-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/091dd0023258252b6a6150139b678023.pdf
0a466871f0641ac666f45785f25b109f
PDF Text
Text
l
r
FOIA Number: 2006-0462-F
FOIA
MAR~~~R
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Oftice of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Terry Edmonds
•
Subseries:
OA/~0
10989
Number:
FolderiD:
Folder Title:
· Mayors -Report on the State of America's Cities
'·
'~.
,\
I
I
(:
·J
~~
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
s
0
0
0
0
�DRAFT
CONFIDENTIAl
· DETERMINED TO BE /\N
ADMINISTRATIVE MAHKING
INITIALS:~_ DATE:_~Js./ 08
AREPORTON
THE STATE OF AMERICA'S CITIES
�DRAFT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
AD MINISTRATIVE MAf~KING
INITIALS:_~·- DATE:__J_WEb K
CONTENTS
Overview
I:
The Decades of Decline ·
The ·1970s and 80s saw a marked decline in the quality of life, the economic
prospects and the optimism that once grew from America's cities.
- Cities became poorer and lost population
- Rising poverty and crime and declining educational standards
-- Lagging behind the suburbs in job growth
II:
Cities Are Doing Better, But Real Challenges Remain
The Administration's first term urban agenda has made a difference- and there
is genuinely good and hopeful news from many cities - but this report finds
·three troubling trends in.the Nation's 200 largest cities.
ill:
An Urban Agenda for the Future .
The President is proposing a second-term urban agenda based on the principles
developed in the empowerment zones: bottom-up, flexible, results-oriented,
values-driven.
- The Empowerment Conce~t
- A Set of Urban Initiatives.
-The Tools for Implementation of that.Agenda
2
�£0NFlBENT\~L
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
OVERVIEW
!N!l!ALS:_~- DATE:__) ~.J.!i!_t;'?
[Insert quote from President .Clinton]
Early in 1997, President Clinton asked Secretary Cuomo and the Department of
Housing and Urban Development to look at two questions:
(1) As we come to the close of the 20th century- the century that saw the bii:th and
rise of many of America's greatest cities - what now is the state of those cities?
(2) What more can the Clinton Administration do to prepare our cities to meet the
economic and social challenges of a new era?
This report directly answers both of those questions. Its description of the current
state of cities, as well as longer-range historical trends, is based in large part. on
extensive and original analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census data - data
that is being released publicly for the first time in this report.
There is much good news for cities, in large part because of the one-two punch of
the Administration's effective economic policies- which have helped to lift many cities
-and targeted urban initiatives on a number of fronts including jobs, housing, crime,
education and the environment.
a
The Administration's economic agenda of the past four years has created a vibrant
and growing economy, with the United States now in the midst of a vigorous
economic expansion, the deficit down $223 billion over 1992 and a projected
bal~mced budget by 2002, unemployment has dropped below five percent for the
first time in 24 years. Twelve million new jobs have been created; xxxx million
new homeowners have gotten their piece of the American dream. This rising tide
has. helped tolift many cities from the economic decline of the 1970s and 80s;
o
The fiscal health of many cities is. stronger than its been in decades and city budget ·
ink is turning from red to black;Iiationwide;
o .
Crime is down dramatically;
A number of cities have experienced a downtown renaissance, bringing whole areas
back to life with sports, tourism and local business;
o
3
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMlN\STRAT\VE
MARKI~GD
INITIALS:~ DATE: l~/l~ £! ?
CONFIDENTIAL
•
Unemployment, from 1993 to 1996, dropped more in central cities than in their
surrounding suburbs :.... and each of the ten largest American cities has a lower
unemployment rate today than in 1993;
•
Average wages for city jobs are growing faster than for suburban jobs as businesses
concentrate their highest-productivity workers in cities; and
•
Many mayors- from cities of all sizes- are highly optimistic about their cities'
future. A 1997 survey found that almost 85% of mayors and chief elected officials
scored their city a seven or higher on a scale of one to ten. And over two-thirds
noted that the number of jobs in their cities has increased over the past five years.
As the Vice President has often noted, there is a new generation of deeply
committed and visionary mayors leading the Nation's cities - mayors who have turned
their cities into laboratories of experimentation and innovation, helping forge in the
white heat of their urban cores smart and sensible solutions to city problems.
[Insert quote from Vice President Gore]
While these are positive and hopeful trends, they also tend to mask some of the
deeper underlying challenges that remain.
The report has three main findings of the problems facing cities:
Finding #1: There is a dangerous disparity in job creation between the cities and
the suburbs - and the cities are losing out. ·
•
Urban unemployment is regularly and significantly liigher than suburban and
national rates;
•
Most of the jobs fueling metropolitan economic growth are being created in the
suburbs;.
•
Large cities acmally lost jobs
I
.
in. the.early 1990s and some have not recovered; and
•
• · . Cities are not creating enough of the. kind of jobs welfare recipients need to move
into the workforce. The suburbs are creating more than 80% of the low-skilled jobs
crucial to ending welfare as we know it.
4
�-
----------~--------------------
- - - - - - - - ---------------
~ DETERMINED TO BE AN
D
..
~··
JL·r
7..
···~ ::i-".
1.1\:..it-;;.Q
!.)
MrlrtliHl
tU
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
1
"'W')f:Y
INITIALS:
Finding #2: Despite the recent decline in the national poverty rate, Americas poor
are more poor, more socially and economically isolated and more physically
concentrated than at any time in a generation.
• · City-wide, the central city poverty rate has risen 50% since 1970, from 14% to
21% in 1995.
•
The concentration of the poor within many urban areas is increasing. More than ten
percent of all city residents live in census tracts with poverty rates of 40 percent or
more. Consequences of this concentration are severe: Such high-poverty areas are
often the breeding ground for severe social dysfunctions like violent crime, drug
abuse and teenage pregnancy.
•
High poverty rates also places heavy service burdens on cities while reducing the
resources available to support these burdens. For example, cities spend 10 percent
less per capita for education than suburbs despite a student population that requires
more resources. Higher dropout rates are a consequence.
•
[Need data proving the "poor are more poor."]
Finding #3: The migration of the middle class from cities to suburbs continues.
•
Only 11 of the 30 largest cities in 1970 have more people in them today than two
decades ago, and population losses continue in some of today's largest cities.
•
But even in cities with growing populations, the character of the population is
changing in ways that do not portend well for cities. Large cities are losing middleclass and wealthier families to the suburbs.
•
In addition, the number of families with children in central cities declined between·
1970 and 1990, particularly two-parent families with children.
In short, there is much good news to build on - cities .are far better off than they
were in the 1970s and 1980s - but America's largest cities are still trailing in the
economic recovery of the last half decade and onty·an invigorated urban agenda will
prepare these cities, and their surrounding suburbs, for the new century.
5
�DRAFT
A!! Urban Aeenda for the Future
CONFIDENTIAL
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~DATE: 1")./J~~'i
Any urban agenda for the new century must begin with a central premise: cities
matter.
Cities have provided hope and opportunity to millions of Americans for most of the
past century. They have. served as the gateway to travelers and future US citizens from
around the world. They have been the ports of entry and exit for trillions of dollars of
products made here and virtually everywhere else on the planet. They have been the
centers and often the lifeblood of arts, culture, science and technology - a symbol of
the American promise and dream.
Today, one in every four Americans lives ina city of more than 100,000 people;
At the beginning of the twentieth century, the United States had only 38 cities with
populations that size; now there are over two hundred - and those cities, and their
surrounding suburbs -.are home to almost eighty percent of Americans and contain
close to eighty-five percent of U.S. jobs.
But the importance of cities cannot be measured in population alone - they also
hold a disproportionate share of both the country's problems and potential.· More than
43 percent of America's poor live in cities, but these same cities are also home to 43
percent of all metropolitan jobs. Just 50 city-based school districts are educating huge
numbers of tomorrow's minority workforce - nearly 40 percent of African AmeriCan
children and 32 percent of Latino kids.
Even those who live outside the urban core have a real stake in the future of cities.
The roots of America's metropolitan economies lie in the great cities; neither city nor
suburb can successfully incubate a new industry unless the resources and infrastructure
are strong across the whole region. Nor can suburbs, and their residents, truly isolate
themselves from the effects of economic and social decay that affects so many large
cities.
Over the past few decades, however, many have V{ritten off the Nation's cities,
fleeing to the stlburbs for safety, an affordable home, for a be~r job. Ironically, many
have given up on one of the greateSt innovations of the twentieth century, the engines
that drove American econoniic prosperity and gave rise to the largest middle class the
world has ever known.
Even courageous champions of the cities - mayors and city leaders nationwide -
6
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
DRAFT
INITIALS:t DATE:TIALk>s
C iBEN .
have often faced impossible economic triage decisions, making choices to allocate ·
precious and limited city. resources to rebuild a dilapidated downtown but having to let
other surrounding city neighborhoods languish without adequate assistance. All know
that a vibrant downtown, while essential in a long-term recovery plan, does not a city
·make. [Quote from Mayor Rendell about downtown development and the loss of
neighborhoods/urban triage]
President Clinton, and Vice President Gore, believe deeply in the future of
America' cities. iThey have proved that commitment repeatedly over the past hve
years, putting together a strong first-term urban empowerment agenda that was based
on a new and distinctly different approach to urban policy. It worked on a few basic
\but often ignored principles, emphasizing mainstream values and practical approaches:
l
1
1
l
- solutions must ci>me from the bottom-up not the top-down in Washington
- communities must have flexibility to implement what works best for them
~
responsibility and hard work must be demanded of all who benefit
- strengthening communities and families must be the frrst priority
- the public sector must leverage private sector resources wherever possible
/~
(
~\)
v
- performance and results must be measured and rewarded
The core elements of that agenda developed and coordinated in large part through
the Vice Pres1 ent s ommum
powerment Board - included:
•.
u~
!.;,
7Y
/9."- ~
i_;JG~
~~;--.
~'. . r
~~
the first Empowerme~t Zones and Enterprise Communities America lba~n
(los EZs and ECs)
.
.
· .
~investment
enacting legislation for Federal
in community banks (CDFis) and
reforming the Community Reinvestment· Act to generate close to $100 billion iri.
community development lending and investment from· banks and thrifts
·
creating affordable housing by inaking the low-income housing tax credit permanent
'
'
. ~;;': • boosting the homeownership rate
$
~·
/ ~,b'
~t
;'!I
01
rewriting federal ~to serve 14 times more people than before
7
'\
�DRAFT
.
..
.
.DETERMINED
.CONFIDENTIAL
·
TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
.
.
INITIALS:_~~ DATE:
committing to bring down and replace 100,000 of the most dangerous and ---:;~'~("\dilapidated public housing developments in the Nation
•
. \r~
streamlining Superfimd to help clean up more toxic waste dumps in the last few
years than in the previous twelve
. "~ '
0
•
L,
, 0~ ,
.•
, \f' :J
()_; ~'··
,
.~
<1
•,
' J
('· ;>?"
'
•
reducing crime rates by putting tens of thousands more cops on the street through .
community policing, passing the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban and
iilstituting a One Strike and You're Out policy to evict gangs and drugs dealers from
public housing
expandirig educational opportunity by increasing funding for head start, creating
Americorps, signing the School-to"7Work bill and launching an initiative to link
every child in every classroom to the Information Superhighway
implementing the HUD Economic Development Initiative to spur private investment·
'-'\
/,\J.
. ""\
expanding the earned income tax credit for 15 million working families and
\
0
wi.Jining a new minimum wage for the American worker.
This report indicates that this first -term Clinton-Gore urban agenda is working for
many cities, especially the President's economic policies which are driving a recovery
from the past few decades of economic and social decline. But the report also makes
clear that .tQ9 many cities and most larger cities are still lagging behind the economic
renewal sweeping the country and that they continue to face very deep-seated problems
that threaten not only the long-term health of those cities but their connected suburbs.
_,\~/
I
Progress has been made but the rea1i is that cities face the tremendous task of not
only continuing to resolve the
blems born in the 1970s and 8 s, ut they must also
meet two new challenges born in the
: creating tens of thousands of jobs to move
people from welfare to work and integrating the waveSOf new immigrants from all over
the world.
If we fail to meet these challeuges head on - at the same time reversing the trends
that. still trouble cities - many cities face the genuine possibility of a reprise of the
decline of earlier decades. To ensure the success and.health of America's cities well
into the new century, the Administration has begun, over the past few months, to put
together a comprehensive and bold second term urban agenda - in response to the
8
i.aiJS"itJa
· · ,_
�DRAFT
BINFIIENTIAt .
second question the President originally proposed.
.
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS: ~ DATE:_I:?,/15/!JS
.
That agenda - covering a wide range of urban concerns including hoiiieOWhership
and affordable housing, economic opportunity, crime and education - is outlined in
Section ill of this report. Core elements include: a new urban homestead initiative, a
second round ofempowerment zones, full funding of Head Start, CDFis, $3 billion
welfare to work challenge grants, passage of a landmark public housing reform bill· and
funding for urban environmental cleanup of toxic "brownfield" sites.
This report also makes. clear the continued need for reform of the way .the. federal
government does business - and that the cornerstone of a renewed urban agenda is a
reinvented and reinvigorated Department of Housing and Urban Development - the
agency created specifically to help solve the Nation's urban problems.
