J

^>J Section IV

ADMINISTRATWE ORGANIZATION

^

1. Administration 2. Personnel Systems

• A

/ / 3

If

o

e*

:M

" < ? , . . . .

7

1 Administration

/ - • : • • • • • • ^ - ' • - • • - • • - . : • • - • • • • • - • / • ^ • - ^ v

STATE ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION, 1958-1959

THE continuing nature of the need for state administrative reorganization was apparent during 1958-59. There

were numerous proposals for consolida­tion or rearrittgement of existing func

recognizing clear needs which necessarily had received little attention during the war, practically all of the states paid special attention to administrative organ­ization problems. Special reorganization

^

tiSns in new or modified agencies and for commissions were formed in many states, the creation of agencies to undertake new and virtually all states made studies of or expanded responsibilities. The pro- administrative structure. These studies posals, and action on them, reflected the were often very broad in scope. The re-expanding scop^ of state government and suiting recommendations frequently the shifts in emphasis and changes in called for major realignment of state de-types of services offered. • partments and agencies.

The proposals come from various agen- More recently, there has been a tend-cies of the legislative branch, including ency to examine state administrative legislative interini commissions and legis- organization on a functional basis, taking latiye councils and, increasingly, from one or a few functions or responsibilities Governors. * at a.time, and limiting proposals, interest

h. number of important changes, ef- and attention to them. For, example, as fected by legislative enactments and it became apparent that significant in-administrative actions, resulted from the creases in college and university enroll-recommendations. They ranged from ments were placing*! new demands on broad realignment of state adiriinistrative public higher educational institutions, a agencies to significant alterations.in de- number of states devoted, particular at-partments and agencies responsible for tention to higher educational organiza-particular functions. tion.

Of particular note during the bien- Proposals were made for new coordi-nium was organization of the new state nating agencies, in order to make the governments of Alaska and Hawaii. Al- best possible use of existing facilities and though as territories both had prepared to plan for the most orderly expansion of state constitutions, including the consti- facilities. Similarly, as peacetime uses of tutional base ^ for administrative organi- atomic energy increased, new demands zatioti, exteiisive study ;was necessary to were placed—or could be foreseen—for impleirient the constitutional provisions, state regulatory and developmental pro-Legislative action followed in both states grams; a number of states conducted spe-in 1959 to establish/the machinery of cial studies and recommended the crea-government. / tion of new cooi;dinating agencies and

In the period following World War 11, new divisions or .bureaus. 1 1 5 • • " • : " • • ; • " • ' - • , . • • • •

<iy:.

116 THE BOOK OF THE ST4TES

In several states, rather than appoint­ing special study commissions to survey problems and niake recommendations in various specific areas, legislatures have continued committees on state govern­ment organization from one session to the nexjt, giving them assignments in the areas of most immediate interest at each session, rather than a broad general as-signment such as was frequently the case with the earlier "little Hoover" commis­sions.

A second important recent develop­ment has been the increased extent to which Governors have taken the initiative in proposing administrative reorganizar tion. In several states, their proposals have been for very extensive realignment of departmental and agency structures.

The following pages summarize some of the major changes adopted in the bien-nium and also review various examples of recommendations of state study groups in this field.

ALASKA AND HAWAII

Among the most important actions af­fecting administrative structures. were tliose that established tlie executive branches of Alaska and Hawaii.

The Alaska constitution provides for only two elective officials in the executive branch—tlie Governor and the Secretary of State. These two officials are elected' jointly for the same term. Thie Secretary of State, in addition to responsibilities connected with that office, performs the duties and has the authority normally exercised by the Lieutenant Governors in other states. The constitution leaves the details of the organization of the execu­tive branch.to the legislature; it limits the number of rnajor departments in the ex­ecutive brancfi and states- a policy of simplicity aind clear lines of authority and responsibility. The Governor is given power to reorganize the executive branch by executive order subject tia legislative approval. '

Acting under the constitutional man­date, and with the aid of two important study commission reports, the first state legislature adopted the State Organiza­tion Act of 1959. Under the act there are twelve principal departments,, plus the

office of the Governor and the organiza­tion of the University of Alaska. The twelve departments are those of Ad­ministration, Law, Revenue, Education, Health and Welfare, Labor, Conlftierce,. Military Affairs, Natural Resources, Fish and Game, Public Safety, and Public Works. All except the Departments of Education and Fish and Game arc headed by officials appointed by the Gov­ernor subject to legislative confirmation. IVfembers of the Fish and Game Board and the Education Board are appointed by the Governor, and the Commissioners of each are appointed by him from names submitted by the boards. The Governcn. also appoints the Board of Regents of the University of Alaska. Provisions re­garding administration of the university are set forth in the constitution, and it is not under the same direct executive con­trol as the principal departments of the executive branch. All departments are headed by Commissioners except Law, under the Attorney General, and Military Affairs, under the Adjutant General.

Included in the Governor's office is an International Development Commission, an Athletic Commission, the State Plan­ning Commission, a Local Affairs Agency, a Local Boundary Commission, and the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State is responsible for supervision of elections, notaries public,„the state seal and other duties that may be assigned by the Gover­nor or by law.

The Department of Administration has broad authority. It is responsible for executive budget preparation and execu­tion, administrative surveys and studies, general accounts, space allotment and centralized services, and alsofor approval of expenditures, disbursement of funds, purchasing and supply, and personnel and retirement. In addition to customary tax responsibilities, the Department of Revenue has responsibility for the cus­tody, investment and management of all state moneys.

The legislature's action in organizing the executive branch followed^ in general, the lines of studies completed by two. groups in advancp of ^statehood—one by the Alaska Legislative (^ouncil, the other by the Public Administration Service

ADMINISTRATIVE

under contract with the Alaska Statehood Committee.. With relatively minor ex­ceptions, the reports were quite similar in ' their recommendations, although that of the Public Administration Service w.as more detailed. As against the twelve de­partments finally set up by the legislature, the Legislative Council recommended thirteen and the Public Administration Service eleven. The omnibus reorganiza­tion bill presented to the legislature by the Acting Governor for action in 1959 .

," was substantially in line with the two"re­ports. The legislature, in turn, adopted the measure in substantially the form in which it was presented.^

The Hawaiian state constitution, like Alaska's, limits the number of elective

. executive officers to two—in Hawaii to a Governor and a Lieutenant Governor. The latter is elected at the same time and for the same term as the Governor, but he may be of the opposite politicarparty-contrary .to the provision for election of the Secretary of State in Alaska. The constitution limits principal administra-: tive departments to twenty, and it left their iestablishment to the legislature. .

' ' Each^'department head is appointed by the Gbvernof with the consent of the Sep^tjC. :

ALCI 1 of- the second special session of Hawaii's first state legislature is the State^ Government Reorganization Act of 1959. Pursuant to the constitutional mandate, the act recast the entire executive branch into eighteen principal departments. T|iese are Planning and Research, Rudget and Review, Attorney General, JPersonnel Services, Accounting and fGeneral Services, Taxation, Treasury and Regulation, Health, Social Services, Education, Defense, Hawaiian Home Lands, Land and Natural Resources, Agriculture and Conservation, Labor and Industrial Relations, Transportation,

. Economic Development, and the Univer­sity of Hawaii. The university, while not named a department, is included among

^See "The Constitution of the New State of Alaska," by William A. Egan, and "The Meaning of Statehood to Alaska," by Thomas B. Stewart, State Government, Autumn, 1958; and "Alaska: On Its Way," by John C. Doyle, State Govern­ment, Winter, 1960. The Council of State Govern- . ments, Chicago, Illinois.

