Of the several approaches available
today for the resolution of urban gov-
ernmental and service problems — rang-
ing from the adjustment and creation
of boundaries to the coordination and
reassignment of service roles — none can
be termed universally relevant or appro-
priate. Each is capable of resolving cer-
tain problems in certain areas at certain
times or in certain circumstances. Each
requires a full understanding of the
nature of the problems involved and of
the impact it may have on existing local
governmental roles and relationships.
Each must also have the approval and
support of governing officials or resi-
dents of the area involved.
For these reasons, contemporary rec-
ommendations for state and local action
embrace a variety of approaches. The
July, 1966, report of the Research and
Policy Committee of the Committee for
Economic Development, for example,
stated :
"It is time for the citizens of the 50
states to take stock of their systems of
local government in relation to urgent
present and prospective needs. This
involves more than an assessment of
current performance. It also demands
a judgment of future capabilities in
planning and executing activities
essential to healthy community devel-
256
|
opment. As we approach the twenty-
first century, weaknesses in eighteenth
and nineteenth century forms must be
corrected — or new systems created —
if local government is to survive as a
vital force."10
The spectrum of urban problems and
of approaches to their solution in Mary-
land was intensively explored at a con-
ference on the moderization of local
government on December 9 and 10,
1966. Co-sponsored by Goucher Col-
lege, The Johns Hopkins University,
Morgan State College, and the Univer-
sity of Maryland, the conference at
Goucher College was attended by offi-
cials of local government in Maryland,
other Marylanders with practical ex-
perience in local government, and a
distinguished panel of out-of-state ex-
9 For additional information on the Metro-
politan Toronto Federation, see H. golden-
berg, report of the royal commission on
metropolitan toronto (1965); F. small-
wood, metro toronto: A decade later
(1963); and Metropolitan Toronto: A New
Answer to Metropolitan Area Problems, Ad-
dress by Frederick G. Gardiner, American So-
ciety of Planning Officials Convention, Oct.
1953, in am. Soc. of planning officials,
planning: 1953, at 38-47 (1953).
10 research and policy committee of
the committee for economic develop-
ment, modernizing local government to
secure a balanced federalism II (July
1966).
|