HUD was born of the best intentions - to help uplift the poor by providing decent,
safe and affordable housing and to create homeownership opportunities for working
families - but those intentions have not always been carried out effectively by the
agency or its community partners.
1
HUD's challenge now is ~h good intentions with good implementati~n, to
bring together compassion and competence and to prove to America that we can really
make a difference for America's communities.
/----- How will America's cities fare in the new global economy? Will they drag down
~rest of the coUntry or become, once again, drivers of a new age of prosperity?
We can not wait to let history answers these questions for us.
For the future of our cities is also a harbinger of the future of race in this country a tell-tale sign of our hopes for achieving One America.
The statistics tell a clear story: urban problems disproportionately affect minorities,
placing race, and the dialogue and action needed - and recently called for by the
President - for racial reconciliation, at the center of national agenda. Nowhere is the
President's challenge more profoun~ than in America's's cities. [Insert Clinton quote]
..
. We can regain the promise of the American community captured in the folll;lding
pledge of "e pluribus unum."
Instead of accommodating ourselves to a Nation Divided, we must construct the
9
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
·
. . .' .
.. . ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
DRAFT INITLI\LS:~ffiNFI'ff(JfiAL
6
first chapter in a great new American story - a story that fits the most racially diverse
democracy in history. And that means Confronting the fate of our cities.
Having taken a hard and honest.look at the state of America's cities we must now
have a_ tough and honest debate about what should be done for those cities if they are to
survive and thrive into the new millennium. Our cities are waiting.
A Map of This Report
Section I: Discusses the two. decades of decline - the 70s and the 80s - as
American life was increasingly defined as suburban life.
Section II: Shows how cities were able to rebound in the 1990s through a
combination of national economic expansion, programs designed to empower local
communities, and the hard work of cities around the country.
It then details the major problems still facing cities and concludes by focusing on
two special challenges to America's cities on the cusp of the new century: welfare
reform and immigration.
Section ID:Offers a future-looking urban agenda- building on frrst-term successes- to help meet the challenges of the new century.
10
�CONFIDENTIAL
I.
THE DECADES OF DECLINE
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INIT!ALS:.~DATE: 12/1~,/D~
.
The end of World War II saw the beginning of the suburbanizatioiiOfl?iiterica. ·
As veterans returned home, many - with the. direct help of the Veterans
Administration and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and the indirect boost of
low gas prices and a dramatic expansion of the Nation's roads and highways -·were
able to buy the home of their dreams in the suburbs.
Hit already by the suburbanization of the 1950s and 60s, cities- in the 1970s
and.1980s- saw a marked decline in their quality of lif~ and economic prospects,
dimming the optimism so long associated with the rise of the country's greatest cities.
In many ways, these were the decades when the post-war suburbanization of
American life actually reached its apex. As middle class families increasingly moved
from cities to ·outlying towns, businesses joined them, setting up shop in office and
industrial parks. Shopping and entertainment followed.
[Insert quote from Mayor Daley]
Throughout the low-growth 1970s, conditions· in America's distressed cities
deteriorated rapidly- population and incomes fell, poverty and unemployment
increased, crime and social problems became more intense and intractable.
•
The Nation~ Cities Became Poorer and Many Lost Population in the 1970s
and 1980s.
Economic growth, which had averaged almost four percent annually since 1945,
slowed to an anemic 2 percent per year between 1973 and 1982 .. Throughout the
1970s, conditions in distressed cities deteriorated rapidly as the U.S. urban population
declined and .the income of those left behind diminished.
· Cities in the Northeast and Midwest were much worse off than those in the
south and west. In 1980, nine of the ten most distressed cities in America were in the
northeast and north eentral regions of the country -:- regions of the country experiencing
such levels of decay that the popul~!f press referred to them collectively as "the rust
belt." By contrast, the cities that showed improved economies and living standards were
overwhelmingly in the ~outh and west. This refleeted demographic changes that
brought more people and industry to both these regions.
11
�DRAFT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:
DATE: I?.Jtflb'l
CONFIDE
NTIA
l:
Urban life in these distressed •rust belt" cities went from bad to worse in those
years, as decay and decline made the boom cities of the sunbelt and west seem even
more attractive to businesses and workers alike. One study, conducted in.1980,
looking at socioeconomic factors from 575 U.S. cities demonstrated that if a city was in
trouble in 1970, it was in deeper trouble a decade later.
I
When updated a decade later, the study found that while the most distressed
cities had bottomed out, many of the cities that had previously done well were also
showing signs of distress. This was particularly true in the south, where the collapse of
the oil boom cut economic growth. Although some northeastern cities experienced
economic improvements during the 1980s, the rate of economic progress continued to
trail behind nearby suburbs.
In 1980, average family income in cities was 18 percent below the average in
the suburbs. That gap widened by almost five percent by the end of the decade.
While cities remained the essential hubs of metropolitan areas, suburban
residents who once would have regularly worked, shopped, dined or been entertained in
city centers now could - and often did - remain in the suburbs. Many of those with
choices moved out of cities while poverty became increasingly urban~ntered. City
governments became more disproportionately responsible for dealing with the nation's
social and economic difficulties.
•
The Quality of Life Declined: More Poverty, Increased Crime, Declining
Educational Standiuds.
Overall, the quality of life in many of the nation's largest cities declined from
1970-to-1990 as evidenced by rising poverty, higher violent crime rates, declining
population, increased pollution, and other factors. In some cities, real median income
fell, declining by 16 percent in Detroit, 10 percent in Houston, 8 percent in Cleveland,
and 7 percent in Charleston WV.
The strains of urban d~line were evinced by a series of municipal fiscal crises
notably those in New Y.ork, Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Miami.
Exacerbating these trends, iD. the 1980s, the federal government turned its back
on the nation's urban problems. FCderal aid to Cities was cut and programs that helped
urbail residents - especially poor people - diminished. Generally, state governments
have not made up for these cuts in federal.revenue-sharing. Local governments,
instead, have been i.D.creasingly forced to rely on local taxes. But as more wealth and
12'
v
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
e
DATE: 1~/1~48'
l
economic activity shifted to the suburbs, many city governments found their ability to
raise revenue insufficient to cover the cost of providing services.
Cities struggled to keep up. Many were forced to cut services lest they tumble
into bankruptcy court. Urban America's increasingly impoverished residents found city
hall less able than ever to offer assistance. The crime rate rose; from 1970-to-1990, the
~umber of violent crimes coinmitted in cities doubled.
Educational standards also· declined as urban school districts increasingly lacked
the wherewithal to upgrade facilities, attract talented teachers and administrators, and,
in some cases, even buy new textbooks. (need some stats on diminishing levels of
educational attainment).
Employment Increased Three Times Faster In The Suburbs As In Cities
During The 1970s &1980s.
•
Given both the social and political forees that were turning against cities, and
• the fiscal woes resulting from the 1980s federal policy of abandoning cities, the outlook
seemed dim. Businesses became .increasingly reluctant to invest in urban areas.
Between 1970 and 1990, suburban employment grew by 75 percent while central city
employment grew by only 25 percent.
'
.
'
The gap in the unemployment rate between city and suburbs was often as high
as one-third or one-half the suburban rate. ·
•
Only 11 Of The 'Country's 30 Largest Cities Had More Residents In 1990 Than
In 1970.
Given the decline of America's cities, and the decade of federal abandoilinent of
responsibility for alleviating the nation's urban crisis, it is no wonder that those who
could voted with their feet and moved to outlying parts of metropolitan areas. This
. trend was most pronounced in the nation's cities.
Even in the West, where populations increased as residents of other regions
migrated there, cities grew less tha.p. half as fast as. nearby suburbs - even though many
Western cities have expanded and dnnexed outlying areas. Between 1980 and 1990, the
sUburbs of Phoenix grew by 55 percent while the suburbs of San Diego grew by
41 percent.
[Insert quote from Mayor Helmcke]
13
�DRAFT
•
CONFIDENTIAl
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
Suburbs have-grown four times faster than ~entral cities. INITIALs:-=;- DATE: 1",/IS)Pi'
The U.S. populationgrew by 45 million people during the previous two
decades. But given the trends favoring suburbs, it is no surprise that for every person
taking up residence in a city, four others moved to the suburbs.
•
The Federal Government Did Not Do Enough to Help Cities During the Latter
Years of Crisis· and Decline.
Just at the point when economic and social forces were mounting to the
detriment of Am.enca's cities the most, the Federal Government dramatically cut its
assistance to cities and the urban poor. This federal retrenchment, most dramatically
affecting impoverished residents of cities, came as the .most privileged in America
experienced a boom in their relative economic standing. Some of the effects of federal
policies during the 1980s are still visible today.
Ingenuity can often spring from great need. And during the 1980s, local
governments had to take drastic action. Downtown revitalization efforts focused and
leveraged remaining municipal resources on the most visible parts of many cities. Such
efforts succeeded in bringing back many declining city-centers. Projects such as
Baltimore's Inner Harbor, which turned a decaying industrial-waterfront area into a
gleaming corridor of offices, apartments, restaurants, entertainment and tourist
attractions, drew accolades.
.
While this kind of urban· redevelopment succeeded in stemming some of the
effects created by two decades of urban retrenchment, these success stories came at a
price;. many cities had to pull already declining resources from the neighborhoods to
give a boost to downtown cores. Successful as these efforts.were, they often amoUnted
to a kind of municipal triage: the patient was saved but remained in serious condition.
ll.
CITIES ARE DOING BETTER IN THE 1990s,
BUT REAL CHALLENGES REMAIN
While urban America is on the rebound, it still faces a number of problems - as
well as new challenges for the new century. This Section outlines the economic and
social gains cities have made in the last few years -.and the impact of the Clinton
Administration's urban agenda (part A). It then describes (part B) the core problems of
·cities - and the new and dual challenges of welfare reform and immigration (part C).
14
�DRtu\FT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
NT!~'tV
JE:_HLJ()oy
u
(A) THE FIRST TERM ECONOMIC AND URBAN INITIATIVES ARE
WORKING
The country's sustained economic growth pattern since 1993 has helped revitillize cities.
•
Lowest Unemployment Rate in Nearly a Quarter-Century.
'
For the first quarter of 1997, the economy grew at an exceptional annualized
rate of 5.8 percent, and unemployment dropped below five percent for the frrst time in
24 years. This remarkable and sustained ecOnomic expansion ru1s brought the
unemployment rate down in the nation's 50 largest cities by nearly a third over the past
four years. By 1996, rates below 4 percent were enjoyed by Indianapolis, Columbus,
Austin, Nashville, Oklahoma City, and Charlotte. But some cities were still mired
above 10 percent, namely, El Paso, Fresno, and Miami. [Exhibit 1]
•
Deficit Cutting in Washington Frees Capital for Productive Use in Cities.
America's ·growing economy is being strengthened by fiScal responsibility in the
form of declining federal deficits. Federal overspending has been trimmed by more
than three quarters since 1992- to its lowest level in 20 years. Total deficit cutting is
projected to reach a trillion dollars by the turn of the century. (Verify these facts -taken
from 1996 Draft White House Fact Sheet). This means a trillion dollars more that.
Washington has freed for productive uses elsewhere in the economy. With the federal
government competing less for capital, the cost of borrowing has gone down for
everyone- a net benefit to local governments when they need financing. For instance,
in 1993 alone, interest costs associated with city, state and school board bond issues
declined by over 3 billion dollars as a result of federal d(!ficit cutting. (Do we have
Updated figures???- no from a special study)
With growth generating income and low inflation keeping borrowing costs low,
city officials say they are quite optimistic about their ability to maintain municipal
services without raising taxes. ·This is a far cry from the service cuts and tax jolts
common just a decade earlier. Thi$ optimism is based on five solid factors:·
1. All but three of 77 large cities surveyed had bond ratings of BBB or higher.
· (The three cities with lower bond ratings, Washington, DC, Miami, FL and
Providence, RI, each had particular problems that were so unique that it put ·
them outside the national trend.)
15
�---~~----------------:DE:=T~E:R:M:lN:E~D~T~O~B~E;A~N;--
DRAFT
ADMIN\STRAT\VE MARKiNG
INITIALS:~ DATE: 12-./Jf/ D'i'
GQNFI OENTIAl
2. Overall, state and local goveinm.ents reported budget surpluses in 1995 for
the first time in almost a decade. At 4 percent, these surpluses were sizable
- bigger than any during the past tWo decades.
3. A National League of Cities survey shows mayors, on average, rating their
cities' financial condition, on a scale of one-to-ten, as 7.7.
4. Federal aid to cities is increasing faster than the rate of inflation. From
1993-96, real federal assistance to state and local governments was, on
average, 40 percent greater than in the preceding 12 years.
5. With more money coming into municipal coffers, city governments have
generally been able to balance budgets while iri.creasing, rather than cutting,
expenditures for municipal services.
•
Cities Making Efforts to Help Themselves
Cities have retooled themselves, to some degree, from the previous two-decades
of decline as the U.S. economy moved away from manufacturing toward informationbased and service industries.