ORGANIZATION , 117

the eighteeri.'^Under the provisionVof Act 1, the Departments of Land and Natural 'Resources and Agriculture and Conserva­tion will be combined into a Department of Agriculture and Natural'Resources on July 1, 1962. ~ " '

Each of the departments has a single head except those of Education, Land aind Natural Resources, Agriculture and Conservation, Hawaiian Home Lands, and the University of Hawaii, which are headed by boards. Department heads are designated directors, except the Depart­ment of tlie Attorney General; the De­partment of Accounting and General Services, headed by a Comptrbller; the Department of Treasury and Regulation, headed by the Treasurer; the Department of Education, headed by a Superintend­ent; and the Department of Defense, headed by the Adjuta*t General. The Lieutenant Governor performs functions normally performed elsewhere by a Secretary of State and others assigned to him by the Governor.

An interesting feature is authorization in the constitution to the Governor to appoint an administrative director for the state, to serve at the Governor's pleas­ure. No duties are indicated for his office, but some authorities believe it may de­velop along functional lines somewhat similar to those of the Chief Administra­tive Officer now established in various United States cities.

A number of Hawaii's departments will perform, in general, the same func­tions that were performed by their coun­terparts under the territorial organiza­tion. However, almost all of them will incorporate a number of tasks formerly performed by independent .boards, bu­reaus and commissions. More than half of the departments will include within their structures boards or comrnissions w'ith more than advisory powers.

The legislature's action in setting up the new state's executive^branch followed long preparation—both in developing the state constitution itself and in subsequent, study. A Joint Legislative Committee on Government Reorganization reported to the first state legislature in 1959 to assist in coping with the transition from ter­ritorial status to statehood. It included

>

^-J*^wif - - - ' -••

118 THE BOOK'OF THE STATES

widi its report a major reorganization bill to serve as an initial master plan.^

REORGANIZATION ELSEWHERE

' The broadest reorganization accom­plished during the biennium by a previ­ously existing state government was in Tennessee. A reorganization act was pre­sented as an administrative measure by the Governor arid adopted without amendment by the General' Assembly.

The aim of die act was to reduce the . number of agencies reporting directly to

the Governor; to eliminate duplicating or overlapping of services; to coordinate re­

flated services; to establish definite lines for reporti^fig to higher authority; and to cut the time lag on decisions requiring approval by higher authority. As one of its results, the consolidation was expected to facilitate quick access to the Governor for the fewer officials responsible to him.

The act provided for fourteen line de­partments'. These cdnsist of the previously existing thirteen plus the military depart­ment, which received cabinet status. The Governor's staff, agencies were consoli­dated into four staff divisions: Finance and Administration, Personnel, Veterans Affairs, and Standards and Purchasing. The act abolished a number of boards and attached several independent boards to larger agencies.

One of the most significant features of the act was its creation of a Staff Division

. of Finance and Administration, combin­ing the functions of budgeting, accounts,

0 data processing, architectural services, . property administration, public works,

planning, and program coordination (youth guidance). All of these except pub­lic works had been handled by independ­ent agencies.

In addition, the functions of the De­partment of Conservation were merged with those of the industrial Development Agency into a Department of Conserva­tion arid Commerce. The State Library and Archives were transferred from an

'See "Hawaii: The Aloha State," by William T. Quinn, "Statehood and Hawaii's People," by John A. Bums, and "What Statehood Means to Ha­waii," by Robert M. Kamins, 5/a/e Government,-Summer, 1959. The Council of State Govern­ments, Chicago, Illinois.

independent commission to the Depart­ment of Education, along with the office, of the State Historian and various histori­cal agencies. The occupatibnal licensing boards were put ir^ a new'^Division of Regulatory Boards in the Department of Insurance and Banking, with the excep­tion of some boards which were attached to the Departments of Health, Agricul­ture and Labor and the Supreme Court. A Division of Retirement was created within the Department of Treasury to service the state's seven retirement boards.

The Michigan and Oregon legislatures, meantime, adopted.executive reorganizar tion acts of much significance that were quite similar to each other—Michigan's in 1958 and Oregon's in 195.9.

ihe Michigan act authorizes the Gov­ernor to submit proposals to.the legisla­ture, within the first thirty days of any regular session, to reorganize execiitive agencies. The reorganizations become ef­fective if they are not disajppiroved by either house within sixty legislative days after their submission, or unless submit­ted to popular referendum within ninety days after legislative adjournment.^ Sub­sequent to the legislature's enactment of • the authorizing measure, the Governor in 1958 appointed an Advisory Committee on Reorganization of State Government to assist him in developing proposals for reorganization^ and it has made a number of proposals to him.

Prior to Michigan's action, somewhat similar reorganization acts had been adopted, all in 1949, by the United States Government, New Hampshire and Puerto Rico. Pennsylvania adopted such legisla­tion in 1955, to apply, no we ver, only to changes within bureaus or similar units. A comparable provision, as noted earlier,, is included in the Alaska constitution.

In -Oregon the legislature in 1959 au thorized the Governor to propose sweeping reorganization of the state's, administrative agencies at the sessions through early 1963. Each house win have forty-five days to consider, and to acceptor

'See "Executive Reorganization in Michigan," by Lynn W. Eley, State Government, WmteT.1959, the Council of State Governments, Chicago, Illi­nois.

ADMINiSTRA TIVE ORGANIZATION 119

reject in full, a reorganization plan sub­mitted by the Governor. The act bars amendment by the legislature.

The legislature adopted this measure after the Governor had proposed that it grant authority to the executive to effect reorganization, subject to legislative veto within stated periods. Likewise, a recom­mendation that he be authorized to sub­mit executive reorganization plans to the legislature was one of the proposals for a continuing program of reorganization submitted by a legislative interim, com­mittee in 1958.

Other Oregon enactments of 1959 pro­vided means for replacing the Governor in the event he is unable to discharge his duties; authorized the Dire.ctor of Agri­culture to rearrange divisions for greater effectiveness; abolished the Committee-on Natural Resources, comprising agency heads; and initiated steps to establish a Department of Natural Resources undt^' the Governor.

, Fiscal Management '. Seyeralstates in the biennium, in addi­

tion to Tennessee, undertook reorgani­zation affecting fiscal management and related functions. Such developments are reported more fully in "Finance Manage­ment" (page 130), but are noted briefly at this point because of their importance in over-all administration.

A new Department of Administration, created by the 1959 Wisconsin legisla­ture, combines the functions of budget prepairation, purchasing, management analysis, personnel, engineering and ar-

^chitectural services, accounting and gen­eral services. In North Dakota the legisla-

I'ture provided in 1959 for a Department of Administration to combine budgeting with purchasing and printing; a central purchasing and printing procedure is to be established by July, 1960, and the full department is to become operative after July 1 1961. Missouri's Division of Budget and Cofnptroller was expanded to include responsibility for central purchas­ing, planning and construction; by consti­tutional amendment pre-auditing was concentrated solely in this division; the^ State Auditor is responsible for post-audit. The Montana legislature, while designat­

ing the Governor the Chief Budget Offi­cer, also established an office of Director of the Budget. Legislation of 1959 in Washington created- 3. Central Budget Agency with two principal divisions, budget and accounting.

Revenue Collection Important changes affecting revenue

collecting functions were made in a num­ber of states. The Connecticut and Mich­igan legislatures shifted motor fuel tax administration to the principal state rev­enue agency: in. Connecticut from the Commissioner.of Motor Vehicles to the State Tax Commissioner, in Michigan from the Secretary of State to the Depart­ment of Revenue. In Nevada, motor fuel tax administration was transferred from the Tax Commission to the Department of Motor Vehicles; in the same state a five man commission was established to replace theTax Commission as the .chief gambling cojitrql autliority. New Mex­ico's Division of Motor Vehicles, respon­sible for administering motor vehicle taxes, was taken out of the. Bureau of Revenue and established as a separate division. By constitutional amendment a new Department of Motor Vehicles was established in New York, where motor vehicles previously were administered by a bureau in the Department of Taxation and Finance. Creation of the department was in line with a recommendation of the state's Temporary Commission on Coor-dinrvtion of State Activities.

