554 ADDRESSES AND STATE PAPERS

Most deplorable of all is the plethora of Federal programs spon-
sored without evaluation or coordination, and without any attempt
to assure continuity. The Federal government has widely scattered
seed money and after a year or two withdrawn or curtailed support,
leaving the city with its extremely limited resources to foot the bill.
The city is forced to cut off programs, raise already high taxes or
appeal for state aid. Ultimately, the state government — previously
ignored by the Federal-city alliance — winds up holding the bag or
the bill. This has been the pattern in the past and one which must
be reversed. In his State of the Union message, President Johnson
called for a new partnership between the Federal and state govern-
ments; certainly the states will regard and welcome this concept as
essential to resolving our ubiquitous urban problems.

We need the Federal government with its greater revenue resources
to subsidize massive transportation projects, to develop "model cities, "
to administer a uniform welfare program. We do not, however, need
excessive Federal control or specific Federal programs, for each com-
munity has its particular personality, its particular problems and its
particular priorities. The needs of Denver will correspond to the
needs of Baltimore in general, but not in particular, and this is true
of Minneapolis and New Orleans, Seattle and Savannah. Federal
funds, unfettered by requisites, can provide meaningful aid to locally
determined and designed solutions.

The state's role should be a scaled down version of the Federal one.
The state should provide leadership, participate in the assignment
of priorities and the provision of funds. However, to the local govern-
ments — those governments closest to the people — should fall the
responsibility of initiating and implementing local-related and ori-
ented programs.

Even "super governments" are unable to fulfill the unique and
intimate function of the local government. While regional dialogue
and cooperation is imperative, regional government — in the future
of the megalopolis — would of necessity soon become too big to re-
spond to the particular. "Super government, " in size and scope, would
inevitably compete with rather than complement state government.
Regional compacts or metropolitan authorities to administer common
services is the best alternative to super-government. Water, sewer,
solid waste disposal and transportation services can be ideally devel-
oped and maintained through regional agreements.

However, my reservations on regional government must be modified
and qualified. Experts indicate that an ideal local government should