While some cities, notably , Detroit, have benefited by America's increased
international competitiveness for such heavy industrial goods as automobiles, many
other cities have re-{)riented themselves toward emerging industries - leaving the
remaining manufacturing to the suburbs.
Most cities have transformed themselves into knowledge centers where high
quality intellectual services are clustered to meet the needs of clients across the country
and around the world. For instance, New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco have
excelled in creating clusters devoted ~ multi-media production - a ba11mark of the
digital age. Banking, insurance, engineeriilg, communications, law, marketing and
accounting are higher level service businesses typiCally clustered in central cities.
Hospitals, edueational institutions - notably colleges and universities, and research
centers have long existed in cities.
[Insert quote from Mayor Archer]
Many have expanded .to meet the demands of an information-based economy creating new opportunities within the surrounding community. Urban revitalization
efforts have further brought shopping, tourist and entertainment dollars back to
16
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
oRNAIFF DATE:I.?/fS/'toNn DENTIAL
downtown areas through creation of such people-magnets as. festival marketplaces,
updated convention centers, new sports arenas and post-industrial waterfront
attractions.
The successes of cities have led to a sense of optimism among mayors and chief
elected officials. When asked in a recent National League of Cities survey, to compare
the condition of their city in January 1997 with its condition a year earlier, the
respondents saw improvements across the board from crime to eConomic conditions to
infrastructure. [Exhibit 2]
There is reason for this optimism - not only because of a strong economy but
because the Clinton Administration has undertaken a wide range of.urbari. initiatives.
The goal of this administration's urban policy has been to empower cities to
build on the hard work of recovery already accomplished. Acting alone, the federal
government simply cannot reconnect people and neighborhoods to opportunity and
prosperity.
The Clinton Administration's new activism - coupled with a new empowerment
approach led by the Vice President- is working. Community empowerment means
that rather than issuing mandates, the federal government should be an instrument to
create opportunity in the private sector, as well as assist residents and community-based
organizations to identify and solve problems locally. The government must help spur
private investment rather than defy the market.
In an age characterized by global competition and information-based economic
power, the question is which cities are successful in making the.transition to a new
economy. Cities must work in partnership with the Federal Government and the
private sector, to further nurture both their human and physical infrastructures. No one
understands local needs and conditions better than people who live in the community .
. The federal government is now serving as a partner - offering a mix of resources so
communities can work out suitable solutions from the bottom-up.
In fact, after declining in the 1980s, real Federal aid to State .and local
governments has been growing since 1992. The average real contribution from 1993
through 1996 was 40 percent ·higher than the average for the preceding 12 years.
Reflecting this commitment to a national partnership for community
·empowerment, the administration has already launched (how many) innovative
·
initiatives that already are showing results.
17
�80NFIOENTIAl
DRAFT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS: ~ DATE: \ c?, liS" /pE
.,
Empowennent Zones and Enterprise Communities Bring Economic
Development to Struggling Communities.
History instructs that, above all, effective community development works best
with a combination of local empowerment and federal assistance. With this bottom-up
approach in mind, the administration's program for Empowerment Zones and
Enterprise Communities offers a challenge to hundreds of cities: they create an
economic growth and community reinvestment strategy for targeted low income
neighborhoods. If the strategy emphasizes private sector growth bnnging both business
and local communities together to execute the plan, then the federal government will
bolster these local efforts with a full menu of grants, employer tax credits, and
regulatory waivers.
Initial reports from the Empowerment Zones have displayed impressive results,
with a HUD review - based on a number of independent analyses - noting progress in
67 out of the 72 urban Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities. One of
· those analyses, a study conducted by the Rockefeller Institute of Government, cited the
EZ initiative as, " among the most significant efforts launched by the federal
'
government in decades ... "
'[put in some quotes from the recent EZ study i.e. 67 of the 72 EZIECs are
showing real progress .... ]
•
In Detroit, thousands of jobs have been created and more than $2 billion
in private sector investments have been committed. The EZ has been
aggressive in using its ·designation and associated tax benefits to attract
businesses, revitalize its manufacturing base and generate jobs. Chrysler
has located a new engine plant in zone, as well as parts suppliers,
packaging industries, service and food firms.
•
The Los Angeles Supplemental Empowerment Zone used its $125
million in HUD Economic Development Initiative grant funds and $315
million in HUD Seetion 108 loan guarantees to successfully create the
. largest non-comme~iallending institution in the nation, the Los Angeles
Community Development Bank. The bank has partnered with several
private lenders, which have agreed to comniit.$210 million in loan
funds, bringing the total loan pool to $640 million. These funds will be
loaned to expand existing businesses and start new ventures in the
designated zone.
18
�·CONFIDENTIAL
DRAFT
•
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: \:J,}IS }DK
The Community Oriented Policing Strategy is Putting I 00,000 More Police On
The Beat~
While central cities tend to be safer than they were during the years of decline,
crime fighting initiatives must further reach into the neighborhoods so that cbildren can
go to school without fear, citizens can sit on their stoops and porches without worry,
and businesses can bring wealth and opportunity to the community.
The Administration's Community Oriented Policing strategy is bringing law
enforcement down to the neighborhood level by building bridges between police
departments and the communities they serve. The Justice Department's Office of
Community Policing Services (COPS) has provided an additional grants to get 60,000
more police officers walking the beat. More than half the law enforcement departments
in the country are participating, and 80 percent of the country's population will see
more police in their areas. HUD will. soon bolster these efforts by selling foreclosed
homes to police officers in targeted communities for (40 ???) percent below the
appraised market value. Community policing means having police fully part of the
community, and this new thrust of the COPS .Program will deepen those roots.
With crime on the retreat, the· incentives for children to become part of the
juvenile underworld of gangs and violence diminishes as urban neighborhoods became
safer places in which to learn and grow. In a world that increasingly demands higher
level skills from the workforce, the true road to conipetitive success - and community
development - is education. Children have trouble learning when they don't feel safe.
Making their communities safer places will help make possible the kind of learning
needed for the jobs of tomorrow. [Exhibit 3]
Raising the Minimum Wage and Protecting The Earned Income Tax Credit to.
Assist Low Wage Worken Help Themselves.
·
•
Increasing the minimum wage, coupled with the 1993 extension of the Earned
Income Tax Credit are two ways the administration has sought to put real dollars in the
hands of those who work so they can better meet life's necessary expenses. .Further.
the administration's 1993 ·legislation to make permanent the Low Income Housing Tax
Credit, has open up/created (need riumbers to show how many) new units of rental
housing specifically designed to meet the needs of people with lower incomes.
Preserving the ability of the working poor to help themselves is one of the most
significant issUes we faced today. Such initiatives are especially significant as the ·
19
�DRAFT
CONFIDENTIAL
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: 1~/IS/lJ't.
nation works to end welfare. as we know it - promoting the independence created by
emi>loyment over the dependency of transfer payments.
[Describe HUD's EDI initiate and the # of new jobs created]
o
•
The Brownfields Pilot Project Began Turning Contaminated Urban Wasteland
Back To Productive Uses. ·
Land is another asset many blighted urban areas have in fair supply, but are
often unable to leverage in the interests of community development because previous
industrial users have left the behind contamination. The administration's Brownfields
initiative, linking HUD with the Environmental Protection Agency, enables cities to
clean up these environmentally damaged properties and buildings in order to return
them to economically useful purposes. So far, the Brownfields Initiative is poised to
help cleanup and redevelop more than 5,000 properties, supporting 196,000 jobs, and
protecting the health of 18 million nearby residents.
•
Preparing and Educating Americans for the Jobs of the Future
Education and training is the key, not only for children,. but for adults already in
the workforce, whose ~nomic prospects. have been diminished by the transition from
an industrial-based to an information- and service-based economy.
Given the vast technological changes sweeping the economy, and the
technological mastery required to thrive in the workplace of today and tomorrow,
educational infrastructure improvements are more crucial than ever for everyone.
•
Every Classroom in America Should Be Connected to The Internet by the Tum
of the Century.
·
· The administration has launched an effort to wire every classroom to the
Internet by the year 2000. Likewise, The Campus of Learners program will transform
public housing communities into learning centers with on-site access to new technology.
Additionally, the Neighborhood Network Program is creating computer education .
centers to link low-income residents to jobs, job training and higher education.
[Insert quote from Mayor Guiliani] ·
Such programs are important links in the Welfare Reform efforts at the center of
20
�DRAFT
. .
.
.
GONFIDENTIAL
~
. .
DETERMINED TO BE AN
. ADMINISTRATIVE MARKtNG
INITIALq: ~ DATE: \'J.../IS"/1)8'
the administration's emphasiS on commumty buildmg and personal responsd)illty;:,_
Those moving from welfare to work will need an estimated three million jobs in the
next two-to-three years. By developing marketable sldns through training initiatives
such as these, the move away from welfare has a better chance of succeeding ..
•
The Bridges to Work Program Gets Urban Job Seekers to Employment in
Suburban Areas
The Bridges to Work program is helping overcome this geographic mismatch
between workers and jobs by tailoring a combination of transportation and child care
options to assist those without a car commute to otherwise inaccessible suburban job
sites. This linkage, in turn, will bring much needed money back to distressed urban
communities- where these new "reverse" conuputers will seek goods and services. As
businesses grow where markets are created, the Bridges to Work program will also
serve, longer term, as an economic development tool for blighted urban areas.
•
Making Investment Capital Available In Areas Shunned by Traditional
Lenders: CRA and CDFI.
A reality of economic and community development is that financing helps make
things happen. By strengthening the regulations related to the Community
Reinvestment Act, the amount of traditional bank financing for projects in distressed
urban cOmmunities has increased.
Substantial additional investment capital is generated through The Community
Development Banks and Financial Institutions Act. This law nurtures community-based
lending by building a nationwide network of self-sustaining locally-based community
development institutions - including microbanks and credit unio~. The program
leverages $10 in private investment for every federal dollar Contributed. Already, more
than 300 such institutions have been established having already made 3 billion dollars in
loans.
•
Homeownership rates rise to the highest level in over 15 years.
Community building is integrally tied not only to increasing economic
opportunity, but giving residents ptide· in their ·neighborhoods. And nothing builds
such bonds of pride as home ownership. [Exhibit 4] .
Currently, 65.4 percent of all Americans owned their own homes - and increase
of 2.5 million homeowners in just three years. This represents the highest rate of
21
·
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMlNISTRATlVE MARKING
DRAFT INITIALS:lJNFIDfNT~~~
homeownership in over 15 years. This trend should further solidify with the newly
announced rate reduction in loans guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration·
(FHA). HUD's National Homeownership Strategy aims to achieve record levels of
home owning by the turn of the century. Experience proves that as home ownership
increases, community stability likewise increases bolstering economic development,
education and public safety efforts.
This year, HUD is investing more than $100 million for construction and
development of private homes in a series of urban "Homeownership Zones" nationwide.
HUD is assisting in the purchase of tracts of urban land where partner private
org~tions, such a5 the successful Nehemiah (foundation???) plan, organize, build
and market homes to people who would otherWise be renters. This represents an
important part of the administration's commitment to its Empowerment Zone program
•
Providing a Continuum of Care to Overcome the Multiple and Complex
Causes of Homelessness.
Efforts to stabilize communities ·must also directly confront problems arising
from failed policies of the past. In the 1980s, homelessness, the most visible scourge
on American urban life, rose dramatically:. For the past three years, HUD has
responded by providing a continuum of care approach. This involves a communitybased process to identify the specific needs of a homeless individual or family -whether
they lie in temporary shelter, assisted housing or job training and assistance, as well as
--addiction treatment or other health services.
Preventing homelessness in the first place is clearly the best solution of all.
This means fighting the poverty that leads to a family's eviction from their rental home,
as well as creating incentives for affordable housing. This is especially so in some of
the nation's largest cities where the salaries earned by low wage earners hardly meet the
high cost of housing.
(B) CITIES STilL FACE REAL PROBLEMS
The success story involving America's cities today while real, is neither as deep
nor as wide as it could be. This report - using in large part previously unreleased
data from the Bureau of Labor Statj.stics and the Census - fmds three main problems
still facing cities:
· Finding #1: ThePe is a dangerous disparity in job creation between the cities and
the ·suburbs - and. the cities are losing out.
·
22
l
�OETERMlNED TO BE A~
ADM\N\STRATlVE MAHKING .
.
DRAFT
.
•
IN!11ALS:
~ JE·il/~K
~10£N~.l
Unemployment Is Consistently Higher in Cities. and Employment Growth Is
Slower. Central cities have always had higher unemployment rates than suburbs
and, since 1970, the number of employed city residents has risen at a rate only
half as rapid as the United States as a whole and barely one-third of the rise for
suburbanites. (See Exhibit 1)
Unemployment has been receding steadily throughout the United States since
1993 and central cities llilve benefited from this recovery. Yet rates remain - as
always- higher in central cities than elsewhere in metropolitan regions. Cities,
which often have disproportionately large pools of lower skilled workers,
typically experience unemployment rates one-third to one-half higher than
nearby suburbs. This is especially true in large cities, where disparities between
urban and suburban unemployment are greatest. Their residents are often the
first to be idled by hard times and the last to be absorbed back into the labor
market when times improve. For example, the central city unemployment rate
in 1996 was 6 percentage points higher in Cleveland, 5.2 percentage points
higher in Washington, and 4.7 percentage points higher in New York than in the
surrounding suburbs. Even with the remarkable progress Detroit has made in
lowering its unemployment rate, the central city rate was still 5. 7 percentage
points higher than the suburban rate.