In Maryland, a new Tax Court and •State Department of Asses.sments and Taxation replaced the State Tax Commission, which had administered, corporation franchise taxes and had su­pervisory powers over local property tax assessments.

Natural Resources Several states acted on aspects of natural

resource administration.- Arizona created an OiL and Gas Commission to regulate drilling and production. In Colorado, by authorizing the Governor to appoint a Commissioner of Mines as Director of Natural Resources, the legislature per-tnitted activating of a new Department of Natural Resources created by the 1957

.¥

120 THE BOOK O HE STATES

legislature—to coordinate activities of "eighteen state agencies that deal with land, water, minerals, timber and wildlife. In Connecticut a Department of Agricul­ture, Conservation and Natural Resources was created, combining programs for­merly administered by several depart­ments arid many independent agencies. " Measures were adopted in North Caro­

lina to coordinate water resource conser­vation. Half a dozen state agencies previously had important responsibilities in this field. A Commission on Reorgani­zation of the State Government proposed and the General Assembly approved an act creating a Department of Water Resources, under the policy supervision of a seven-member board, and with a di­rector responsible for general administra­tive control.. In West Virginia a.State Water Resources Commission of seven members was established—including the heads of the health, conservation, geologi­cal and economic survey agencies. Among it's responsibilities are to inventory state water resources, study and make recom­mendations concerning -their develop­ment, and regulation aiid, with the legislature's consent, develop compacts and agreements on interstate water problems.

Consolidations and New Agencies ...„.Numeroiis" additional acts" of "the" biennium consolidated existing agencies, eliminated agencies or created new ones.

In Colorado, for example, the I/epart-ment of Institutions was reorganized to broaden its, director's powers and to absorb the duties of.several boards which had governed individual institutions. A Colorado Department of Rehabilitation ' also was established, combining under a single head the Division of Rehabili­tation of the Blind and the Department-of Vocational Rehabilitation.

In Connecticut the legislature approved an extensive executive- reorganization progiam. One aspect was the bringing to-getlier of previously separate departments and numerous agencies in the new De­partment of Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources, noted above. In addition the legislature nierged the Civil Defense and Military. Departments; en-

/ • larged the Mealth Department and pro vided for including in it offices of public health, mental retardation and programs on tuberculosis"; placed the Commission, on Alcoholism in the Department of Mental Health; and established a Depart-rhent of. Consumer Protection with duties previously performed by, various regu­latory agencies. Several independent Connecticut boards and agencies were abolished and their functions transferred to existing departments. _..:,,._^^ _

A broad measure of the Georgia legis­lature abolished, or eliminated by consoli-dation,.approximately twenty-five boards, bureaus and commissions, and .others were abolished by executive order. For example, the functions of the Department" of Entymology and the Milk Commission were transferred to the Department of Agriculture, the University Binlding Authority was merged into the School Building Authority, and a number of advisory groups were abolished.

Legislation in ^California created a State Planning Agency in the Finance Department, a State Consumer Counsel, an Economic Developmeiit Agency, and an Office of Coordinator of Atomic Energy Development. In Maine an inter­departmental board on mental retarda­tion and a new bureau of mental health . were established within the? Department of^In^titutional Services. The IVIaryland Planning. Division was replaced by a single Planning Director, who has an advisory board. The Minnesota legisla­ture created a new Department of Cor­rections, responsible for all state service'* and facilities for delinquent children and youth and for all adult offenders. The Board of Parole, the Youth Conservation Commission and three institutions for adults, were placed under the new de­partment.

Arnpng various measures in New Mexico the legislature launchecl a State Department of Development to correlate related functions. It placed a revised Youth Commission in the Department of Education. And it established a series of new agencies, including a State Radiation Technical Advisory Council, a Civil and Defense Mobilization Agency, an Oil and Gas Accounting Commission, and an

\

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZ/iTlOjY 121

administrative system and central repos­itory for.public records.

Several new agencies created in New York included an Office of Local Govern­ment, an Office of Transportation, an Office for Atomic Development, a division of motor boats, a Municipal Police Train­ing Council—iand the Department of Motor Vehicles noted under "Re\enue Collection," above. In Utah a State Insurance Departmenf was established as an independent agency under the Gov­ernor; responsibility for supervision of the insurance business was transferred to it from the Department of Business Regu­lations. Wyoming legislation established a central purcha,sing system and desig­nated the Budget Officer as State Purchas­ing Agent.

STUDIES AND PROPOSALS

Contributing much to reorganization action in the biennium was the work of study groups established by the legisla­tures or by Governors. Studies by staff agencies coritributed further. And recent findings of study groups can be expected to aid in fiiture reorganization.

In 1958-59, reorganization study com­mittees established by statute submitted preliminary or final reports in Alaska, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, Missouri, New York, North Caro­lina, Vermont and Wisconsin; Those of Alaska and Hawaii have been cited aboye. Examples of work by others follow:

A report in 1958 of the California As-senibly Interim Committee on Gov­ernment Organization, a permanent committee,, explored various aspects of executive organization, and conditions that had beeii brought about through constitutional or statutory establishment of fixed, permanent appropriations. The committee recommended submission to the voters of a constitutional amendment that would remove all present constitu­tional restrictions against full, annual legislative review of the total budget, it also proposed establishment of a tem­porary study cominissioii to examine the structure and functions of all executive agencies and to examine continuing, per­manent appropriations now in existence.

In Georgia tne Governor's Commission

on Economy and Reorganization issued two reports in 1959 recommending im­provements in budgeting and records management and in administration of personnel, highways, and health and wel­fare services.

The Kansas Legislative Committee on Economy and Efficiency, reporting to the legislature in 1958, recommended changes affecting personnel,- purchasing and the State Highway Commission. In 1959 the same committee reported in a two-volume study on the operation of state; agencies, as regards efficiency, and economy. In­cluded were specific recommendations on the Departments of Administration, Rev­enue and Social Welfare and the Boards of Agriculture and Health.

A Maine Citizens Committee oil the Survey of State Government reported in 1959 to the legislature on the state's Exec­utive Council, state appointments, arid salaries. The committee, established in 1955, urged abolition of the Executive Council. It recommended that the Gov­ernor appoint the Commissioner of Agri­culture, Secretary of State, Treasurer and Attorney Geiieral, all now elected by the legislature, and the Commissioner of Education, now chosen by the Board of Education. On salaries, it recommended that all department heads and their dep­uties be in the unclassified service, and urged establishment of a salary equaliza­tion fund to adjust pay inequities and alleviate recruitment difficulties.

A Missojiri Committee on State Reor­ganization completed in 1958 an interim study of recommendations made some years before by the state's "Little Hoover" Commission. The committee was named in 1957 to study the status of the original recommei«lations and to suggest legisla­tion for their further application. It found that about half of the recomnienda-tions had been put into effect, by statute or administrative action.

