should be executed through an advisory relationshipbetween the planning board and other branches of State government."117Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1952118 ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEindependent and semi- independent bodies will attempt to by-pass the governor andappeal directly to the legislature if the governor does not agree with the pro-posed programs. The governor, through proper utilization of his planning agen-cy, could present to the legislature a strong case for his position and keepstate agencies in line with his program.The development-planning theory emphasizes the development of the resourcesof the state and the promotion of industry within the state. 5 This emphasis isjustified on the grounds that itmakes possible a higher standard of living andthat this automatically results in better health, greater security, and thevarious other things that government ought to promote. The agency under thistheory encourages the location of new industry within the state and expansion ofexisting industry using the various concessions granted by the state and localareas as major advantages. These concessions take many forms including tax ex-emption, free buildings, free or less than cost municipal utilities and soforth.The planning- development theory places its emphasis on adequate governmen-tal services for the state in general and for industrial areas (actual or poten-tial) in particular. 6 The main effort in this theory is to strengthen localcommunities through encouraging them to have available adequate services andfacilities. Attention is given to the adequacy of such items as power, water,fuel, recreation facilities and programs, schools, housing, municipal financeand administration, and similar other items.The development-planning theory and the planning- development theory eachhave strong advocates, especially in the southern states.South Carolina and Mississippi are typical of the states supporting thedevelopment-planning theory. The act creating the State Agriculture and Indus-trial Board in Mississippi includes the following declaration of policy:"That the present and prospective health, safety, morals and pursuit ofhappiness, right to gainful employment and the general welfare of the citizensdemand as a public purpose, the development within Mississippi of commercial,industrial, agricultural and manufacturing enterprises That the accomplish-ment of the things herein authorized to be done by the several municipalitiest l t iwill give to them local benefits peculiar to each."'The planning development theory receives support from Alabama, Virginia,and especially Tennessee. Tennessee grants that new industries will often makecommunity improvements possible, but the fact remains in their mind that a com-munity must be attractive as a place to live ifindustry's attention is to beinvited. The director of the Tennessee State Planning Commission- wrote in StateGovernment "We of Tennessee sometimes shudder at the extent to which developmentpredominates in some states and planning, particularly at the local level, ismade a step-child of the state program." 8The planning-development theory has also received support from leaders inindustry. Responsible individuals of a number of leading industrial firms havestated that in looking for new locations that community services and facilitiesreceive prime consideration. Good schools, housing, recreational facilities,stores, and local government are important. Concession on taxes and municipalservices are not requested or even desired. This attitude was amply expressedby S. B. Williams, Director of Public Helations, Sylvania Electric Products,Inc., in a talk before the annual meeting of the Association of State Planningand Development Agencies in 1950. Williams said: "We feel that taxes are theonly way a community has of raising money to pay for necessary municipal ex-penses. We want to pay our share the same as anybody else, but we want to besure that the taxes are fair. If we don't pay our share someone else has to payit. Perhaps at a later date we, too, would be paying a part of someone else'staxes, and that we wouldn' t like."5Albert Lepawsky, State Planning and Economic Development in the South, (Kingsport: Kingsport Press, 1949), pp. 81-83.6Ibid.,pp. 81-837Ibid., p. 82.Harold V. Miller, "State Planning and Development-Tennessee Style," State Government, Vol.23, No. 7, (July, 1950), p. 150.118Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21THE PLANNING AGENCY IN STATE GOVERNMENT119The future course of the planning agency in state government is not a setone. There is no doubt need for basic reorganization within state governmentitself if the planning function is to be able to operate most effectively. Theactual program that a state agency will undertake and the emphasis placed on theconstituent parts of the program will vary from state to state. However, it isimportant that neither the planning or development function be neglected ifthestate is to advance not only economically, but socially and politically.119Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1952120Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21

Planning agency in State Government

UARK (University of Arkansas )