1
The 1990-91 recession created an actual decline in central city employment that
lasted unti11993. Suburban employment continued to grow during this period
but at much lower rates than over the preceding two decades. After 1993~ the
employment growth rate in central cities and suburbs has been roughly eqUal but cities have not closed the gap previously created. [Exhibit 5]
·
•
Suburbs Are The Great Job Creators.
~e
the U.S. as a whole has gained 12
million jobs since 1990, suburbs have gained the lion's share.
Cities continue to serve ·their traditional role as a primary bUsiness center for
metropolitan - they host 38 percent of all metropolitan businesses and 43
percent of all jobs in the 77 cities examined. However recent statistics suggest
that this economic primacy may be waning. Between 1991 and 1993, cities were
net losers of jobs while jobs. in suburbs grew by over 10 percent. [Exhibit 6]
•
During this same period 95 percent of the new establishments were located in
the suburbs of these metropolitan areas and only 5 percent in central cities.
23
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MAHK!NG
INITIALS:~ J< :J./1 5 D~
•
.DRAFT
The 1990/1991 recession cost large cities many jobs. Of the 19 cities for which
data are available through 1995, almost half (9) lost jobs between 1990 and
1993. New York City lost 275,000 jobs. The economic recovery has helped
these cities by reversing or slowing the job lost. But a third of these cities
continued to lose jobs. Despite the turnaround after 1993, New York City still
had 250,000 fewer jobs in 1995 than in 1990. Only half of the ten largest cities
have more employed residents today than in 1990. [Must check to see if this is
consistent with the New York Times article-but it is cOnsistent with a second
BLS data series] [Exhibit 7]
•
The Jobs and Skills Mismatch. Aggravating the urban employment situation- .
and the great need for people coming off the welfare rolls to find entry level and
low skill jobs - there is a mismatch between the urban workforce and the jobs
·that are being created in cities. Of the new service jobs being createdespecially those requiring little or no skills, cities are creating less than 20% and
suburbs more than 80%. Compounding that situation, large numbers of low- .
skilled jobs that can serve as a first step in breaking the cycle of poverty lie in
the suburbs and are often inaccessible using public transportation - the only
method of transport available to many of the city's most needy residents~
•
Cleveland: Fewer than half (45%) of entry-level jobs in the Cleveland
metropolitan area are accessible from central city neighborhoods (those
in the Cleveland Empowerment Zone) within an 80-minute commute
time. The remaining 55 percent are simply not accessible by public .
transportation.
•
Boston: Boston has an excellent transit system, with stations within a
half-mile of 99 percent of the city's welfare recipients. Still, it does not
provide needed connections to available jobs: ·only 43 percent of
employers are also within a half-mile of transit lines. Only 40 percent of
employers in high-growth areas can be reached after a public transit
commute of more than tWo hours.
·
•
Atlanta: Three of every four job openings in the Atlanta area are in the
suburbs. Two-thirds of entry level jobs paying less than $15,000
annuai.ly are within Aquarter-mile of a tranSit line; ·however, fewer than
one of three entry levd jobs paying more than $15,000 annually- those
most likely to enable a welfare recipient become self-sufficient - are
located within a quarter mile of a transit line.
24
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMIN.ISTRATIVE MARKING
.'
INITIALS.
l~/15tY
--DEN
FAt
0~f·
DRAFT
Finding #2: Despite the recent decline in the national poverty rate, America cities
today are as poor and the poor are more socially and economically isolated and
more physically concentrated than at any time in a generation.
•
50% Increase in Central City Poverty. Poverty rates in central cities rose
steadily from 1970 to 1993, increasing by over 50 percent. Since 1993, the
national poverty rate has fallen and there has been a· very slight decline in the
central city rate as well. But in 1995, one of every five central city residents
was still living in poverty compared to less than one in every ten suburban
residents. [Exhibit 8]
•
Poverty imposes a heavy burden on cities. While central cities house only
30 percent of the population, they have to care for 43 percent of the poor. This
burden is especially heavy for some cities. In 1990, the poverty rate exceeded
30 percent in Detroit, New Orleans, and Miami. Poverty especially afflicts
minorities. Poverty rates surpassed 40 percent for African Americans in Miami,
Miwaukee, New Orleans, and Pittsburgh and for Hispanics in Buffalo,
Cleveland, Hartford, and Philadelphia.
A particularly alanillng trend has been the growth of poverty ghettoes.
o
Poverty Concentration has doubled. More than 10 percent of all city residents
live in neighborhoods where the Census Bureau reports that 40 percent or more
of the households are living below the poverty line, a doubling of the level of
concentration in 1970. In many of these places, intense and increasingly longterm poverty and welfare dependency occur simultaneously with alarmingly high
rates of cdme, drug abuse, single parenthood, dropping out of high school and
other soci~ problems. ·
·
And more than ever, these high poverty tracts, isles of misery, are almost
. exclusively inhabited by minoritieS. As a tesult, almost a quarter of the African
American and Hispanic population in central cities are isolated in these high
poverty neighborhoods. [Exhibit 9]
•
The concentration of poverty is eating away at the residential core of central
cities. In 1970, only 6 percent of all census tracts in central cities were high
poverty tracts; by 1990, this had more than doubled to 14 percent.
•
Increasing Burden on Services. Growing poverty places increasing service
delivery burdens on cities while reducing the tax base availabl~ to finance these
25
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MA~w~ o~
INITIALS:~ DA~otH iNTI ~t
DRAFT
services. School system performance is an important example of how this fiScal
dynamic weakens cities' ability to carry out their functions and simultaneously
reinforces poverty.
Because of their greater expenditures for noneducation functions, cities spend
only 90 percent as much per student on education as suburbs. This is the case
even though city schools, with more students from impoverished homes and
immigrant children for whom English is a second language, face greater
burdens. Urban schools also tend to be more segregated. The cOmbination of
fewer resources and greater challenges results in higher dropout rates in large
city schools. While some large school systems perform close to the national
norm, for example, New York City and San Diego. Others have dropout rates
50 percent, 70 percent, and even almost 100 J?ercent higher. [Exhibit 10]
lFinding #3: The migration of the middle class from cities to suburbs continues. ·
City Populations In General Are Shrinking. Only 11 of 30 largest cities in 1970
have more population today. Population losses continued into the 1990s in some
instances. Population losses were particularly severe in StLouis which lost
40 percent of its population over this period and. in Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh,
and Buffalo, each of which lost approximately one-third of its population.
G
Among today's ten largest cities, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia and Detroit
lost population between 1990 and 1994. New York City barely held its own as a
massive influx of immigrants made up for the made up for the large number of
former city residents who left the city.
·
There has been a long term trend that has led to central cities being home to a
shrinking share of the metropolitan population. In 1970, 45 percent of the
metropolitan population lived in central cities; but, by 1994, the central city share
had fallen to only 38 percent. [Exhibit 1~]
Minority population growth has helped stabilize central city population but, as a
consequence, minoritY are becoming the majorities in an increasing number of
central cities. Between 1970 and 1990, the minority population in central cities
grew by 60 pet;cent while the non-minority population declined by 25 percent.
Minorities cOnstitute more thai60 percent of the population in Miami, Newark,
Detroit, El Paso, Honolulu, Oakland, Santa Ana, Was~n, Hartford, New
Orleans, Atlanta, Birmingham, and San Antonio.
•
Suburban Populations Are Growing. The growing dominance of suburbs is
26
�~---~--~~------------------------------------
especially recognizable in the vary large metropolitan areas. Among metropolitan
areas with over one .million inhabitants in 1994, the suburban population increased
more than 10 times faster than the central city population between 1970 and 1994 .
. [Exhibit 12]
The Urban Middle Class is Shrinking. In 1970 the income profile of central cities
o
was almost identical to the Nation as a whole. However, the loss of jobs and
middle-class families over the ensuing two decades has fundamentally_ changed the
~come distribution within central cities. The proportion of high and middle-income
families is decreasing, while the cities' share of low-income households has grown
substantially. [Exhibit 13]
By contrast, the suburbs are increasingly becoming the province of more affluent
families, while the proportion of those at the opposite end of the income scale
continues to fall. This disparity is most stark in metropolitan areas of over a
million inhabitants, where 25 pe~nt of the central city's population is low-income
compared to less than 12 percent of suburban residents.
•
Income Distribution has grown. Changes in income distributions for some cities
were particularly striking and provide strong testimony to the impact of economic
changes during the 1970s and 1980s. For example, Detroit in 1970 had a relatively
balanced income distribution with 20 percentlow-income families, 58 percent
middle-income families, and 22 percent high-iricoine families. By-1990, 40 percent
of Detroit's families were low-income, 49 percent middle-income, and only 10
percent high-income. Other cities following Detroit's pattern include Cleveland,
.Buffalo, and New Orleans. Some cities displayed a bifurcation of the income
distribution where the proportion of high-income and low-income families increased
while the broad middle class declined. The two most prominent examples are
Boston and Washington.
• Lower paying jobs are" leaving cities. There ~ also a new dynamic that makes it
even more difficult for central cities to retain. the middle class. The highest paying
jobs in central cities are in industry· groupings such as wholesale trade, depository ·
institutions, and insurance carriers. Employment in these categories declined for
the 77 central cities studied betw~n 1991 ~d 1994 but average compensation in
these categories rose, even after adjustment for inflation. It appears that firms are
either eliminating lower paying.jobs in these categories or moving these lower-paid
positions to suburban offices. The Census numbers confirm stories of large midlevellayoffs by major financial corporations and the movement of back-office
functions to suburban locations.
• Loss of Families. Families are the bedrock of a stable community and cities are still
27
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~DATE: 12.Jt912f
struggling to attract and retain them in the face of the suburban siren song of lower
density, better schools and less crime. In 1970, central cities and suburbs housed
roughly equal numbers of families; today, suburbs have almost twice as many
families as do cities.
•
Loss of Traditional Families. The demographic and social changes that have
characterized the end ofthe twentieth century in America have been magnified in
cities. With the aging of the baby boom and changing attitudes toward marriage
and divorce, the number of two-spouse families with children remained essentially
constant from 1970 to 1990, but the distribution of this total shifted more heavily
towards the suburbs. The absolute number of families with children in central cities
declined by 300,000 between 1970 and 1990. During this time, the number of twospouse families with children fell by 1.5 million in central cities while increasing by
1.3 million in suburbs. As a result, central cities are home to a disproportionate
share of single-parent households - with all the additional social services such
arrangements often entail. Single-parent families outnumber two-spouse families in
Hartford, Newark, Petroit, and Atlanta. [Exhibit 14]
..
The Challenge of Reversing the Trend. A forthcoming study highlights the
challenges central cities face as they work to reverse the declining population of
middle class families.
First, the study shows that, despite recent progress in America's cities, this trend has
continued ·into the 1990s. Annual data constructed from the Current Population Survey
continue to show that the number of high and middle income household moving from
central cities to suburbs is substantially higher than the number moving from suburbs to
central cities.
Second, using the 1990 Census data, the study observes that households of all income
levels who leave the central city typically settle in subtlrbs while households who leave
the suburbs typically move to other metropolitan areas. City dwellers seem to find the
suburbs an attractive residential alternative but suburban dwellers leave the suburbs
niainly because of employment changes.
Third, while immigration has helped sustain the population of large central cities, only
three of 12 eentral cities studied attracted more immigrants than did their suburbs and
the higher the level of household ineome, the more likely an immigrant household will
settle in the suburbs.· The study notes that: "In general whites, two-parent households,
and·the middle-aged are leading the charge out of the central cities .... Black
households with ·the same profile aie close behind."
So while it is good news that the nation's cities .are rebounding from their historic low
points reached during the previous decades, their gleaming do\vntown areas, their
28
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVEMARKiNG
I+'
~R ~.l r-~ :~ r' nI
:J:l·'!! ;U\7!. .!_
1
· INITIALS:~ DATE: f ~/15/Di-
DRAFT
healthier balance sheets and lower crime rates only tell part of the story.
Many city neighborhoods continue to show signs of distress and dislocation. The
time is right for initiatives to extend and deepen America's urban renaissance; our goal
must be to empower communities to make it happen. New initiatives and seeds of hope
have started taking root. But they will need to be carefully nurtured before they can lead
to bountiful harvest.
(C) THE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD
· When the administration assumed office in January, 1993, the urban challenge
was clear: how to best leverage federal help to empower local government to make the
most of the work they had already begun. As described above, our efforts are already
bearing fruit. But our strategy for assisting Urban America to make an effective
transition to the 21st Century is now confronting two additional and vexing problems: the·
effects of welfare reform and immigration.
•
Welfare Recipients Moving Into Tlte Workforce W"dl Require An Estimated I
Million Jobs.
A fundamental tenet of the Clinton Administration is that all Americans must
assume responsibility for the well-being of their families. The Welfare system should be
a transitional step as people develop skills and find jobs that will ultimately free them
from the bonds of poverty and dependence·.