North Carolina's Third Commission on Reorganization of State Government submitted, eleven reports to the legislature in 1959, containing thirty-three recom'' mendations for changes in organization and procedure. As reported above, its proposal for consolidation of water re-

(Coniiniiedon page-129)

THE GOVERNORS, JANUARY, 1960

• /

»"

- - - - Length Maximum - . . • of Number consecutive

State • Present regular of terms or other. ,. Political.. term * term in previous allowed by

Jurisdiction Governor party' began years terms constitution

Alabama: , John Patterson (D) Jan. 19. 1959 4 . . (a) . Alaska WUliam.A. Egan (D) Jan. 3, 1959(b)^* 4 . . . 2 ' Arizona Paul Fannin • (R) Jan. 5,1959 • 2 Arkansas Orval E. Fatibus (D) . ~ Jan. 13, 1959 2 2 »

California Edmund G. Brown (D) Jan. 5.1959 4 '• . . . . Colorado..- Stephen L . R . McNicliols (D) Jan. 13, 1959 4 1 . ; Connecticut Abraham .-\. Ribicoff (D) Jan. 7,1959 4 1 D e l a w a r e . . . . . . . . . J. Caleb Boggs (R) . Jan. 15, 1957 4 1. . 2

Florida LeRoy Collins. (D) Jan. 8.1957 ' .4 (c) ' (a) Georgia S. Ernest Vandiver (D) r Jan. 13. 1959 4 . . (a ) . G u a m . . . . . Vacancy .'•. . . . . . 4 . . • H a w a i i . . . . . . William F.Quinn. (R) ' Aug. 21. 1959(d). ' .4 1(d) • . .

Idaho Robert. E. Smylie (R) Jan. 5,1959 4 1. l U i n o i s . . William G. Stratton (R) Jan. 14. 1957 4 1 . . I n d i a n a . . . . . . . . . . . Harold \V. Handley (R) . Jan. 14, 1957 4 " . . (a) Iowa ; . . Herschel C. Loveless (D) • Jan. IS, 1959 2 ""1 . . .

Kansas George Docking (D) Jan. 12, 1959 2 1 Kentucky. Bert Combs . (D) . Dec. 8. 19.59 4 . . (aO ' Louisiana Earl K ; Long (D) May 8.1956 4 1(e) (a) M a i n e . . . . . . - . , John H. Reed (f) (R) Jan. 8, 1959(g) •' 4 . . .

M a r y l a n d . . . : . . . . - . J. Millard Tawes . ( D ) . ' Jan. 14, 1959 4 . . 2 M a s s a c h u s e t t s . . : . Foster Furcolo (D) Jan. 8, 1959 ' 2 1 ; . M i c h i g a n . . . ; G. Mennen Williams (D) ' Jan. 1, 1959 2 5 • . . , Minnesota Orville L. Freeman (h) Jan. 5.. 1959 2(i) 2 . .

Mississippi Ross R. Harnett (D) Jan. 19. 1960 4 . . (a) Missouri James T. Blair, Jr. (D) Jan. 14, 1957 4 . . (a) M o n t a n a . . . . J. Hugo .Aronson (R) Jan. 7, 1957 4 J N e b r a s k a . . . . . . . . . Ralph G. Brooks (D) Jan. 8.1959 2 . . • • .-.

Nevada Grant Sawyer - • (D) Jan. 5.1959 4 . New Hampsh ire . . . Wesley Powell (R) . Jan. 1. 19S9 2 . . . . . \ New Jersey Robert B. Meyncr (D) Jan. 21, 1958 . 4 1 2 " New Mexico. John Burroughs; (D) Jan. 1.1959 2 . . . 2

•New Y o r k . . . . . . . . . Nelson .A. Rockefeller • (R) Jan. 1.1959. 4 . . . . . . North Carol ina . . . . Luther H. Hodges (D). Feb. 7.1957 4 .- (j) (a) North Dakota John E. Davis (R) . . Jan. 5.1959 2 1 O h i o . . . . Michael V. DiSalle - (D) Jan. 12, 1959 4 . . . . .

Oklahoma J; How'ard Edmondson (D) Jan. 12, 1959 . - . 4 . .-. . ( a ) ' . Oregon . . Mark O. Hatfield. (R) Jan. 12. 1959 ; 4 . . . 2 P e n n s y l v a n i a . . . . . David L. Lawrence (D) Jan. 20, 1959 4 ... (a) Puerto R i c o . . . Luis Mufioz-Marin (k) - J a n . 2,1957. 4 .2 • . . .

Rhode I s l a n d . . . . : Christopher Del" Sesto (R) Jan. 6,1959 2 . . . . . . South Caro l ina . . . Ernest F . Hollings (D) • Jan. 20, 1959 - 4 - . . (a) South D a k o t a . . . . . Ralph Herseth (D) Jan. 13. 1959 2 . . 2(1) Tennessee Buford Ellington (D) Jan. 19. 1959 4 . . . (a) •

Texas Price Daniel (D) . • • Jan. 20. 1959 2 1 • . ; Utah George D. Clyde . (R.) Jan. 7,1957 4 . . : . . . V e r m o n t . . . . . Robert T. Stafford (R) Jan. 1.1959 2 •Virginia.. J. Lindsay .Almond, J r . . , (D) J a n / I S , 1958 4 . . , (a) •

Virgin Islands John D. Merwin (R) .\ug., 1953 • (m) W a s h i n g t o n . . . . . . .Albert D. Rosellini (D) Jan . 14, 1957 4 West Virginia Cecil H. Underwood (R)' Jan. 14. 1957 4 - . . . ( a ) . W i s c o n s i n . . . Gaylord A. Nelson • (D) - Jan. 5,1959 2 . . . . Wyoming J. J. Hickey (D) . Jan. S. 1959 4 . . . • . . . ' ,

(a) Governor cannot succeed himself. • . in December. lO.'iQ, to .serve until January, 1961. following (b) Governor Egan inaugurated January 3. 1959, the date . Bpccial election of Governor in general election in November,

on which Alaska became a state. 1960. (c) Elected .in 1954 to fill unexpired term of Governor (g) Inauguration date of Governor Clauson.

McCarty; elected for full term 1957-61. (h) Democratic-Farmcr-Labor Party. . (d) Governor Quinn inaugurated August 21, 1950, the (late (i) Four-year term effective with plcction in 1962.

on which Hawaii became a state. His previous term, which be- (j) Siicceeded to office November, 1954. to fill uiicxpired gan in 1957, was by appointment of the President as Governor term of Governor Umstead. Elected for a full term 1957-61. of the territory. . ' .. (k) Popular Democratic Party.

(e) Succeeded to office June. 1939, to. fill unexpired term (1) Nomination for third successive term prohibited by of Governor, Leche. Elected for full terms 1948-52 and state law. « - • . . • 1956-60. .* (m) Indefinite term; serves at pleasure of the President.

(f) Succeeded to office upon death of L in ton A. Clauson

122

APPOINTING POWER OF THE GOVERNOR

. stale

A l a . . . . . . A l a s k a . . Ariz A r k . . . , .

CaUf . . : . C3olo...i C o n n . . . D e l a . , : .

F la . . G a . . . . . . Hawai i . . I d a h o . . .

l U . . . . . .

Iowa.- . . . K a n . . . . .

K y . . . . . . L a . . . . . M a i n e .

M a s a . . . . M i c h . . . M i n n . . . . MlBS.. . .

M o . . . . . . Mont ' . . . . N e b r . . . . Nev

N. York*

N. Car . . N. D a k . . O h i o . . . . O k l a . . . .

Ore Pa

S. Car . . S. Dak. . T e n n . . . T e x a s . . .

U t a h . . . V t . . . . .

Wash. . . W V a . . W i s e . . . W y o . . . .

CO

E E E E

E : E E GS

E E (I) E

E E • E E

E E L GS

E E E E

E E E E •

L : GS E GS

E E E E

E O E E

E E E E;

3 • ••§

•5

E . 0 E E

L(e) E L E

E GS E , L(j) GS(m)L E . E

E E E E .

E E L L

E E E . E

E • E ••

E E

L GS E GS

: E E E

.E

•2 R

E G GSH GSH E E E G

E E E E

E E GS E

G S ( o ) E E E E E E . . E

E O L G

E E E :•

. E

E E E L

0 L E 0

E E

- E E

E(aa) E" - E(aa GS~ E(ab) E : GSH GS 0 E E 0

E E ' L GS

E • • E GSH

E E

. E

. E

E. E L E

E E GSH

E E E E

B(ad E . 0 L(af)

E E L

E . E GS E

E E L E

E E E E

E E-E E

GC GS E-E

E E E E

) E ' GS GS E

1 E. E SC E

E E E .

