I realize this is a hard problem. The Congress came to grips with it some years ago when we enacted a specific statute permitting the policemen to live within a 25-mile range of Washington, and that was specifically done because of the great difficulty there of recruiting, and this seems to have even increased.

I think your expression is possibly an admirable goal, but in an area where, in truth and in fact, the Nation's Capital is a metropolitan area, crossing the Potomac into northern Virginia and going north into Bethesda and Silver Spring, it is all pretty much of a natural city environ even though three jurisdictions are involved, but I appreciate your views on it, though it certainly does have some problems, and I suggest as you move into this you look into the record that was made at the time we had the hearing on this very problem. The Senator from Virginia.

Senator SPONG. I understood your response to earlier questions about your real estate holdings, but I do want to clear this up in light of an allegation made here this morning.

Have you at any time refused to divulge your real estate holdings to anyone?

Reverend FAUNTROY. No, that is simply not true. That is not true. Senator SPONG. Have you found out any more about the nature of the stock that you have in Washington Civic Television, Inc.? Reverend FAUNTROY. No, other than that it is 45 shares of subscribed stock.

Senator SPONG. Have you determined whether it is a profit or nonprofit corporation?

Reverend FAUNTROY. I have not.

Senator SPONG. I have no further questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Reverend Fauntroy.
We appreciate your statement.

I would like to say as we move into these nominees that if the elective process was as thorough as this appears to be, in screening all of the nominees, I don't know, maybe it is easier to be elected than it is to be appointed. But all of this is good, and I suppose you bring this out in a free election contest, the pluses and the minuses of various of the candidates.

I have never had nine nominees before me at one time, and I don't suppose any of the other Senators have either, but this is very thorough. Maybe we are setting a pattern for other cities to follow. Maybe you could have a prequalification type of an interview before you permitted anyone to run for office. I say that rather facetiously because I realize that isn't the democratic process, but you are doing very well.

Our next nominee is Mrs. Margaret A. Haywood. Mrs. Haywood. STATEMENT OF MARGARET A. HAYWOOD, NOMINEE TO BE MEMBER OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COUNCIL

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee' my name is Margaret A. Haywood.

I have lived in the District of Columbia since April 17, 1921. It is the only home I really know, and Washington is the city I love most. I have no desire, nor hope, nor aim greater than my wish that it always

occupy the position of the greatest city in the world. To have been selected by the President as a member of a team whose commitment is to this very goal is at once the most inspiring and rewarding honor, and the most humbling experience, in my entire life.

I want nothing so much as the opportunity to prove worthy of this public trust-to prove worthy of the confidence of the President in me, and to try to merit the hundreds of expressions that have come from citizens who believe in me. For, if I can contribute to the progress intended by the reorganization plan, and if I can relate properly to the people and their needs, I will feel that I am giving back to the District of Columbia some of what it has made possible for me. I will feel that I am serving not only my people, but my country as well. In my profession, as in my religious activities, the giving of service appears on my personal horizon as the only way to live. Without giving of oneself, one circumvents growth and circumscribes vision.

I confess to a growing feeling of awe, in these few days since the nomination. Were it not for the fact that acceptance of the responsibility is met by a promise of the support of a team, the prospect would be frightening indeed. But I know all the other nominees, either by their excellent reputations or in person, and I could not wish for better partners than these with whom the President has chosen to have me work.

The success of this new form of government, in my view, lies in dedicated, concerted action, undergirded at all times by a sense of unity of purpose and oneness of function. If we bring to the District of Columbia Council the best of our varied backgrounds, experiences, and observations, as these relate to the various parts of our city, segments of population, races, creeds, and conditions, as well as of availability of human resources, and if, out of considered judgment we arrive at a mutual sense of direction, I believe we, Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, and Council, will not fail.

I was neither an aspirant nor an applicant for a position on the District of Columbia Council. I could not, however, turn away from a vital challenge such as this is at this time in the history of the city of Washington. I want to assure the members of this committee that I am ready and willing, and even now impatient, to enter into joint service for the good of Washington and its people-all of its people. I concede that I have no special talent, but I am sure that I can join with the others in intensive study and research, and all my motives will be forthright, just as you and the citizens of the District of Columbia would. expect.

