Small Cities and the Community Development Act of 1974Institute of Governmental Affairs, University of California, 1976 - Community development - 82 pages |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
administrative differentiation Agricultural apply for funds Area Planning Commission block grant categorical grant centers citizen participation City Administrator city and county City Clerk city councils city manager Colusa Community Development Act community development planning community development program comprehensive planning county government county seat economic external assistance external resources federal funds federal officials federal strategy governmental Group guidelines H/CD Act H/CD Application H/CD funds H/CD legislation Housing and Community input interviews Isleton jurisdictions large cities Live Oak Marysville ment Metropolitan Statistical Area municipal needs non-metropolitan areas non-metropolitan communities Northern California Oak and Wheatland Oroville percent Placerville population problems public officials regional agencies Regional Area Planning regional planning agencies responsibility Revenue Sharing Roseville rural Rural Development Act Sacramento Regional Area sample cities scalogram Seven cities small cities small communities SRAPC3 City structure Table technical assistance Tehama tion twenty-one cities unincorporated areas urban Yuba City
Popular passages
Page 41 - Trends in Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Population Growth Since 1970," forthcoming; and Calvin L. Beale, The Revival of Population Growth in Nonmetropolitan America, ERS-605, Economic Development Division, Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, June 1975.
Page 1 - Federalism, a redistribution of authority and responsibility from the Federal to the state and local levels.
Page 9 - Act of 1974 is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and by expanding economic opportunities— principally for persons of low and moderate income.
Page 41 - Don A. Dillman and Russell P. Dobash, "Preferences for Community Living and Their Implications for Population Redistribution," Washington Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 764, (Pullman: Washington State University, November, 1972), p.
Page 9 - The expansion and improvement of the quantity and quality of community services, principally for persons of low and moderate income, which are essential for sound community development and for the development of viable urban communities; 5.
Page 40 - Survey (Los Angeles: University of Southern California, School of Social Work, Regional Research Institute in Social Welfare, March 24, 1975). 3. US, President, Bill Signing, "Statement of the President upon Signing the Bill Providing State and Local Fiscal Assistance. October 20, 1972," Meekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, October 23, 1972, 1534-36.
Page 26 - Human need, both economic and social, is subordinate to governmental size and community population. This Is not to say that larger cities in metropolitan areas are not in need. It merely suggests that small cities with significant need are not equally attractive public investments.
Page 26 - Our analyses point in one direction: The largest, best staffed, and frequently the least needy non-metropolitan communities are in the best position to compete for resources under the latest community development grant strategy.
Page iv - The research for this paper was supported by the Agricultural Experiment Station of the University of California, Davis.
Page 9 - This study focuses on the combination of internal capabilities and external resources required to initiate a community development program under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.