-E E E GS

E CS GE GS

E(h) GS GS GS

GS G GS G

G GS DG

GC GS GS . GS

t

S o S c ^ tj

G GSH 0 0

G 0 GE 0

0 0 0 0 .

,GS 0 0 G

G G GC G(s)

i! DG(b) DG{b) G D 0 0 DG G

D G B(g)

G(i) G(j) GS G

E CS E 0

E(h) .E(k) GS • O

(0 . 0 G 0 GS(q) GS DG(b) DG(b)

DG G(3) DG G(8)

GC GC G(t) G( t ) GS(s) GS(s) O G

GS GS(t) GS(t) G .O G G S ( u ) 0 GS(u) G O G

SC GS GS GS

G E GS GS

G GS O DG-

GS GS G (ag)

<^S GS GSH

GS GS GS (ai)

G C ( t ) G G ( t ) GS GS(q) G(v) DG 0 G

G O GS 0

G G

o • GS 0 GS G(s) O

GS 0 0

D B(x) GS(s) G

(f) G • G DG

B(ad) D G(3). G(ah)

BG G ' G

G C GS(s) GS(§) GS . ;D(b) G(s) G(3)

DG E DG E

GC G(t) 0 G

GS(t) GS 0 E

.GC(0 GS(q) G(v) E

0 0(x) O 0 .

0 E(ab)

' G S H D

- E L h E

BG O GSH

O O D(b) 0

•2

3

•8 • a .

a v>

E E G S H D E G B 9. E B B B

E . E B E;

E E B E .

E E. B B

B E- , B E

B E B B

B GS B B

E E B E

E GS GS B

E . E G E

G CS GE B

.8 -a

G GSH GS GS

GS CS GE B

E G E E GSCn)GS G G

GS E(p) E B

E E L GS

GC GS GS E .•

"GS GS GS B

GC BG GS GS

E E(y) GS (z)

G GS GS GS

E : GS G E •

B GS B GS GSH GSH

E B E E

GS E B B

GS G GS GS

G G GC G

GC. GS GS

o. GS GS GS G

GC GS GS GS

.-JE E(y) G S . E .

E GS GS GS

GS • E(ae;

G GS

GS GS GS

GS GS GS G

a ^ •

• & : • 1 1 i

B B C^ ' G S H ( c ) G S H ( c ) D G GS (d) BG G GS

GS CS GE B

GS GS GS GS

GS G GS GS

B GS GC B

GC G S . B . GS •

GS G B B

B GS GS GS

GS G GS (z)

GS GS GS GS

G GC G B

GS GS G .

GS B B B

GS CS GE B

G GS GS G

GS G GS B

G .B(r) GC B -

GC GS GS GS

GS G GS B

B BG GS B

G ~^B

GS (z)

G GS O GS

B G G B ;

G S , GS ' GSH

GS GS B -B

GS CS G E E

- i » - —

G .D GS B

G CS GE B

E G E(k) L GS(m)GS G GS

GS G GS E .

G E GC G

GC GS GS. E

G S -E GS G

GC GS E(w) GS

E E GS E

G G S (ac) DG

L GS G B

GS GS B(d)

E • GS GS -GS

G G GS G

•

1 '

c s ,° 9

G o • G . BG

GS CS G E B

B 0

GS(n) O

GS G GS 0

G G B{r) GS

, G C GC G G

GC E GS E .

GS G GS B

GC GS GS GS

GS ,G GS (z)

GS GS O GS

B G G B

GC GS GS B

B O O G

O GS 0 GS

GS 0 - . GSB (z)

G GS O GS

B G G 0

BG GS GS GS GSH GSH

GS GS GS B

GS GS B 0

• :Legend: E—Elected. Gk-Appointed by Governor. GS—Ap-

f)ointed by Governor, a^roved by Senate. O—Office or equiva-ent does not exist. B—Appointed by departmental board. GE— '

Appointed by Governor, approved by either House. L.:—Chosen by Legislature. GC—Appointed by Governor and Council. .SC"— Appointed by Judges of Supreme Court. D—Appointed by director of department. DG—Director with approval of Gover­nor.. GSB—Appointed by Governor, approved by Senate and departmental board. GSH—Appointed by Governor, approved by both houses. BG—Appointed by departmental board with approval of Governor. CS—Civil .service appointment by com­petitive examination.

(a) See table on page 134 for pre- and post-audit functions. (b) Subject to civil service act. (c) Health and welfare comprise one department. (d) Appointed by State Corporation Commission. (e) Auditor General is appointed by Jt. Leg.-Audit Comm. (f) Budget officer a designated official' in a department of

administration and finance.. . (g) Budget officer Is appointed by the Budget Commission,

(h) The Comptroller collects most of Florida's taxes, (i) Governor appoints with approval of Budget Commission, (j) Governor ex-officlo budget officer assisted by Auditor, (it) ComptroUerGeneralisex-officIo Insurance Commissioner.' U) Lieutenant Governor functions as Secretary of State, (m) Treasurer regulates insurance, (n) Agriculture and conservation comprise one department. to) Aud. Gen. appointed; Aud. of Pub. Accts. elected, (p) I>t. Gov. Is ex-officio Commissioner of Agriculture, (q)'Comptroller is budget officer.

(r) Board of eight appointed by Governor; Governor is ex-officio member.

(s) Budget officer is head of adept , of admin, and fin. (t) Controller is head of dept. of admin, and budg. officer. (u) Tax Commissioner is the Budget Officer.'

• (v) Head of dept. of fin., and admin, is comptroller. (w) .Insurance Board 'is thr»e elected members of the Cor­

poration Commission. • . ,!' (x) Under a new law effective July 1, 1961, a Director' of

Accounts and Purchaaies will be ex-officio budget officer. (y) A combined Department of Agriculture and Labor is

headed by a single elective official. (z) Governor appoints board with consent of Senate, board

appoints Executive Director except in-Agriculture whe;re board elects a member as President.

(aa) Secretary of State is ex-officio auditor. • (ab) Treasurer also serves as comptroller.

(ac) Appointed by Secy, of Treas; with approval of Governor. (ad) State Auditor is appointed by Budget-'and Control

Board and serves as budget officer. fae) Attorney General serves ex-officio as Industrial Com­

missioner. (af) Appointed by Legislative Audit Committee and ap­

proved by Senate, (ag) "The Tax Commission is an ex-officio body which fixes

the tax rate. The Comptroller is Tax Administrator. (ah) Legislative Budget Board separate; works in same field

as Governor's budget officer. (ai) None; duties under State Board of Equalization.

123

" > V

• • • , • • • • , . • • • • • ' • • - • • . " . ' . - . . ' - ; • . , , • • • • • • . - • .

CONSTITUTldNAL AND STATUTORY ELECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS .

-T-

Stale :

I CO

II fe . 1 o .

s

3

a >-5

I •«3 •it e •2

.C.O

CI *

•^ o

a, . Miscellaneous

K ~ j BO

1^ 1°-Arizona Arkansas . . .

Connecticut^ to Delaware

F l o r i d a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Georitla

Idaho I lUnoU. . : Indiana. Iowa ; . . . .

Kansas Kentucky Louisiana .-.

- Maine ; . Maryland.

M a s s a c h u s e i t a . . . . . ' M l c h i & a n . . . . . . . . . .

M l o s l s a i p p l . . . . . . . . . ; • • " • • •

C C c c. c c G G

C C

G C C C C

C G C C c G G

C G

C

G , ,

G G

C G G

G

C G G C G

G C C , \

C

c G C

C

G C C C G

G ^ G

• • • .