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 5 Article 21 1952 Planning agency in State Government William S. Bonner University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas  Part of the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Recommended Citation Bonner, William S. (1952) "Planning agency in State Government," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 5 , Article 21. Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu. THE PLANNING AGENCY IN STATE GOVERNMENT*WILLIAM S. BONNERUniversity of ArkansasDevelopment of State P IanningBefore 1933, little had been done in the way of state planning. Previousto that date, Wisconsin and New York had made a beginning in the field. Withthe creation of the National Planning Board in that year came the impetus whichresulted in the creation of state planning boards in nearly every state of thenation.In 1933, the National Planning Board suggested to the governors of the var-ious states that they create state planning boards in order to aid the federalgovernment in public works planning. The response was overwhelming, and withintwo years 47 states had created such boards.State planning boards were granted federal aid if they met certain condi-tions. The major conditions imposed on the states involved: the appointment ofan unpaid planning board by the governor consisting of at least four state de-partment heads as well as citizens, assurance by the governor that he wouldsponsor legislation to put the planning board on a continuing basis, securing bythe governor of necessary personnel to staff the board, development of a plan-ning program, selection of a qualified planner to direct the work, and willing-ness to cooperate in an interstate agency if one was formed. In return formeeting these conditions, the National Planning Board assigned full-time con-sultants to the state agencies, assigned relief personnel to help carry out itsprogram, and offered to coordinate their activities. 1No two state planning agencies were similar as to programs undertaken. Thestate agencies cooperated with the National Planning Board especially in makinginventories of various resources of the nation. Generally, the work within thestate agencies was not too well coordinated.In the late 30' s the number of active planning agencies began to decreaseas state legislatures failed to make appropriations. With the abolition of theNational Resources Planning Board in 1943, the position of the state agencieswas further weakened.With the entrance of the United States in World War II,many agencies aidedgovernors with war planning and later post-war planning. After the conclusionof the war, a few agencies were abolished, and a number of others had theirfunctions transferred to development agencies.State planning and state development agencies have dealt with a number ofproblems. These have included: land use; water and mineral resources; economicsurveys and industrial development; industrial promotion; tourist promotion;state public works, highways and airports; social services including health, ed-ucation, and recreation; the general role of state development; and managementplanning and research.Organization of the State Planning AgencyState planning agencies have been headed by an unpaid commission or board.This was the direct result of one of the conditions set forth in 1933 by theNational Planning Board if states desired federal aid. It also followed thegeneral policy of making a public agency multiheaded in order to protect it frompolitics and outside influence. When a permanent staff is maintained for theplanning agency, the director of the staff is in theory responsible to the com-mission, and in theory the commission determines the planning policy.In practice, the organization functions differently. Planning is a compre-hensive matter and it is difficult to find persons who have the background andNational Resources Board, State Planning (Washington: United States Government PrintingOffice, 1935), pp. 8-9.•Research Paper No. 1043 Journal Series. University of Arkansas.115Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1952116 ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEthe time to serve on an unpaid commission that is to formulate planning policy.A director of one state planning agency made the statement that while his com-mission was composed of capable men, the commission accepted the policies of theplanning director. 2 Perhaps it is too much to expect persons engaged in a full-time pursuit of their own to find the time to become acquainted in any detailwithin the broad field that state planning encompasses.One of the arguments used to support the commission type agency is that itgives different interests representation on the planning agency. But can suchrepresentation be broad enough at the state level even on large commissions?One representative, of say business, is not representative of all types andkinds of business.The commission form does relieve the planning staff of political pressureand interference. A change of administration does not generally effect theplanning staff. This is vital if long-range unbiased planning is to be accom-plished.There may at times be a need in the planning agency of utilizing an advi-sory committee to work on a specific problem. When such a committee is deemedadvisable, broad representation can be secured. This would provide the planningagency with the opportunity of conferring with and seeking the advice of thecommittee on the particular problem. The North Carolina State Planning Boardused such a committee successfully in studying children and youth in 1946.A properly organized and staffed planning agency can relieve the governorof much pressure brought against him by varying interests. The agency can pro-vide the governor with an almost unlimited source of nonpartisan informationproduced by the best brain power and experience the