This effort to end welfare as we know it requires the availability of employment
opportunities for those making this crucial step toward personal independence.
City residents ·moving from welfare to work will need an estimated three million
jobs in the next two-to-three years. However, amid our current economic expansion, over
·the past three years, the economy has only created 2 million new jobs in central cities.
Overall, job growth in cities has been dramatically slower than in the suburbs - especially
for the lower skilled jobs suitable for most people moving from welfare to work.
While better economic development of cities represents the long term solution, in
the short run, the administration's program to end welfare as we know will require efforts
to get city residents to the suburbs to' find appropriate suburban jobs. This mismatch
problem is more pronounced in large cities than in smaller ones.
[Insert quote from Mayor Savage] '
•
Immigration Is At Record Levels, And Is Projected To Increase In The Coming
Decade.
29
�88HF IBEilTI
~l
' I
DETERMINED TO BE AN .
. MINlSTRAT\VE MARKING~ '
AD
.
_. ~~ S{P'l
\NITIALS:~DATE.I
I
Dl{AFT
.
The United States has not had such a large influx of immigrants since the
legendary days of industry-building at the tum of the century, when unskilled workers
from distant lands were drawn by the promise of a better life. Today's immigrants, while
generally haling, from different countries, carry many of the same hopes and aspirations:
that hard work will be rewarded and lead to a better life.
As in earlier periods of intense immigration, today's new Americans .are most
likely to settle in large gateway cities such as Boston, New York, Miami, Chicago, Los
Angeles and San Francisco. Their hard work and energy has been a net bonus for the
U.S. economy and presents us with an opportunity.
[Insert quote from Mayor Guiliani on immigration]
Immigrants are a positive force, bringing new energy, talent and resources to their
adopted hometowns. As one New York demographer noted: As immigrants poured into
the city in recent years, longtime New Yorkers poured out, at a rate of more than 100,000
a year. "This city was dying in the 1970s. Having more than 100,000 immigrants a year
has helped mightily." Similarly, in Los Angeles, public schools now have children who
are able to speak 75 different languages.
The 1980s brought more. immigrants to these shores than other decade in history,
including the previous high point of 1900-to-191 0 when there were more than 9 million
immigrants. Immigration from 1990 to 2000 is likely to prove even greater than during
the 1980s. However, the United States is much more populous today, and immigrants
represent a smaller percentage of the total population.
In 1990, fourteen gateway cities, including the Boston, New York, Miami,
Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco regions, contained almost
80 percent of the foreign-born population living in the fifty-eight largest U.S. cities. Yet.
all types· of coinmunities are affected by immigration. [Exhibit 15]
Foreign-born persons are niost highly concentrated in central cities (and made
up 16 percent of their population in 1990). However, more than 11 percent of the
populations of their Suburbs were· also foreign born. Immigration has grown so much
in recent years, and immigrants have so spread out in metropolitan areas, that by 1990
foreign-born persons made up almost as large a proportion of suburban populations as
they had of central city populations ten years earlier.
·
·Immigration Provides A Net Benefit For the County.
Immigration has played several important roles in the American economy in
recent years.
30
.
,.
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
fl[NTI ql
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING CO~l~l
/'j)J~.
J
I•
l.1.-•
IN ITIALS:--=::rDATE: 12.} IS'>t>~ ,
I
•.
First, immigration increases the size of the domestic market for goods and
services, and of the labor force.
•
Second, highly skilled, educated immigrant workers meet the need for brain
power in high technology sectors.
•
Third, skilled immigrants from developing nations can help to generate
international trade and investment opportunities for U.S. businesses. It is
becoming clearer and clearer that these immigrants' ethnic, cultural, and family
ties to their home countries can be foundations for business relationships
between the United States and the· motherlands of America's ·immigrants. Such
ties may be of special importance in overcoming cultural and market barriers.
[Insert quote from Mayor of Albuquerque]
•
Fourth, a strong case cai1 be made that low-skilled workers enable U.S. firms to
provide many goods and services that the United States otherwise could not
produce efficiently.
ill.
AN URBAN AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE
In an age of global competition, America cannot afford to be divided into two
nations - one doing well in the suburbs, and the other marginalized in urban
neighborhoods. While the cities are now rebounding from two decades of economic
and social transition, coupled with the·anti-urban policies of the 1980s, America's urban
renaissance is not yet solid.
In an effort to create One America, we must now build upon the past four years
of success to insUre that the gleam of booming downtown districts casts light on the
neighborhoods. We must build on the momentum begun in 1993. and institutionalize
the lessons learned and the approaches that have proven effective .
. We must assist the creative spirit that seeks to build, from the bottom up,
. stronger communities. We mustensure that human capital is maximized through
education, homeownership is fostered to give people a deeper stake in their
communities, and that pure economic capital is made available so energy and
entrepreneurship is freed, rather than stifled by the streets of urban America .
•
In 1993, President Clinton rejected decades of failed policy and created an
Urban Empowerment Agenda.
31
�------------------------------
DETERMINEDTOBEAN .
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:.~DATE: \~/t(/Of
Q
\!'-:r··r .. \lTI~L
8·
L1 hl JLJLn IIHL
DRAFT
EMPOWERMENT PRINCIPLES
The President has built his Empowerment Agenda on these core concepts:
Leverage Private Sector Investment. Working with the market and private
C>
business, an empowerment approach aims to build upon the natural assets and
competitive advantages of urban communities. For example, in virtually all
existing EZs and ECs, efforts are underway to create new partnerships with the
private sector which allows private capital to flow back into inner-city
neighborhoods. Small amounts of federal funds are leveraging private capital
into neighborhoods which have for too long have had not significant
investments. Rather than work against the market - as too many poverty
programs have done - empowerment says that we must use market incentives
and norms to create the healthy, mainstream communities all Americans desire.
Make Community Development Comprehensive. Traditionally, communities plan
development projects in a piecemeal fashion. An empowerment approach says
that it doesn't work this way - only a comprehensive, multi-year approach will
allow communities to solve the underlying problems rather than merely treating
symptoms. As the Vice President says, only a "whole systems" plan will get the
right results.
·
Trust the Community. Traditional community development has too often been
top-down, directed by bureaucrats in Washington. But the days of "Made In
Washington" solutions are over- and the President's approach promotes
solutions that are locally shaped and implemented at the grassroots, involving
community residents, private businesses, the growing and entrepreneurial
network of commuD.ity based organizatio~ and all levels of government. The
early experience has shown that this process often produces significant tensions,
but such tension has been a barometer of the community commitment to
achieving full community buy in, and thus generating lasting change.
0
0
Demand Perfornumce. Performance measurement is an important part of
ensuring that federal tax dollars and tax inceD.tives are used effectively - a way
to ensure accountability, put performance over process and protect the public
trust. The right federal role says that the community must take the lead - but
the federal government must be a responsible steward of public funds, offering
flexibility and local control but demanding results in return.
..
Build on Mainstream Values. Finally, an empowerment approach affirms
traditional values such as hard work, family and self-reliance. President Clinton
recOgnizes that the problems of so many inner-city neighborhoods - family
breakup, criine, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy- are not subject to government
32
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE:\" JI5 /P'i
t i
i
I \
DRJ;\FT
l...
solutions alone, but call upon individuals and their communities to set and
maintain high standards of behavior and mutual responsibility. Instead of
perpetuating dependency we must nurture self-reliance, helping people to make
their way off government programs and onto an independent life.
-The essence and innovation of the President's empowerment philosophy and
program is that unlike in the 1960s where "urban policy" meant the same policy for
every community, Washington now recognizes that there are really nine hundred
different urban agendas for all of the communities we partner with.
Instead of a federal mandate we offer a federal menu, a range of options for
creating stronger, safer, saner communities: more affordable housing, increased
community development, more homeownership opportunities for working class
families, and better schools with higher standards. One community needs police and
parks, another housiri.g and homeless assistance .
.ADMINISTRATION INITIATIVES
.This Administration seeks. partnership with communities through an urban
agenda for the future, an agenda that will deepen and institutionalize the innovative,
bottoms-up, mainstream empowerment approach developed over the past four years.
This study indicated a need for policy efforts directed at a three-fold challenge:
•
· With the suceess of welfare reform hanging in the balance, what can be done to
ensure that ,there are two million jobs for people coming off welfare refoim and that they're prepared to succeed at work - emphasizing targeted efforts to
make cities more attractive to the private sector?
•
How can we retain - and begin to bring back - middle class families to
· America's cities?
•
. What can lessen the impact of today's poverty concentrations - creating more
hope and opportunity for future generations?
I
.
.
The Administration has a seven point agenda:
•
(1) Making the City Home: An Urban Homestead Initiative for the Year 2000
(2) A Second Round of Empowerment Zones
(3) New Tools For the Welfare to Work Transition
33
�-------~---- --
r·..-··
--
DRIJ.FT
i
\._,.
(4) Making Urban Neighborhoods Safe and Crime-Free
(5) Cleaning Up The Urban Environment
(6) Creating Educational Opportunity for All
(7) Ensuring Better - and More Affordable - Housing for The Future
(1) Making the City Home: An Urban Homestead Initiative for the Year 2000
Homeownership, as many mayors would attest, is often the most effective
antidote to the many problems that ail a city. Two years ago, President Clinton set a·
goal of reaching an all-time high level of homeownership in America, requiring a total
of 8 million additional households. Significant progress has been made to date: as of
the end of the first quarter of 1997, more than 2.5 million new homeowners have been
added.· The homeownership rate has increased from 64·.2percent at the end of 1994 to
65.4 percent today. The expansion in homeownership over the last two years is the
largest experienced in 30 years. Currently, we are enjoying the nation's highest
homeownership rate since 1980.
Despite these efforts, there remains a large gap between the homeownership
rate in central cities and in their surrounding suburbs. While 72.1 percent of suburban
families own their own homes, only 49.4 percent of families in cities are homeowners- and over the past few decades, hundreds of thousands middle class families have fled
the cities. In many ways, this is one of the most significant urban challenges, for their
is great urgency in fmding ways to halt - and hopefully reverse - the exodus of the
middle class from the cities.
To reverse this trend, HUD will undertake an "Urban Homesteading Initiative"
to accomplish this goal:
(A) Reduced Mortgages for City Homeowners
On June 12 of this year, President Clinton announced that HUD has reduced the
Fedeial Housing Administration mortgage insurance premium for first time homebuyers
obtaining homebuyer counseling. ~up-front premium would be reduced by 12.5
pereent- from 2.00 percent to 1.75 percent. Up to 50,000 additional families could
becoJD.e homeowners as a result of the reduction.
The reduction in premiums is the third such reduction since the President took
34
�• '
1
I ~.. \ ~
',
!
..
office in 1993. The three reductions, along with savings passed on to homebuyers
because of increased efficiency in the FHA will save homebuyers $1,200 in closing
costs on the average FilA mortgage of $85,000
To stimulate further activity and reduce the disparities between suburban and
central city homeownership rates, the President will be announcing an additional
reduction of 25 basis points for first-time homebuyers in central cities only.
This effort reverses a long-standing historical trend in which the FHA, starting
in the 1950s, contributed to the exodus of many cities by subsidizing homeownership in
suburbs. Creatillg, for the first time ever, a federal incentive for central city
homeownership will mend this historical inequity and help rebuild our cities.
[insert quote from Secretary Cuomo]
(B) Safe Communities: "The Officer Next Door" Initiative
To make central cities safer, HUD proposes to use its programs to further the
goal of community policing, by providing incentives for police officer to live in the
communities in which they work. Under the Officer Next Door initiative, the Federal
Housing Administration will offer police officers· a 40 percent discount on the purchase
of HUD-owned foreclosed properties in designated revitalization areas.
[Quotes from Mayor Cleaver and Mayor of Springfield]
HUD will also be encouraging its local public housing authorities to create
special preferences which· allow police officers to reside in public housing
developments.
(C)One America: Cracking Down on Housing Discrimination
To fui-ther his recently announced initiative on race, President Clinton is
challenging HUD to double - in the next four years - the number of prosecuted
housing discrimination cases over the previous four, which was[# of cases]. This step
is vital to ensuring One America - for the freedom and dignity of choosing where you
live is a choice every American should have. [This seetion will be expanded.]
(D) Homeownership Empowerment Vouchers
Approximately 1.5 million households receive Section 8 certificates and
vouchers to help them rent apartments in the private market. Under the Section 8
program, the federal government makes up the difference· between the rent for a private
unit and 30 percent of the tenant's income. Tenants could only use the Subsidy to help
pay rent, not to make payments on a mortgage.
35
�,-
DRt~FT
··- ...
The Administration now proposes to allow hard-working families to use their
Section 8 assistance to become homeowners, rather than limiting their choices to the
rental market. The Administration's public housing reform bill proposals include
provis,ions that would make the Section.8 program work for homeownership. [HR ?]
ThiS initiative can also have a significant benefit for minorities as fifty six percent of
Section 8 voucher recipients are minority, with the figure far higher in some cities (e.g.
Dallas, 95%; Phoenix, 76%;:and.New York, 65%).
Under the Administration's proposal, a family must have income from
employment and must make a contribution toward their own downpayment. [What
should be put in here about Freddie Mac?]