G C

C C c c

c G C CL

. ••

c. G

C C

C

G

C C G

G G G

C G

G G S G

C G C GL G

G G

G C

C

C

C G G

G G G

G C

C / G

C G

C G C

CL CL

C G

G G

c

G , , • G

c

c G

SL

CL G G c c G G , .

SL .•• ,

G G

G

c G

. .' , ,

• , j

G

G • • •

G G

, , , , ,,

, , C , , c

••

• • • '

G , , c , . G

, , • • •

G G

c c c

c c c , ,

G

C

••.'

G(a) . . . . • . • « • •

• • ' . . " • •

• ' • • • • •

. . .

c G G

. , • , ,

'. • ' •' • • . . i •

S

Gfd) . . .

SL . . . . . .

. . . .

S(h) ' . ; . •

, . . • •

, . , , • •

. . .

, , G.

(c)

, , ' , , , , . • • '

S ' . > - • ,- ,

's - .••

c , , ...

, , v

• •

s , , , , • •

. . , , , ,

• •

,', G

- •••.'

, ," • : • •

••

, , , ,

• • • .

• • •

G(e)

c • • ••.-

• •

' s . "

• •

•'1

, , ••

C6 , ', ••

••

S9 • • -

' • •

• • , , , . •

•

G8

L12

» • " • ' .

, , . • • • . • •

G5 , , •• •

• .

, , ; , , . , ' • '

• •

" • , ,

G i l , ,

' " • • •

C3(g)

C

S3 , ,

C3 , ,

, ,' ••

S3

cs

. , , • , ,

, , .;••

• • ' • • e 3 , , • •

. .

S3 S3

• •

• « ... , ,

, , ••

• • • •

,-, , , , , ••:

, , .'.

GL7 • • •

G8 • • • •

. . . .

- — « ? - — : •

. . . . . . Tax Gommisaion—S3

• * .

9 2 9 * 7

Board of Equalization—G4(b) 8 ,

. • * • • (

. . . . . .

. . . . ... .'

, • • • • • . '

> . . . . . * . . • .

Printer—C Railroad Gommissiijh—C3

• . . ' . • . .

. . . . . . i

• . . • • • • • ' . .

. . . . . . Highway Commissioner—S Board of Agriculture—G6

Tax'Collector—S Highway Commission—S3 . . . . . .

8 6 6

8 11

3 8 8 7 7

"9 9

11 7 4

7 11

8 14

6

11 2

13 7

11

17 6 6

10 15

3 8

16 7 . 7

9 11: 23 13 4

14/

7 2i 18

6

^

M o n t a n a . . . . . . . . . . . Nebraska^ N e r a d a . . .

New H a m p s h i r e . . . . , New J e r s e y . . . . . . . . .

New M e x i c o . . . . . . . .

New York. . North Carolina

North D a k o t a . . . . . . Ohio

O k l a h o m a . . . . . . .

Orefton. . . . Pennsylrania . .

South Carolina , a . - ^

» — 1 •

JO OX

South D a k o t a . . Tennessee .

T e x a s . . . . U t a h V e r m o n t . .

V l r f i l n l a . ; . . . . ; . W a s h i n g t o n . . . . . . . .

W y o m i n g . . . . . .

C C c C C

C

c •' c. c c c.

c c c c

c c c c c c c c c c

c c c , , . . . •

c c c c c c

, , c c - c

c SL

c , ,

c c c , , c

-'c c c

CL

c , , c c c-c

c , . c c

c CL

c c

• .

c c c c

c c c

• •

• ••.

c c c c c c

s , . c c

c • - • ,

c c s c c c c ••

c c c

CL • • •

c , , c

. c. c

,c

c c c c

c CL

c c c , ^

c c c . c

c c ••

, ,' CL

C

, i

c G

c c

(e) c .-•

c • •

c c

CL C

c , . c

, ,

c • •

! / •

••

c • • .

', , • . . •

, , . . h .

,' ,. c

SL CL

'••C'

, , • •

• • •

j ,-

, , , ,

• • • •

c c ; , ••

c • - •

c c • •.

• c

; S •

, , , , c •

c • •

, ,

6

c c c c

• •

•• ,

• • • • • •

• ^

, , c

ca) • •

cs

. , , , •

'ii.

s

, , ;•"

,s , ,

• • • . ;

.'; .' , , C , ,

, , • • • •

, , ••

• • • '

, , ' C_

• • .

• . .

c

s , , , ,

• '. —.'

, , •

, ,

tSi

- . ,

s j ,

••

• • . • ' , ,

••

• •

• • ' •

, , c c c

," , , , t > • "

SL

, ,

, ,

's s , ,

, ,

s , ,

• •

• •

• F

• • •

vC^

, , • • - •

, , • •

- • •

" • • . •

V

• -

, , 5

,- ' • • • • •

•. -'

C6 C(5 .;. C9 S8

. . • . . • . . . .

f • • • •. • •

IC .. ;.

. . CL13 . . CL . .

100 , ' • • • ' • • • •

. . . . C23(j)

CS C7

. • ' fc. • . i

• • ' • * ' • •

• • . • • , • • •

. . • . . , •

G ' • . . . - . -. . . . . . • . . . • •

C . . S21 . . C9

. . . L9 ..

. . C . . .512(1)

.. s .C(m) . . . .

S3 C3

. .

. ; CS

. .

••

. . . . . 1 • • : . . ^

C3 ; . . • •

C3

• > '• • • » • •

• • • • CL7

S3 .S3

C3(k) . ,

. .

CL3 . : .

s : .. • • • • . .

Printer—S. Fish & Game Commiasion—S17

•••••.•' - . , . . . . . .

Corporation Commissioa—C3

. . . . . . Board of Public Welfare—

CL7 Tax Comftiisaioner—C

Commissioner of Charities & Corrections—C

Examiner & Inspector—C . . . . • •

Secy, of Interna] A£fairs—C 1 . . . . . . . • • Adjutant & Inspector

General—C . Librarian—SL . Bd. of Public Welfare—SL7

.. Employment Security Commbsion—SL3

'..-••"•••'•'

-1 . , • i . - •

. ' . • • ' •[

. .

• • • • * • .

. . - . . . . • • • , . ' • ' • .

8 10 11

4 2

9

S 12

11 7

17

6 5 -

• s H

10 6

9 6 7

S 10 12

7 . S

10 22 42

8 2

11

17 117

13 29

39

6 •• s

5 •28

12 8

31 14 • 15

. 7 21 12 6

• . ' S - :

Source: U.S.Depnrtmentof Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Eleetm Officts of State and County Governments (Washington: Government Printing OflSce, 1946); modliied in accordance with . the most recent Iniorniation available to* Council of State Govemmenta.

Symbols- C—Constitutional. L—Elected by Legislature. S—Statutory'. Numbers indicate numberof officials.

<a) . Gommlssloner of Agriculture and Industries. (b) Plus Controller, ex officio.' (c) Comptroller General is ex-offido Insurance Commissioner. (d) Commissioner of Agriculture, Labor and Statistics. • (e) 5, Secretary of State. . (f) Coinmisaioner of Agriculture and Immigration. U) Plus 1 ex officio. (h) Commissioner of Agriculture and Commerce,

' i(i) Commissioner of Agriculture and Labor, (j) Board established by constitutional amendment but

' number of members and district boundaries set by enabling legialation. ' •. . (k) Railroad Commission.

(1) Elected by local school board members in convention, plus 1 ex officio.

(m) Secretary of State, Treasurer and Attorney General con -stltute a Board of Commissioners for the sdle of schooland university lands and investment of funds therefrom.