state has to offer. Whenthe agency has the confidence of the governor and is respected by those who workwith it, it can save the state many times the cost of its operation and contrib-ute to improved state government.The Need for a State P Ianning AgencyIn a departmental system of state administration, there is a number ofweaknesses that can be strengthened through proper use of a state planningagency.One of these weaknesses is the lack of coordination and combined actionamong departments. State government has become so complex that the governorcannot personally coordinate its activities.Another weakness is the lack of technical advice from the best expert opin-ion. Employees of the state are generally so busy with their day-to-day tasksthat they do not have opportunity to give adequate attention to long rangeprobl ems.There has generally been a lack of an organized thinking body in state gov-ernment which can take the initiative in submitting to the governor, and throughhim to the legislature, the long-range programs which seem of little importanceat the moment to the average law-maker and citizen.Department heads are generally busy satisfying public opinion, not creatingit. The need for an agency that can present facts to the public is genuine.The utilization by local political subdivisions of the powers and responsi-bilities granted them in the planning field under the state constitution andlegislative enactments generally fall far short of expectations. An agency isneeded that can provide technical and advisory service to aid those local unitsin developing their own programs for improvement.The Func t ion s of a State P Ianning AgencyIfthe need for a state planning agency is recognized, the functions of theagency become apparent.A basic function of the state planning agency is to gather intormation,through research, on the various problems and resources of the state and to pre-Hayden Johnson, former director of the Tennessee State Planning Commission, made thisstatement to a graduate planning seminar at the University of North Carolina in 1947.116Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21rTHE PLANNING AGENCY IN STATE GOVERNMENT 117e long-range plans concerning those problems and resources for the governor*f r his approval and action. In the preparation of these long-range plans, con-- deration must be given to the programs and activities of the various statedepartments in order to prevent duplication of effort.The planning agency can serve a useful function by aiding the governor withthe preparation of legislation, especially that of a technical nature.The state planning agency can serve as a clearing house of information be-tween the various agencies of state government and between local governmentalagencies and the state.A technical and advisory service should be provided by the state agency toaid local governmental units with their planning problems and programs.The state planning agency should not be assigned administrative functions,that is, made responsible for the execution of any plan or program. When super-visory or administrative functions are assigned a planning agency, the planningfunction suffers. 3 Planning is a full-time job itself.The Theories of Func t ions of a State Planning AgencyThree theories of functions of a state planning agency can be recognized atthe present time. These theories are:(1) The reorientation theory(2) The development-planning theory(3) The planning-development theoryThe first of the three theories is concerned with coordinating state serv-ices and giving these existing services a long-range development plan. The lat-ter two theories are concerned with the physical development of the state,geared to a long- ranged plan, and differing as to emphasis and procedure.The reorientation theory holds that the function of the planning agency isto prepare long-range plans for the activities of the various departments incooperation with the staffs of those departments.*This theory recognizes thatlong-range comprehensive planning is desirable for every activity carried on bystate government. This theory also recognizes that department heads are oftentoo busy to plan for future needs and changes, and that the department head isnot in position to coordinate his department's program with the programs andplans of other departments. The planning agency thus provides the assistance toget the planning done, and being interested solely in the state's bettermentrather than individual service, can coordinate the various plans into a compre-hensive state plan.The reorientation theory holds that state agencies charged with the admin-istration of various programs must themselves become a part of the planningprocess that develops the programs. If the administrative agencies are to takepart in the planning process, department heads would have to be made free fromday-to-day tasks in order that they may turn their attention to the developmentof long-range plans and programs.The planning agency takes on the role of a catalytic agent by getting thevarious state departments together to work out plans and programs. This ofcourse would be an ideal solution to carrying out the planning function. How-ever, certain practical problems may arise. In a corporate form of organiza-tion, the head can direct the subordinate units to present a unified program orplan before any consideration will be given to budgets. There is no escapearound the head. In state government, this may not always be true. Many timesJohn D. Millett, "Planning and Administration," Elements of Public Administration, Editedby Fritz Morstein Marx, (New York: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1946), p. 132.John E. Ivey, Jr. advanced the reorientation theory in his graduate planning seminar onState Planning at the University of North Carolina in 1947.Ivey held that the broad policies and procedures which had been followed by