I thank you for your consideration of me.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mrs. Haywood. You are a lawyer by profession?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Yes, sir; I am.

The CHAIRMAN. And you are a practicing lawyer in the District of Columbia?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there anything in your professional capacity that you believe would make it impossible for you to carry out your duties as a City Councilwoman?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. No, sir. I have examined my practice. The few matters that I had that would in any way create any problems of that nature have been disposed of.

The CHAIRMAN. As I understand the statement you made to the staff, there were some cases where there were possible conflicts. You say you have disposed of those or are prepared to dispose of them in the event that you are confirmed.?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Yes. The fact of the matter is that I have made arrangements and I have obtained the approval of my clients to transfer those cases to another lawyer, should I be confirmed. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

The Senator from Vermont.

Senator PROUTY. I have no questions.

The CHAIRMAN. The Senator from Colorado.

Senator DOMINICK. Mrs. Haywood, do you have any partners in your law practice?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. No, sir. I am not in partnership with anyone. Senator DOMINICK. In your biography it also points out that you are a licensed real estate broker.

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Yes.

Senator DOMINICK. In the District of Columbia?
Mrs. HAYWOOD. Yes, sir.

Senator DOMINICK. In that capacity do you own or have any interest in real estate in the District which has not been shown?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. No. I have only the one piece of real estate which is shown on my statement.

Senator DOMINICK. What is your concept, if I may ask you, about the time that is going to be required on this job?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Well, I think, Mr. Senator, that I would have to concur with those who have spoken to that ahead of me, that it will be intense in nature in the beginning, but I believe that this very concentration of effort to get us off the ground will make it possible soon for us to level off and have a more normal condition in I would say another 5 or 6 months, 4 or 5 months.

Senator DOMINICK. Part of your job as a Council member, if confirmed, would be the setting of the real estate tax rates. Do you feel that your position as a real estate broker would constitute any conflict in the situation?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. No, sir, I don't, but if it occurred to me that this would present a conflict, I would very easily find it possible to turn my license in.

Senator DOMINICK. It is my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, that the major portion of your activity is in your law practice as opposed to your real estate practice.

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Yes. As a matter of fact, I don't really do anything at all in real estate. I have kept the license, but I don't really practice a real estate practice.

Senator DOMINICK. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. The Senator from Virginia.

Senator SPONG. The financial statement which you have provided the committee with, Mrs. Haywood, shows a gross income from your profession for this year, and that does not include any money from real estate deals. All from the practice of law?

Mrs. HAYWOOD. That is correct.

Senator SPONG. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. I have no further questions. Thank you very much.

Mrs. HAYWOOD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Our next nominee is Mr. J. C. Turner. Mr. Turner.

STATEMENT OF J. C. TURNER, NOMINEE TO BE MEMBER OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COUNCIL

Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is my understanding that my statement will be made part of the record. The CHAIRMAN. It will be incorporated in full in the record.

Mr. TURNER. Then I will read a couple of paragraphs, if I may. My name is J. C. Turner, and I have resided in the District of Columbia since 1932. To me Washington is the most stimulating and glamorous city in the world and, like my friend, the former Commissioner Renah Camalier, I love every brick and stone of it.

This city faces a new day with a new, modern government.

All citizens cannot but be grateful to President Johnson for the imagination, vigor, patience, and almost limitless time and attention which he has given to making this new government a reality. The job ahead now is to turn the promise of the new government into service to the city and its people.

Like other nominees to the City Council I did not seek this appointment. However, when asked by the President to serve I felt that I could not, and therefore did not, refuse.

The position of Councilman will give me a wonderful opportunity in a policymaking position to assist in making Washington a better city for all of its citizens. The concept of the City Council will bring diversified viewpoints to the decisionmaking process in the city government. It is my hope that the new government will assist greatly in securing home rule for the District. Also, it is to be hoped that the new government can be helpful in the adoption of a constitutional amendment to provide national representation.