(E) Homeownership Zones
Another HUD program that targets home ownership expansion in inner cities is
the Homeownership Zone initiative. HUD will provide $10 million in FY 1997 and
requests $50 million in FY 1998 for Homeownership Zones. HUD recently made
Homeownership Zone grants in Baltimore, Buffalo, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Louisville·
and Sacramento.
·
This program enables cities to undertake large-scale, single family development
in inner city neighborhoods. Such developments can. retain and attract stable, middle
income families into the inner cities. In addition to increasing the supply of safe and
decent housing in urban areas, the program will create new jobs in the home building
industry and stimulate new investment in revitalized communities.
(F) Ginnie Mae Targeted Urban Ownership Initiative
Ginnie Mae helps expand home ownership opportunities for all Americans by
ensuring that mortgage funds are available throughout the country. Ginnie Mae links
the capital and Federal housing markets by facilitating secondary market activities for
federally insured or guaranteed mortgages. To date, Ginnie Mae has helped 19 million
American families purchase homes.
· Ginnie Mae is spearheading a new Federal initiative to stimulate at least $1
billion in annual mortgage loans to help about 15,000 families buy homes in America's
inner cities each year. With the Targeted Urban OwnerShip Initiative, Ginnie Mae will .
cut the gUarantee fees it charges to lenders by up to 50 percent when the lenders make
home mortgage loans to central city;home buyers in one of 72 cities designated as
Empowerment Zones or Enterprise Communities across the nation. [Ginnie Mae just
recently announced an extra billion dollars - need more information on this].
(2) A Second Round
of Empowerment ZOnes
36
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:
DATE: 1~/IS/t>~
1b
In 1994, more than 500 urban commUnities applied to be designated as one of 6
. urban empowerment zones. Just two years since their designation, these zones have
begun to generate billions of dollars in private investment, beginning to revive inner
city neighborhoods once given up for dead, creating jobs and helping families move
from welfare to work.
Empowerment Zones embody the best of the President's Community
·Empowerment agenda. The EZ/EC program combines federal tax iricentives with
direct funding for physical improvements and social services. It requires unprecedented
levels of private sector involvement and investment. It brings all stakeholders in a
community- residents, nonprofits, business and. government- to the table to develop a
locally fashioned and locally controlled, comprehensive revitalization strategy. It
makes the private sector the driver of economic growth, with the government acting as
a partner.
Building on this success and the vast untapped potential in the hundreds of
communities which were not designated, the Administration proposes to select an
additional 15 urban empowerment zones and 50 additional urban enterprise
communities. These commUnities will receive a combination of taX incentives and
direct grants totaling some $2 billion to stimulate economic opportunity and
revitalization in distressed neighborhoods across the country.
(3) New Tools For the Welfare to Work Transition
There is· no greater urban policy chal1enge than making the revolution in welfare
policy work in central cities. Welfare reform gives States and individuals
unprecedented opportunities to build a new welfare· system that rewards work, invests
in people, and demands responsibility from recipients.
A cornerstone of the welfare reform jobs challenge was laid during the first term
of the Clinton Administration by enactment of two provisions to "make work pay."
These achievements included the expansion of the Earned. Income Tax Credit and the
increase in the minimum wage. The expanded Earned Income Tax Credit effectively
raises the wage rate for a full time worker with tWo or more children by nearly $2.00
per hour. In conjunction with the increase in the minimum wage to $5.15 and food
stamp benefits, a full time worker with two children would have an income that exceeds
the poverty line.
The President fought to inchide new tools in the Balanced Budget agreement to
help cities, states and welfare recipients make the transition from welfare to work.
·
Among those tools are:
•
A $3 billion ~elfare to Work Jobs Challenge Fund: This fund will provide
37
�~
'
'
: !
j
•
funds directly to both cities and states to provide additional resources to help
long-term, hard-to-serve welfare recipients fmd and keep jobs .
.These resources are particularly critical for cities. They represent the first
allocation of resources directly to mayors, who will have resources to leverage
jobs and services for their residents. Funds will be ·used for wage subsidies to
private and public employers, on-the-job training, public and private job
placement contractors, transportation subsidies, job retention services and other
effective job creation and placement strategies.
•
A New Welfare-to-Work Tax Credit: The Budget Agreement provides a new
tax provision to give private employers an extra incentive to hire long-term
welfare recipients. The credit would allow an employer to claiin a credit of up
to 50 percent of the first .$10,000 in wages paid during a year to a former
welfare recipient who is employed for at least nine months. The credit would be
available for up to two years per worker.
•
Incremental Rental Assistance Linked to Welfare Reform:
HUD housing programs can also help link welfare recipients to jobs. Often,
there is a. mismatch between where welfare recipients live and the location of
entry level jobs. for which they have the appropriate education and skills.
Moreover, stable and affordable housing can mean the difference between
steady employment and welfare receipt.
HUD proposes to use housing assistance programs to leverage jobs for welfare
recipients. HUD's FY 1998 budget proposes 50,000 units of Section 8 rental
assistance linked to the President's Welfare to Work Jobs Challenge.
Jurisdictions which receive Welfare to Work Challenge grants and develop
coordinated strategies between their public housing authority and the state or
local welfare agency for the use of iricremental rental assistance will compete
for this funding.
•
Transportation Services: One of the biggest barriers facing those making the
move from welfare rolls to payrolls - particularly for inner city welfare
. recipients - is convenient access to jobs. Two-thirds of new entry level jobs are
in the. suburbs, but three of four welfare recipients live in central cities or rural
areas. Access to these suburban jobs is limited: only one in 20 welfare
recipients owns a
and niass transit does not provide adequate or timely
connections .for those living in the city and traveling out to suburban jobs. The
public transit system also provides severely limited help for those· with nontraditional work hours or families with children who require day care in order to
work.
ear
38
I'
I
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKiNG
_
I,NIJ"IA,k~:~ DATE: I01 1rsj Di
DRAf i
£9NF18fNTIAL
In 1996, HUD initiated a 5-dty Bridges to.work demonstration to connect
inner-city job-ready residents with suburban job opportunities. The initiative
brings together regional service providers to provide· transportation, job
placement, and supportive services to. residents of targeted inner-city
neighborhoods. HUD proposes an additional $10 million in FY 1998 to expand
the aridges to Work program.
\
Building on the Bridges to Work model, the Department of Transportation ·
proposes to provide $100 million per year for six years to fund innovative
transportation programs to transport welfare recipients to jobs. Grants would be
available to states, local goveriunents, and private and non-profit organizations
. to plan and implement new transportation services linking welfare recipients to
jobs.
•
Reengaging the Faith Community:
[Describe HUD's initiative on faith participation... need more information].
(4) Making Urban Neighborhoods Safe and Crime-Free
While violent crime rates have plummeted in many large cities, too many
families still cannot walk their city streets knowing they. will be safe. Businesses and
homeowners cannot be expected to risk their hard'-Carn.ed money in neighborhoods
where drugs ate rampant, gangs control the streets, and where violence keeps residents
in their homes at night.
The cornerstone of the Clinton Administration's efforts to fight crime,
particularly violent crime, is the continuing effort to put 100,000 more police on the
streets. By the end of 1997, funding will be in place to have about 64,000 additional
police on patrol. The.FY 1998 budget proposes $1.4 billion to put nearly 17,000 more
officers on the streets.
The focus on Community Policing is beginning to reap dividends in reducing
crime in the most intractable urban settings. For example, in Boston, no juvenile under
the age' of 16 has died as a result of gunfire since July 1995, and the homicide rate for
those under 24 has dropped by as qmch as 71 percent since 1990.
These reductions can be attributed to innovative community policing techniques.
In Boston, the police identify "hot spots" to proactively target their crime prevention
and efforts. A Youth Violence Strike Force - consisting of !1 unique community-wide
law enforcement collaborative - zeros in on battling gang violence and thus reduces
39
�.DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MAn.KiNG
DRs(\FT
AK
. ~TINFJOEt Tl l
INITIALS:~
DATE:
1.;1.~1 f
youth homicide. The Strike Force established a community-wide collaboration of law
enforcement officials to prosecute a major gang and developed an innovative
partnership with the probation department to increase accountability.
The Administration's FY, 1998 budget includes other crime fighting initiatives:
•
Juveniles: The Administration proposes a $50 million increase in FY 1998 to
support more local community prevention programs, such as mentoring, truancy
prevention, and gang intervention. To prevent young people from becoming
involved in the juvenile justice system, the budget expands funding for programs
that provide supervised afternoon and evening activities for youth. These
programs include $63 million of community schools, supervision and youth
services.
•
Gangs: The President has worked hard to get guns off the streets and out of the
hands of children, to crack down on violent teen gangs and to teach children
that drugs are wrong, illegal, and dangerous. As gangs become an increasingly
powerful and deadly force, the Administration is pursuing a coordinated national
strategy to combat them. For example, the budget proposes substantial budget
increases to hire more prosecutors, to establish a new juvenile court initiative
and for a local youth crime intervention initiative.
•
Putting Violent Criminals in Jail: The Administration seeks to ensure that
convicted violent offenders serve at least 85 percent of their sentences behind
bars. To reach this goal, the Administration proposes $710 million in State
grants to build new prisons and jail cells under twoprograms: the Violent
Offender Incarceration and Truth in Sentencing programs. Nationwide, the
prison population is growing by over 1, 700 inmates per week, and will likely
grow faster as tough sentencing laws and practices that these programs require
are implemented.
•
Combating Drug Abuse: Drug abuse and drug-related crime cost our society an
estimated $67 billion a year and destroy the knit and futures of millions of
children. lllicit drug trafficking breeds crime, violence, and corruption across
the country. The effects of drug use and drug-related crime are felt acutely by
all Americans, transcending economic, geographic, and other boundaries.
The Administration propose~ a $16 billion, coordinated, multi-agency approach
to combating all types of suostanee abuse among youth - including tobacco and
alcohol. This initiative focuses on State-level data documenting trends in drug
use. This comprehensive approach, consistent with the President's National
Drug Control Strategy, come in response to surveys showing sharp increases in
drug abuse among adolescents.
40
�BONFIBENTIAl
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKiNG
INITIALS:~ DATE: l.;l./ tS 8'
/o
Specific anti-drug initiatives include:
•
National Media Awareness Campaign: The Office of National Drug Control
Policy is developing a national media campaign to include public service
announcements targeted at youth and their parents on the consequences of
drug, alcohol and tobacco use.
•
Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Program: This is the largest
federal program to inoculate children against drug abuse and to ensure that
schools are safe and disciplined learning environments. The program covers
97 percent of all school districts nationwide through educational activities,
teacher training, and other activities. The President proposes to spend $620
million for this program in FY 1998, a 12 percent increase over 1997.
•
Public and Assisted Housing: The President believes that public housing is a
privilege, not a right and residents who commit crime and peddle drugs should
be immediately evicted. This is HUD's "One Strike and You're Out." HUD's
budget provides $290 million to support anti-drug and anti-crime initiative.
•
HUD proposes to double funding for Operation Safe Home, a unique crimefighting campaign spearheaded by HUD's Office of the Inspector General. The
collaboration includes the FBI, the Drug E~orcement Administration, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, U.S. Attorneys offices and other
federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. Operation Safe Home focuses
on three major types of wrongdoing that undermine HUD programs - violent
crime in public and assisted housing, fraud in public housing administration, and
equity skimming in multifamily insured housing. Operation Safe Home has to
date resulted in more than 10,000 arrests and the seizure of more than 1,200
weapons and nearly $2.5 niillion in cash.
•
(5) Cleaning Up The Urban Environment
Brownfields are former industrial and commercial properties that may contain
low to moderate levels of contamination. Because these sites are co~idered to be only
moderately contaminated, they do not appear on EPA's Superfund list.. An estimated
500,000 brownfields exist .[this figure is being checke<J], the vast majority of which are
urban. In many cases, these sites must be cleaned up before they can be redeveloped
for commercial uses. Old manUfa~turing or other industrial sites leave some level of
contamination aftet they have ceasbd to be productive assets.
The Clinton Administration has launched a landmark effort to clean up and
redevelop Brownfields sites. It has established a Brownfields National Partnership
between 15 federal agencies to join together in a collaborative effort to turn
41
�h'-\.f.T
D·R. I'~
.
CONF/OENTfAL
.
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS: ~ .DATE: l ~Jis-/Dfl
contaminated Brownfields into greenfields of urban opportunity. In total, the~
Brownfields action agenda has marshaled funds to clean up and redevelop 5,000
properties, leveraging between $5 billion and $28 billion in private investment and
creating and supporting 196,000 jobs.
The key components of the FY 1998 Brownfields Action Agenda are:
•
$125 million EPA funding for assessment, clean-up, and job training.
•
$100 million in HUD economic development funding and $400 million loan
guarantees over 4 years. In each of the next four years, HUD proposes to fund
$25 million in Economic Development Initiative (EDI) grants to redevelop
contaminated brownfields after they are cleaned up. In general such grants
leverage four dollars in HUD Section 108 loan guarantees for each HUD grant
dollar.
•
$2 billion in tax incentives proposed by the Treasury Department. Under
proposed legislation, businesses would be allowed to "expense" brownfield
clean-up costs. These tax provisions would provide direct financial incentives to
private sector developers and investors to participate in clean-up and
revitalization activity.