•s

126 THE BOOK OF THE STATES 1; h

ANNUAL SALARIES OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS , ^ - . • . . • • • - . • . • • . - ' -x • ' • • ' . '

--.-, •' Maximum or current figures, as of September, 1959 • • , i • ' Director or

, . . . Commis-.Executive \ftoner of '

i . Secretary Lieutett' Secretary Finance or • State or . .' . to the Attorney ant of Adminis-

otherjurisdiction Governor* G(jvernor\ General Governor State ' Auditor- Treasurer tration

A l a b a m a . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . $25,000 StO.WK) S12.000 $ 12(a) $ 8.000 $8 ,000 $8,000 $10,000 A l a s k a . . . ' . . . . . ; . . . 25,000 ~ 16,000 17.000 — ^ 18,000 10.900(bi 0,600(cV 17.0(X> . Arizona 18.500 7,900 12,500 N'one 9,600 "9,600 • 7,500 — Arkansas 10,000 8,500 £.000 ' 2,.S00 5.000 5,000 5,000 — Cal i fornia . . . . 4 0 . 0 0 0 18,900 26.000(in) 20.000 19.500 20.000 19.500 28.875

C o l o r a d o . . . 20.000 11.403 12.000 .4.800 9.000 9.00d 9.000 — Connecticut 15,000 16.380 12.500 5.000 8.000 13,140 . 8,000 15.360 Delaware. . . . . : ; . . . . . . . . . . 17,500 7,200 10,000 3.000 8,000 6,000 6,000 — Florida 22,500 13.500 17.500 .None 17,500 12.000 17.500 — Georjiia. 12.000(s) 10.000 7.500(s} 2.000 . 7.500(s) 7,500(3) . 7,500(3) ~

Hawaii ..V '... 25,000 16.000 17.500 19.000 (t)" 15.000 15.000 — I d a h o . . . . . 12,500 .8.100 9.000 1.200(x) 8.000 8.000 S.OOQ^ Cy) Illinois 30.000(2) — 20.000(z) 16.000(z) 20.000(z) 20.000(z) 20.000 ""- 15.000 I n d i a n a . . . . . . 15.000 11.000 11.500 11.500(ac) 11.500 11,500 11.500 " — I o w a . . . . . . 7 . . . - 20.000 10.200 11.000 — 10.000 10.000 10.000 —

Kanias . : . . . . . ; . . : . . . . 15.000(ag) 10.920 8.500(ah) 2,400(at) 7.500(aj) 7.500(aj) 7.500(aj> 12.000 K e n t u c k y . . . 18.000 12.000 12,000 . liZ.OOO 12,000 12,000 12.000 12:000 Louisiana 18,000 12,000 15,000 12,000 15,000 '12.000 12.000 14,000 Maine. ;. I0,000(ani) 11.128 10.000 None 10,000 10,000 7.500 13.520(a'n) Maryland 15.000 11,500 15,000 None ,10.000 9.000 2.500 i9.000(au).

Massachuse t t s . . . 20.000 10.000 15.000 11,000 11.000 11.000 11,000 14.000 Michi f tan . . . . . . : 22,500 13,000 12,500 8,500fau) 12,500 12.500 12,500 t5,5(K)(av) Minnesota 19,000 10,000. 16,000 9.600(ax) 14.500. 14.500 14,500 15.000 Mississippi 15,000 7,S00(bc) 11,000 1,500 10.000 10,000 . 10,000 M i s s o u r i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.C|00 12,000 15,000 12,000 15,000 - 15.000 15.000 . 12.()00(bcl\^

Montana . 12,500 8,100 9.'i)00 . . 25(bh) 7,500 7.500 7.500 7.000. Nebraska 11,000 " 7.500 • 10J | i t ' • 3.000 8.000 8.000 8,000 Nevada . . . . . 1 8 , 0 0 0 10,000 1^IH|^- 2,400(bl) 10,000 F. 12,220 10,000 — New Hampshire 15,000 10.000 12.220T" None 9.516 F. 12.220 9.516 10.634

• , . - . - to I2.22TT NewJersey . . . . ; . . , . 30,000 15.000 22.000 None 17.000 12.000 20.000 (bi.)

-New M e x i c o . . . . . 17,500 12.500 12.000 40(bh) 10.000 11,000' 10,000 15.000 New.York. . . 50,000 20,486 25,000 20.000 20.486 25,000(bcl) 20,486 — North Carolina . . . . . . . 15,000 10.812 13,500 3.100 12.000 12,000 12,000" 14,500 NorthDakota 10,000(bx) 7,200 8;500(b.x) 1,600 6,000(bx) 6.000(bx) 6,000(bx^ --: Ohio ; . . . 25,000 12,000 15,000 . 8,000 15,000 15,000 15.000 15.000 -

O k l a h o m a . . . 15.000 12,000 12,500 5.000 9,000 8,400 9,000 . ' — Oretioh 17,500 12,000 12,500 None 12,500 (bz) 12,500 1^,000 Pennsy lvan ia . . .35,000 20,000 20,000 22,500 20,000 22,500 22.500 i()W)0 Rhode I s l a n d . . . ; 15,000 , 9,568 11,000 5,000 9,000 10,036 9,000 12.500 South Carolina 15,000 9,000. 11,000 1,000 11,000 10,000 11.000 - —

South Dakota 13,000 6,480 7,875 2,400 6..30C 6.300 6.300 -Tennessee . 12,000 10,000 15,000 7S0(cf) 10,000 C. 10,000 10,0(X) 10,000 Texas 25,000 15,000 20,000 25 Ccb) 15,000 15.000' 15.000 — Utah : 12.000 8,220 10.000 None 9.500 7.500 7.500 _ 7,.UK) V e r m o n t . . . . . . ; . . . . , 12.500 8,200(cj) 8.000 2.500 8.500 8.500 8.500 — . . ,

• • . • . . • • • • - • . • x

Virginia. ." 20.000 10.992 17.000(ck) 6.OO6 lO.OOO(ck) . 8.500(ck) 8.500(ck) • — ' Washinttton. 15.000 ; 10.000 14,000(cl) 7,000(cl) 12,000(cl) 12,000(cl) 12,000(cl) 12,000 , West V irg in ia . . . . 17,500 8,700 . 12,000 None -ll',000 11.000 11.000 10.000 W i s c o n s i n . . . 20.000 15.000 17.000 6.500 12,000 14,500 12,000 15.(XK)

-Wyoming ;. .;..:... 15,000 7,200 9,000 None 10,000 10.000 10.000- — - '

G u a m - . . . . . . . . . . . I9,000(cr) — . 8,970(cs)' 12.270(09)"^ 11,355(cs). 7,800 -i. ^V V' Puerto Rico 10.600(cv) ll.OOO 14,000(c\v) None 15.000 C. 16.000 14.000(cx) — li ' Virgin Is lands. . . 19.000 ' — ll,000(cz) — 10,500 None 11,000 — T .: : . '- *..., ^ . —^ < : , .—

B—Budset Officer; C—Comptroller or .Controller; F—Fi- .. (i) For eacli of three officials. • nance Officer; R—Revenue Officer; T—Taxation Officer. - . (j) Per diem for each of five members to 100 days, plus travel.

^Fiffures shown do not include mansion and other expense (k) Part federal. 1 • funds; (1) $9,500 state, $8,000 federal.

tTitles of aides covered In this column, vary from state to fm) Effective with the next elected term of office, state: Executive Secretary, Administrative Assistant, Executive ( M Pay and allowances of Major-General of \J. S. Army. Assistant, etc. - i d ) Title: Director of Industrial Relations.