state planningagencies had not produced, to that date, as effective a working relationship as might be desir-ed either within state government or among the people of the state. These unsuccessful poli-cies and procedures were: "(1) planning and administration should be separate responsibili-ties; (2) the planning board should make the plans and turn them over to other branches ofKovernment; and (3) the planning process should be executed through an advisory relationshipbetween the planning board and other branches of State government."117Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1952118 ARKANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCEindependent and semi- independent bodies will attempt to by-pass the governor andappeal directly to the legislature if the governor does not agree with the pro-posed programs. The governor, through proper utilization of his planning agen-cy, could present to the legislature a strong case for his position and keepstate agencies in line with his program.The development-planning theory emphasizes the development of the resourcesof the state and the promotion of industry within the state. 5 This emphasis isjustified on the grounds that itmakes possible a higher standard of living andthat this automatically results in better health, greater security, and thevarious other things that government ought to promote. The agency under thistheory encourages the location of new industry within the state and expansion ofexisting industry using the various concessions granted by the state and localareas as major advantages. These concessions take many forms including tax ex-emption, free buildings, free or less than cost municipal utilities and soforth.The planning- development theory places its emphasis on adequate governmen-tal services for the state in general and for industrial areas (actual or poten-tial) in particular. 6 The main effort in this theory is to strengthen localcommunities through encouraging them to have available adequate services andfacilities. Attention is given to the adequacy of such items as power, water,fuel, recreation facilities and programs, schools, housing, municipal financeand administration, and similar other items.The development-planning theory and the planning- development theory eachhave strong advocates, especially in the southern states.South Carolina and Mississippi are typical of the states supporting thedevelopment-planning theory. The act creating the State Agriculture and Indus-trial Board in Mississippi includes the following declaration of policy:"That the present and prospective health, safety, morals and pursuit ofhappiness, right to gainful employment and the general welfare of the citizensdemand as a public purpose, the development within Mississippi of commercial,industrial, agricultural and manufacturing enterprises That the accomplish-ment of the things herein authorized to be done by the several municipalitiest l t iwill give to them local benefits peculiar to each."'The planning development theory receives support from Alabama, Virginia,and especially Tennessee. Tennessee grants that new industries will often makecommunity improvements possible, but the fact remains in their mind that a com-munity must be attractive as a place to live ifindustry's attention is to beinvited. The director of the Tennessee State Planning Commission- wrote in StateGovernment "We of Tennessee sometimes shudder at the extent to which developmentpredominates in some states and planning, particularly at the local level, ismade a step-child of the state program." 8The planning-development theory has also received support from leaders inindustry. Responsible individuals of a number of leading industrial firms havestated that in looking for new locations that community services and facilitiesreceive prime consideration. Good schools, housing, recreational facilities,stores, and local government are important. Concession on taxes and municipalservices are not requested or even desired. This attitude was amply expressedby S. B. Williams, Director of Public Helations, Sylvania Electric Products,Inc., in a talk before the annual meeting of the Association of State Planningand Development Agencies in 1950. Williams said: "We feel that taxes are theonly way a community has of raising money to pay for necessary municipal ex-penses. We want to pay our share the same as anybody else, but we want to besure that the taxes are fair. If we don't pay our share someone else has to payit. Perhaps at a later date we, too, would be paying a part of someone else'staxes, and that we wouldn' t like."5Albert Lepawsky, State Planning and Economic Development in the South, (Kingsport: Kingsport Press, 1949), pp. 81-83.6Ibid.,pp. 81-837Ibid., p. 82.Harold V. Miller, "State Planning and Development-Tennessee Style," State Government, Vol.23, No. 7, (July, 1950), p. 150.118Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21THE PLANNING AGENCY IN STATE GOVERNMENT119The future course of the planning agency in state government is not a setone. There is no doubt need for basic reorganization within state governmentitself if the planning function is to be able to operate most effectively. Theactual program that a state agency will undertake and the emphasis placed on theconstituent parts of the program will vary from state to state. However, it isimportant that neither the planning or development function be neglected ifthestate is to advance not only economically, but socially and politically.119Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1952120Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 5 [1952], Art. 21https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol5/iss1/21

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1153&amp;context=jaas

Planning agency in State Government

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks@UARK

UARK (University of Arkansas )