(6) Creating Educational Opportunity for All
Today's most successful workers are those with skills and a firm educational
footing to compete successfully in the dynamic economy. No where is progress more
needed than in inner cities - especially to help future generation's of inner city children
succeed in the new economy.
The President's goals are to help families, communities and States ensure that
every child is prepared to make the best use of education; that the education system
allows enables every child to learn to his or her full potential; that those who need
resources to help pay for a college education can get them.
The Budget Agreement includes the largest federal investment in education in 30
years and the largest single increase in college aid since the GI Bill in 1945. The
budget agreement provides investments in for students in the earliest years of their
lives, guarantees basic reading skills in elementary school years, helps all students
· become technologically literate, an~ makes college more affordable for hundreds of
thousands additional students ..
•
Head Start: Over the past 4 years, the President has secured a 43 percent
increase in funds for Head Start. The budget agreement provides $4.3 billion
for Head Start, a $324 million increase over 1997. A child's learning begins
42
..
·
�60i~FlUEI~TlAL
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: 1:2.11r (oi
lmig before he or she goes to school. That's why· the President's budget
expands Head Start to benefit one million children by 2002.
· Beyond expanding the Head Start program, the Administration is challenging
parents to get involved early in their children's learning. Parents are their
children's first teachers, and every home should be a place of learning.
America Reads: The President has launched the America Reads Challenge, a
nationwide effort to mobilize a citizen army of a million volunteer tutors, to
ensure that all children can read independently and well by the end of the third
grade.
While America's 4th graders read on average as well as ever, more than 40
percent cannot read as well as they must to succeed later in school and in the
workforce. Research shows that students unable to read well by the end of the .
3rd grade are more likely to become school dropouts and truants, and have
fewer good options for jobs. The Budget Agreement adopts the $260 million
proposed to fund this effort.
o
National Standards: Setting rigorous national standards, with national tests in
4th-grade reading and 8th-grade math will make sure our.children master the·
basics. Every 4th grader should be able to read; every 8th grader should know
basic math and algebra. To help make sure they do, the.President is pledging
the development of national tests in 4th-grade reading and 8th-grade math, and
challenging every state and· community to test every student in these critical
areas by 1999. These tests will show how well students are meeting rigorous
standards and how well they compare with their peers around the country and
the world. They will help parents know if their children are mastering critical
basic skills early enough to succeed in school and in the workforce.
Every state 'and school should also set guidelines for what students should know in all
core subjects. We must end social promotion: Students shoUld have to show what
they've learned in order to move from grade school to middle school and from middle
school to high school. We must make sure a high school diploma means something.
-.
Make Technology Available: The President has proposed funding to help
ensure that computers are in every classroom and that every classroom is
· connected to the Internet by .the year 2000. Our schools must now prepare for a
transition as dramatic as the· move from an agrarian to an industrial economy
100 years ago. We must connect every classroom and library to the lntemetby
the year 2000, so that all children have access to the best sources of information
in the world. CEOs of some of America's inost innovative technology and
communications firms have already responded to the President's challenge to
43
�~~:\. ~ ;-·:•·,
o~1RMINED T~Q~ ~tfJENT/AL
ADMINISTRATIVE MAR.K!NG
.
· INITIALS:_~ DATE: Po/ IS tDP
work with schools to get computers into the classroom,licl?s~hools to the
Internet, develop effective educational software, and help train our teachers to
be technologically literate.
In addition to having access to the information superhighway, children must be
taught by talented and dedicated teachers. The Administration is committed to making
sure there are talented and dedicated teachers in every classroom. We are challenging
our most promising young people to consider teaching as a career, setting high
standards for entering the teaching profession, and providing the highest quality
preparation and training. We should reward good teachers, and quickly and fairly
. remove those few who don't measure up. The President's education budget will make it
possible for 100,000 master teachers to achieve national certification from the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards over the next ten years.
e
Making College Affordable: The President is opening the doors of college to all
who work hard and make the grade. To prepare ourselves for the 21st century,
all Americans must have access to college and at least two years of college
should be as universal as high school is today.
The Budget Agreement also provides $35 billion over 5 years to help make
college affordable for all American families consistent with a $10,000 tuition tax
credit, an expanded IRA to allow families to save tax:-free for college and the
President's Hope scholarship initiative. This initiative would provide a $1,500
tax credit for tuition paid for the first two years of college. It would be enough
to pay for a typical community college education or provide a solid down
payment at four-year colleges and universities.
The Budget Agreement also includes a 25 percent increase - the largest increase
in two decades in the Pell Grant program, which provides.grants to
disadvantaged students. Maximum grant amounts will reach $3,000- an
increase of $300- and new funding will allow an additional348,000 students to ·
receive grants.
Other Education Initiatives: In addition to focusing on these important areas,
the Administration also calls for resources to expand school choice and
accountability in public education; modernize school buildings and help support
school construction; help adults improve their education and skills by
transfomrlng the tangle of f~eial training programs into a simple skill grant;
and make sure our schools are safe, disciplined and drug free.
Students cannot learn in schools that are not safe and orderly and do not
promote pasitive values. We must fmd effective ways to give children th.e safe
and disciplined conditions they need to learn, and continue to support
44
�J(Jtk\fo~O BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS: ~ ·DATE: }.;? I ISJog
communities that introduce school uniforms and character education, impose
curfews, enforce truancy laws, remove disruptive students from the classroom,
and have zero tolerance for guns and drugs. The Administration proposes to
keep schools open later as safe havens from gangs and drugs, expanding
educational opportunities for young people in the afternoons, weekends, and
summers, and providing peace of mind for working parents.
(7) Ensuring Better .; and More Affordable - Housing for The Future
This is a two-fold challenge, for a safe, decent home is the essential base from
which families can ultimately attain independence: (A) reinventing the way that public
housing works_.:. so that it is no longer a dead end but a platform to self-sufficiency;
and (B) protecting the Nation's precious supply of affordable housing stock and the
federal assistance that houses millions of families, seniors and kids.
(A) Reinventing Public Housing: Passing a Landmark Public Housing Bill
At the heart of many distressed urban neighborhoods, one fmds old public
housing developments, plagued with deteriorating conditions and beset by crime and
gang activity. These old developments are too-often high-rise building with caged
hallways.
We are living with decades of mistakes in public housing. In too many cases,
the original site plans and architecture of the developments were flawed. Other times,
buildings simply have worn out their useful lives. In some locations, callous
management contributed to the deterioration of buildings. In other cases,
neighborhoods changed from healthy residential settings to isolated pockets of poverty
·
and despair.
This is not to characterize all public housing as a failure. To the contrary, the
majority of the 1.4 million units of public housing works successfully. It is wellmanaged and provides decent housing to poor families who desperately need affordable
housing at an affordable price. Public housing units represent one-third of all the
housing that is available nationwide to families with minimum-wage incomes.
In the first term of the Clinton Administration, the Administration initiated a
comprehensive effort to fundamentally transform public housing. The Administration
wants to tum public housing into a platform from which residents can launch better
lives by gaining the education and $kills they need to achieve self-sufficiency. This
effort to transform public housing had four major components: 1) Tearing down and
replacing the 100,000 worst public housing units 2) Aggressively, intervening to
improve the troubled public housing authorities 3) Establishing positive incentives· to
reward working families and encourage families to make the transition from welfare to
45
�self-sufficie~cy and 4) Cracking down on crime, gangs and drugs.
DETERMINED TO B.E AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE:\ :J.Jl5/b3
But those reforms cannot advance the full transformation without further
legislative action. And HUD baS introduced the Public Housing Management Reform
Act of 1997 to both cement and deepen the transformation of public housing. It would
also match the public housing program structure to the likely resources HUD will have
available.
•
Responsible deregulation and program streamlining: HUD proposes massive
changes to the public housing system of old where regulations and red tape
governed even the most basic operations.
•
Managing for performance with effective oversight and enforcement:
Responsible enforcement must accompany responsible deregulation. Such
efforts require early identification of PHA management problems, timely
preventive action and sure and certain consequences for persistently troubled
performers.
In some communities, public housing has become an isolated and permanent
residence with few incentives for residents to work. HUD 's legislation proposes new
admissions policies which balances the need to achieve a greater mix of incomes in
public housing, with policies that offer incentives for. existing poor tenants to raise their
own incomes. It allows housing authorities flexibility to design their rent systems to be
consistent with local welfare programs and encourage work.
(B) Renewing Millions of Section 8 Contracts
. Earlier this year, HUD faced what some described as the greatest challenge its
faced since its inception. Rental assistance contracts on 1.8 million unitS of housing providing shelter for 4.4 million people- are scheduled to expire. This crisis grows in
future years: by FY 2002, contracts for 2.7 million units- or 6.4 million people- will
be expiring.
"
Section 8 provides a subsidy to tenants to afford private rental housing. Under
Section 8, tenants pay approximately 30 percent of their income and the federal
government makes up the difference. For families receiving Section 8 assistance, it is ·
more than a contract or a subsidy; it is often the foundation from which they can build
lifelong self-sufficiency. Renewing these contracts, then becomes a fulfillment of a
social contract between government and a vulnerable family.
What would happen if the these 1.8 million expiring Section 8 contracts are not
renewed in 1998f Some 4.4 million people could risk losing their homes- either
through evictions or unbearably sharp rent increases. Without reform, that number
could grow to 6.4 million Americans at risk by 2002. Over 90 percent of these .
46
.
�DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: l~ 115 lD'¥
P-~:1
~r
~....,:'J :·J ·.• jJ',~~-:·:\T"'
1
·
GBNFIBENtl~
IL
0
Americans are elderly persons, persons with disabilities, or families with children.
American communities should not have to bear the high social costs, and should
not have to face the potential social chaos, of an unprecedented explosion of
homelessness that would surely arise if these contracts are not renewed.
A plan for renewing these contracts must also·protect America's communities.
The answer cannot be to divert funding away from other vital community programs. A
shredding of the social and economic fabric of our communities would surely be the
result if we choose to fund the expiring Section 8 contracts by making 35 percent
across-the-board cuts in core HUD programs like CDBG, public housing operating ·
support, homeless assistance and many others. This kind of "cut-and-shift" approachrobbing.Peter to pay Paul- would be short-sighted and self-:defeating. While such an
approach would avert the Section 8 crisis, it would simultaneously trigger other
community crises in homelessness and affordable housing- as. states, counties and
cities small and large would face billions in cuts in 1998 .alone.
Renewing these contracts requires sharp increases in appropriations for this
purpose. In FY 1998, HUD proposes $9.2 billion for contract renewals- a $5.6
billion increase over FY 1997. By 2002, funding necessary for contract renewals
grows to $18 billion. The President pushed for this in the balanced budget agreementand will fight to keep it in any final budget deal.
IMPLEMENTING THE AGENDA
There are two key building blocks for implementing the Administration's second
term urban agenda: an active and engaged Community Empowerment Board and a ·
renewed and reinvented Department of Housing and Urban Development- a HUD that
has been dramatically transformed for the 1990s and beyond..
The President's empowerment agenda - as noted earlier - is distinctly different
from past federal attempts at urban renewal. The Vice President has honed that
·philosophy and practice in partnership with communities for the past four years. Much
has been learned from the many wise and bold mayors. Now it is time to institutionalize
and deepen this new empowerment approach.
An Active Community Empowerment Board
•
Created in xxxx by President Clinton - and chaired by Vice President Gore - the
Community Empowerment Board is the coordinating body for community and urban
policy for the entire federal government. [Need more info on this].
47
�.'
0JR'·!r:nc~l
ctJvriUt!~ll/-t_
.
DETERMINED TO BE AN
A New HUD for a New Century
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
·
.
INITIALS: ~ Di\TE: I~ 115 }D¥
In 1961, President Kennedy, in a special message to Congress,carted for the
creation of a cabinet level agency to strengthen urban communities. "Our communities
are what we make them. We as a nation have before us the opportunity- and the
responsibility --to remold our cities.:."
In 1965, fulfilling Kennedy's vision, President Johnson actually proposed the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, citing its mission thus: "This new
department will provide a focal point for thought and innovation and-imagination about
the problems of our cities."
But the agency whose direct mandate was to act as an advocate for urban America
has not kept pace with the times. HUD is now just over thirty years old -- and it is time
to prepare HUD for the next thirty. While HUD's traditional goals must remain the same
- fighting for fair housing, increasing the supply of affordable housing and opportunities
for home ownership, reducing homelessness, promoting jobs and economic development
-its mission and organization must be updated and re-focused.
IfHUD is going to be a significant, value-added player, helping America's
communities move from an industrial to an information economy, with welfare reform
hanging in the balance, the agency must strive to empower people·, giving them the tools
they need to succeed. HUD must be an ally to communities, not a bureaucratic
adversary; a creator of opportunities, not obstacles.
At the same time, in a balanced budget environment- and with the storm clouds
of mismanagement still hovering over the agency- HUD must refocus its energy,
ingenuity, and resources on eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in all our programs.