The difficulties in our city relating to housing, jobs, crime, and education are almost endless. Under Mayor Washington and his assistant, Thomas Fletcher, the City Council will make substantial contributions to their solution.

I can see that the task of the Council will be primarily to support Mayor Washington in developing and implementing programs for the common welfare. He is the coach and we are the team.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Turner, do you hold any political position in the District of Columbia at this time?

Mr. TURNER. Yes, sir. I am a member and vice chairman of the Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia.

The CHAIRMAN. My understanding from the Department of Justice, and we requested from the Department of Justice their official opinion as to whether or not the Hatch Act does or does not apply to the people who are members, nominees of the Council, of the Council in effect. I am going to ask, Mr. Reporter, that the full letter from the Department of Justice addressed to me be incorporated in full in the record.

(The letter above referred to follows:)

Hon. ALAN BIBLE,

Chairman, Committee on District of Columbia,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, October 19, 1967.

DEAR SENATOR: The Committee staff has informally requested a statement of the position of the Department of Justice on the applicability of the Hatch Act to the new officers of the District of Columbia Government created by Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1967. In our view, the political activity restrictions of the Hatch Act presently do apply to the Commissioner, the Assistant to the Commissioner and the members of the District of Columbia Council, although the members of the Board of Commissioners have been exempt from these restrictions.

The analysis underlying this conclusion is not complex. As codified in 5 U.S.C. 7324, the Hatch Act prohibits "an individual employed by the government of the District of Columbia," as well as federal employees, from taking "an active part in political management or in political campaigns." This prohibition is expressed in subsection (a)(2), which by subsection (d) is made inapplicable to five specific classes of employees and officials. The exemption for the Board of Commissioners is expressed in subsection (d)(4) by referring to "the Commissioners of the District of Columbia."

The Reorganization Act, codified in 5 U.S.C. 901-913, authorizes the creation of new offices and the abolition of existing ones, as well as the transfer of functions from existing offices to the newly-created ones. It does not, on the other hand, authorize a reorganization plan to amend statutory references to existing offices except insofar as a transfer of functions or one of the other express authorities under the Reorganization Act is involved. We were unable to conclude that any of the authorities under that Act would permit a reorganization plan to rewrite the Hatch Act exemption provision referring to the present Commissioners.

As a matter of legislative policy, it may well be the judgment of the Congress that the governing officers of the District, the Commissioner and the members of the Council, should be exempted from the political activity restrictions of the Hatch Act, for the same reasons that moved the Congress in 1940 to exempt their predecessors of the three-man Board of Commissioners. The same reasoning would also seem to extend to the wholly new office of Assistant to the Commissioner. These are matters for Congressional consideration; our position described above seeks only to apply the existing statute.

The Department is reviewing the questions that have arisen in connection with the applicability to these new officers of several statutes, including the Hatch Act, the conflict of interest law (18 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) and the Dual Compensation Act (5 U.S.C. 5533). It appears that some amendments would be appropriate, particularly with respect to the special circumstances of part-time service by Council members. It has been our thought that it would be advisable to await some experience in practice before formulating proposals for legislative changes, which would suggest deferring consideration of these matters until the next session of the Congress. However, if the Committee feels that it would be appropriate to take action at the present session, we shall be pleased to assist in formulating appropriate legislative proposals.

Sincerely,

MARTIN F. RICHMAN,
Acting Assistant Attorney General,
Office of Legal Counsel.

The CHAIRMAN. I have asked that other members of the committee be furnished with this letter. I think the pertinent parts of it are contained in the first paragraph where it says:

The Committee staff has informally requested a statement of the position of the Department of Justice on the applicability of the Hatch Act to the new officers of the District of Columbia Government created by Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1967. In our view, the political activity restrictions of the Hatch Act presently do apply to the Commissioner, the Assistant to the Commissioner and the members of the District of Columbia Council, although the members of the Board of Commissioners have been exempt from these restrictions.