Since the 1980s, HUD has been criticized by the Congress and its own Inspector
General for failing to modernize operations and for being susceptible to waste, fraud, and
abuse. HUD is, in fact, the only entire federal agency desi~ted by the General
Accounting Office as "high-risk." Recent reports by both the General Accounting Office
and HUD's Inspector General highlight essential steps HUD must be take if the agency is
going to permanently improve management.
. Despite significant improvement in the last few years, HUD remains a symbol of
inept government The plan HUD will soon be putting forward puts HUD's house in
order and creates a new HUD for the. new century. It says that compassion without
•
competence has failed HUD - and America.-- and that HUD must change.
The President's first directive to ineoming Secretary Cuomo was to remake HUD.
48
�\ I,. 1
' ' c- . - .. ,.... . . ... _ ' "I
.
~
'=
\._.; t_ I· i\1
i ·;
(
~
: ~
:
: •
>.
f
i .
' L_ ~~ ;
i.:
I
~I
I;,,
~
l
i_! . ; \ :_,
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
~ DATE· ~nn
le16/S /D'C
In late June, the Secretary WI'll provt'de the p rest'dent WI'th a INITIALS:
sweepmgnimfrrgement
plan.
CONCLUSION
What is the state of America's cities today?
Is it the 44,000 jobs added in San Antonio between 1993 and 1995? or· is it the
258,000 mostly middle class residents who left Cleveland since 1970?
Is it the record 35% drop in violent crime in New York City the past four years?
Or is it the. 50% ·explosion. in poverty in central cities across America the past two
decades?
Is it the 125 percent drop in unemployment in Tulsa since 1993? Or is it the
dropout rate in Los Angeles schools, which runs 96 percent higher than th~ national
average?
In a word, the answer is: both. The urban glass is both half-empty and half-full,
depending on where you look. Thanks in large part to the one-two punch of the Clinton
Administration's economic plan and a targeted urban strategy, America's cities are
coming back: unemployment is down. Crime is down dramatically. Downtowns are
reinventing themselves. Paychecks are growing faster than in suburbs. Fiscal health has
returned to many city halls. And confidence nationwide is riding-high.
But at the same time, three
our cities:
very real national trends present serious challenges for
·
•
First, a dangerous disparity in job creation between cities and suburbs, which
cities are losing.
•
Second, poor people who are more poor, more isolated, and more concentrated in
inner-cities than any time in a generation.
•
. And third, the uninterrupted migration of the middle class - and much of the tax
base - from cities to suburbs.
Added to these challenges are the very real -difficll;lties of converting our urban
areas from an industrial to an information economy, integrating an increasing number of
immigrants, and moving two million o( our fellow citizens from welfare to work -- all at
a time when federal, state, and locarbudgets are tight.
With this.disparity, one thing remains clear: just as no one city works like the rest,
no one solution will work for them all. If we are going to meet the need of America's 900
cities, one cookie-cutter solution will not do. We need 900 partnerships-- each tailored
49
�DRAFT
~o
a community's needs, each custom-made to empower local residents to meet their
goals. That is the ambition of the Clinton Administration's second term urban agenda: to
encourage innovation, to facilitate cooperation, and to help local communities - and
businesses, and churches, and residents, and nonprofit organizations - fulfill their own
visions of the future.
As much as America has changed since World War II, our cities -- and the
suburbs that surround them -- remain home to almost eighty percent of the American
people and contain close to 85 percent of America's jobs. We couldn't turn our backs on
America's cities, even if we wanted to. Their roads, ports, bridges, banks, businesses,
colleges, and residents -- not to mention their museums -- are still the engine that drives
our national economy.
What is the state of America's cities? Improving.
What is the challenge? To meet the needs of urban America in a way that
empowers us all. We need all to be committed to strengthening the whole not just our
individual parts - the cities and the suburbs, our neighborhoods and those further from
our doorstep.
The success or failure we have in meeting these intertwined challenges will
largely determine how all of us live in the twenty-first eentury.
50
-
~
'\ !
�DRAFT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: I ~/l)j()f
Exhibit 1
Unemployment· Rates, January 1993 and 1997
Jan 1993
Suburb
6.4%
Top 50 Total
6.9%
ALL MSAs*
8.8%
U.S. Total
7.3%
Source: BLS, Local Area Unemployment Stat1st1cs
s~b\
OONffBENTIAb
Jan 1997
Suburb
4.2%
6.
4.7%
6.3%
5.4%
�DRAFT
GONFIDENT\M:
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
Exhibit 2
INITIALS:-4- DATE:(~ }15" /b
National League of Cities Survey Results, January 1997
Change in city conditions over the past year (1996)
Condition
Improved
Worsened
No change
Violent crime
44%
15%
41%
Unemployment
49
11
41
City fiscal
conditions ·
46
17
38
Neighborhood
vitality
46
10
44
Police/community
relations
'61
7
32
Overall economic
conditions
55
9
36
Volunteerism/
community services
48·
6
46
Infrastructure
51
15
34
Recreation
ss
3
39
Source: The State of America's Cities (National League of Cities, January 1997)
�---
--------~---------
----
DRAFT
80NFIDENTIAt
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~- DATE: I~ JIS/oo
Exhibit 3
.Percent Change in Violent Crimes in the Top 10
City Raiikiiig
1
2
u.s.
Cities, 1990-95
·Change in Crime
City
New York City, NY
· Los Angeles, CA
(%)
-33
-16
-12
3
chicago, ILt
4
Houston, TX
5
Philadelphia, PA
6
San Diego, CA
7
Phoenix, AZ
+9
8
Dallas, TX
-35
9
San Antonio, TX
-10
Detroit, MIt-
-13
Overall change
-20
10
*
-2
+3
-8
*-violent crime• in this table referS to the number of incidents of murder, non-negligent
manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault, and robbery reported to the police. In some cases,
data on a specific form of crime, and/or data from a specific year for a given city were not available. A
"f" indicates when these situations occurred. (Specifically, this indicates that forc1ole rape data were
excluded from the analysis.) Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1990, 1995). Uniform Crime
Reports for the United States, 1990 [1995 edition was also used]. U.S. Department of Justice:·
Washington, DC.
;
�BONFIOENTIAl:
DRAFT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATlVE MARKING
INIT!.A.LS:_~--·· DATE: I:J..JJQ¢9
Exhibit 5
Clust;ered bar graph: Annualized eaployment; growth, 1970-96 (in percent;)
1970-80
1980-90
1990-96
1990-93
1993-96
u.s.
2.37%
1.69%
1.28%
0.40%
1. 77%
Central city
residents
1.06%
1.19%
0.90%
-0.03%
1. 74%
Suburban residents
3.36%
2.27%
1.37%
0.40%
1.93%
Souroer Census o~ .Popu.lattoa lllJd Housing (1970-90); Local Area Unemplopaent: St:af:isf:ics (1990-96)
•
�CONFIDENTIAL
DRA15J;ERMINEDTO BEAN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
Exhibit ~NITIALS:~ DATE: lA /JS /6 ~
Bar graph: Change in metxopolit;an jobs by location and cit;y size, 77 cities,
1991-93
Central city
Suburbs
1.6\
5.5\
250,000 "':" 500,000
-1.0\
9.8\
500,000 - 900,000
1.0\
16.3\
>900,000
-3.1\
7.9%
All MSAs
-1.3%
10.4%
Pop. <250,000
Source: Standard Statistical Establishment List
�DRAFT
EONFIOENTIAt
DETERMINED TO BE AN .
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: 1~115Lt>8
Exhibit 7
Change in Jobs 1990 to 1995 for 19 Selected Central Cities/Counties of
Metropolitan Areas
Pop Rank
Change
Change
Change
1990 to 1993
1993 to 1995
1990 to 1995
New York City
1
-273,435
23,751 .
-249,684
Philadelphia
5
-52,999
-15,726
-68,125
San Antonio
9
37,808
44,211
82,019
Indianapolis
12
12,031
22,519
34,550
San Francisco
13
-49,652
-2,800
-52,452
Baltimore
14
-50,726
-10,265
-60,991
Jacksonville
15.
8,589
29,850
38,439
Washington
20
-14,644
-28,331
-42,975
Austin
23
51,627
44,480
%,107
Nashville
24
19,713
22,485
42,198
Denver
25
12,292
14,275
26,567
New Orleans
27
-4,165
4,686
521
NA5
-1,606
7,562
5,956
SL Louis
43
-9,986
-626
-10,612
Wichita
54
3,937
3,599
7,536
59
5,861
5,956
11,817
Anchorage
64
6,012
3,067
9,079
Lexington
69
5,428
7,127
12,555
-4,506
-20,439
NorfolkVrrginia Beach
Corpus ChriSti
6
RichmondNA7
Petersburg
-15,933 ;
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, ES-202
�DRI~fT
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADM\NISTRAT1VE MARKING
Exhibit 8
!NITI.t\LS:_~ DATE:}~ I,~jDf"
Line graph: Poverly rates, 1970~95
1970
1980
1990
1993
1995
u.s.
12.6\
13.0\
13.5\
15.1\
13.8\
Central cities
14.2\
17.2\
19.0\
21.5\
20.6\
8.7\
0.3\.
9.1\
Suburbs
Source: Current Populali.on Survey
7.1\ 8.2\
�DRAFT
Exhibit 9
Bar graph: Share of cit;y popal.at;ion living in t:.ract;s wit;b
poverty, 100 largest; cit;ies, 1970-90
1970
1980
1990
Total city pop.
5.2%
7.9%
10.7%
Non-Hisp. white
1.4%
2.0%
3.2%
19.9%
24.2%
12.3%
23.8%
Non..:.Hisp. black
Hispanic
Source: Urban Underclass Database
15.7%
9.8%
GONFIOENTI~L
DETERMINED TO BEAN
ADMlNISTRATlVE MARKING
INITIALS: ~
-rr. J.::/
··
at; lease 40 >pe]!~ot
�DRAFT
pn~.' r1 r"\r' IT!&~
. ._
l)ETERMINED TO BE AN
Exhibit 10
TEN LARGEST CITIES
New York City, NY
Los Angeles, CA
Chicago, IL
Houston, TX
Philadelphia, PA
San Deigo, CA
Phoenix, AZ
Dallas, TX
San Antonio, TX
Detroit, MI
Sourcea Department ot Educatl.on
Ratio of City
Shoool Dropout Rate
to National Rate
1.16
1.96
1.52
1.61
1.43
1.07
1.61
1.79
1.16
1. 70
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITLJ.\l.S:_~·- DATE: ~~ /J;{" Jbf
P
r
�•
DRAFT
9
BONFIDENTIAL
DETERMINED TO BE AN .
Exhibit 11
A~MINISTRATIVE Mi\RKING
INI IIALS· 'VL
·
· ·~ DATE:l.;},/Jrl.ol
Segment;ed bar graph: Cit;y share o:E :met;z:opolit;an populat;ion, 1970-94
1970
1980
1990
1994
Central
cities
44.9%
40.9%
39.2%
38.3%
Suburbs
55.1%
59.1%
60.8%
61.7%
Source: Census
of Population and Housing; Census FSCPE
�•
DRAFT
0
.
Exhibit 12
G0!\ FI JENT1Al:
1
·
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE: 1~/IS/DV
Segmented bar graph: Distribution of Metropolitan Area Population
Size, 1970-94
Metro Area Size
City
Suburbs
Small (pop.2SO,OOO or less)
36%
64%
Medium (250,000-1,000,000)
26%
74%
Large (1,000,000 or more)
Source:. Census
8%
of Population and Housing; Census FSCPE
92%
Gro~
Area
�•
·~
DRAFT
'
Exhibit 13
CQNf! OENTIAL
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
INITIALS:~ DATE:\~/ I~ /b~
Segment;ed bar graph: Income dist;ribut;ion of cent;ral. cit;y populat;ion, 1970-90
1970
1980
1990
Low income
20.2%
23.6%
24.5%
Middle income
59. 9%
58.0%
5.7. 6%
High income
19.9%
18.4%
17.8%
So~
Census of Population and Housing .
�DRJ~FT
'
DETERMINED TO BE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE MARKING
Exhibit 14
INITIALS:~ DATE:,~,,~,{>~
Clustered bar graph: Types of Families with own children in central cities and suburbs, 1970-90
Married Couple
No Spouse Present
1970
1980
1990
1970
1980
1990
Central Cities
81.6%
71.3%
66.8%
18.4%
28.7%
33.2%
Suburbs
90.6%
85.4%
82.1%
9.4%
14.6%
17.9%
Source: Census of Population and Housing
Source: Census of Population and Housing
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Terry Edmonds
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
James (Terry) Edmonds
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1995-2001
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36090" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763294" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0462-F
Description
An account of the resource
Terry Edmonds worked as a speechwriter from 1995-2001. He became the Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting in 1999. His speechwriting focused on domestic topics such as race relations, veterans issues, education, paralympics, gun control, youth, and senior citizens. He also contributed to the President’s State of the Union speeches, radio addresses, commencement speeches, and special dinners and events. The records include speeches, letters, memorandum, schedules, reports, articles, and clippings.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
635 folders in 52 boxes
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Mayors – Report on the State of America’s Cities
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
James (Terry) Edmonds
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0462-F
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 44
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/2006/2006-0462-F.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763294" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
12/9/2014
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
42-t-7763294-20060462F-044-001-2014
7763294