(a) Per diem, plus $10 per diem during legislative sessions, i (pS Treasurer Is Insurance Commissioner. (b) Title: Director. Division of Finance. ' (q) This Is state's portion only. (c) Division of Department of ^levenue; Title: Chief, Treas- (r) Plus $2,400 a year expense allowance, unfurnished home

ury Division.- with utilities and subsistence allowance of $575 a year. (d) Under Commissioner of Natural Resources, whose salary (s) Minimum: Acta 1953 provided a-minimum salary for

is $17,000. electeo officials with an automatic increase of $800 for each four (e) Under Commissioner of Health and Welfare, whose salary years of service. ,. •

Is $17,000. • (t) Duties performed by-Lieutenant Governor.. • (f) Under Commissioner of Commerce, whose salary is (u) Plus quarters and subsistence. $15,000. (v) Superintendent of Public Works is Hishway Engineer.

<g) Tit le: Director, Division of Personnel. (w) Budget Director Is Chief Purchasing Agent. (h) Title: Director, Division of. Supply. fx) Plus same rate as Governor while acting aa Governor, and

1: • In leglslatl've sessions same aa Speaker of the House. * • . . ' - . h - ' ' - - ' . , • • -

•tr

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 127

ANNUAL SALARIES OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS—Continued Maximum or current.figures, as of September, 1959

. 1 Chief Revenue Chief •r ''Jf .State or Bitdget and/or Public Adjutant Agri- Health other jurisdiction .Officer Taxation' Instruction General culture . Officer Highways

Alabama $9 ,000 $10,000 $10,000 $9 ,000 $8 ,400 $12,000 $15,000 Alaska 11.000 15.000 17.000 12.000 10.000(d) 18.S40(e) 15,000 Arizona — • ' 9.600 12,000 8.400 300(i) 10.000 20G) Arkansas 9.500 R. 10,000 9.660 7.200 12,000(k) 17.500(1) 18.000 California Z - , B . 16.800 — 20.000 (n) 17.850 20,475 18,600

Colorado . . . . . ^ B . 10.464 12.000 16,000 8.760 12.912 17.568 . 15.000 C o n n e c t i c u t . . . . . . . . . . . A B. 14.700 16.980 16.980 16.380 13,140 16,380 16,980 Delaware 7,500. T. ^8.000 16,000 6,000 . 7,500 15,000 12,500 Florida 4-. B. 14,000* * C. 517.500 17,500 9,S00(r) 17,500 15,000 15,500 G e o r f t l a . . . . . . . . — \ mOOO(s) 7,500(s) 9,234 7,500(3) 7,500(s) 7,S00(s)

Hawaii ,. 16,500 15,000 15.500 16,200(u) 15,000 16,500 (v) Idaho .A B. 7,500 T. 7.000 8,000 . . 7,000 7,000 15.000 12.000 Illinois (. F . 13,000 R. 15.000 20.000 12.000 15.000 15.000 (aa) I n d i a n a . . . . 11.000 11.000 11.500 10.000 — 17.850(ad) 11.000 Iowa B&C. 12.000 , 8.000 12.000 (af) 10,000 9,500 . 5 , 2 5 0

K a n s a s . . . : . . . . . 11,460 9,000 8,000(ak) 6,000 10.000 15.000 11.000 K e n t u c k y . . . . (al) R. 12.000 12.000 10.000 12.000 12,000 17i.500 Louisiana 10,800 12,000 15,000 16,728 12.000 12,000 17,500 Maln« . . (ao) 10.608 14,000 10,000 10.000 13.000 13.520 Maryland 14.400 C. 15.000 20.000 8,500 — 17,500 25,000

M a s s a c h u s e t t s . . . . . . . . . : . B. 12.500. T. 15.000 14,000 16,200 10.000 14".000 (as) M i c h i g a n . . B. 17.038 17.500 17,500 18,828(aw) 19,000- 19,000 17,500 Minnesota s. . . . B . (ay) T. 15.000 .12.750 (az) 12.750 12.750 15.000 Mississippi A......L^B. 8,600 12,500 10,000 9.600 . IQjOOO 10.000 ,,10.000 Missouri B&C. (be) R. 15.000 16.500 7,000 10,000 14,000 ' 1 8 . 5 0 0

M o n t a n a . 10.000 TjOOO 7.500 9.734(bi) 7.500 14.800 12.600 . * -» . .

Nebraska 10.000 - 11.500 6.000 8.500 12,500 13,500 Nerada 10,000 10,000 12,000 : l,600(bm) 10,956 14,676 17,000 New Hampshire . . C. 12,220 T. 9,516 12,220 10,192 10,192 12,896^ (\?o) N e w J e r a e y . . . . . . J . . . . . . . C. 18,000 ., T. 16.00Q_^ 22.000 18.000 20.000 20.000 22.000

NewMezIco F, 15,000 { T " Jo'oOO 10,600(br) 11,500 9,600 15,000 • 17.500 New Y o r k . . . . 20,486 " (bu) 24.000 f8,186(bv)> 20,'486 • 20.486 — North Carol ina . . . 14,500 14.000 13.500 11.000 12.000 17.000 15.Q00 North Dakota . . . . - B. 6,x300 T. 6,000(bx) 7.200(bx) . 8.040 (bw) 10,440 12.000 Ohio \ (by) 15.000 25.000 16.200 14,000 18.000 . 22,500

O k l a h o m a . . . . : . . . ' B. 12.000 T. 12,000(i) 12,000 10,000 9.000 15,000 20,000 Oregon: ::.....\ . F . 12,500 T. 10,500 11,500 9,000 11,000 15.500 16.000 Peeqosy lvan la . . . B. 15,000 20.000 20.000(ca) 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Rhode I s l a n d . . . : . . . . ^ . . , . B. 11,622 T. 11,622 10,500 10,530 9,500 8,000 11,622 South C a r o l i n a . . ; . . . ' . . . . (cd) 9.250(ce) 11,000 11,000 ' 11,000 12,000 15,000

South Dakota . . ; B. 6,825 «,500 6.800 . 4,800 .6,300 12,500 12.000 T e n n e s s e e . . B. (eg) T. 10.000 10.000 10.000 10.000 18,440 15,000 Texas ; . . . (ci) 17,500 18,500 10,600 15,000. 18,500 18,500 U t a h . Governor T. 7,300 11,202 9.000 7.300 14.700 14.000 Ve rmon t Governor T. 8.000 9.500 . 8.000 8.500 il.036 10.000

Vlr i i in la . . . 13,500 17,000 17.000 11.000 12.500 17.000 17.000 Wash lnf t ton . . B. 12.000 T. 12i000(i) 14.000(cl) 11.000 12.000 12.000 20.000 WeatVlrf i lu ia . . . . (co) T. 10,000 12.000. 8.000 11.000 15.000 14.000 Wisconsin 13,464 T. 15,000 17,000 15.000 14,500 15,000 14,500 Wyoming Governor 9,000(cp) 10,000 6,600 8.400 12.000 12.000

G u a m 9.880(cs) 9.880 9;360(cs) ' — \ 8,970 12,480(cs) (bo) Puerto RIco 12.000 (ex) " 14,000 8,500 \ 14,000 14,000' (as) Virft lnjs lands . . . . F . 11,000 T. 6,500 11,000 None Vll,000 11.000 . . (as)

(y) Director of the Budget is ex-oflicio Director of Adminis- (au) Salary, $4,000: expense account, $1,000; member of State tration. Administrative Board, $3,500,

(i) Effective January, 1961. (av) Title: Controller. Salary aa appropriated. * (aa) Range. $1,400 to $1,900 a roonlli. (aw) Base pay, $16,200; allowancea. $2,628. . (ab) Range, $830 to $1,040 a month. (ax) Per term (2 years) plus $50 per day for special sessions. (ac) Plus U>800 as President of the Senate and $5 per legisla- (ay) Commissioner of Administration is Chief Budget Offlcer.

Uve day. * ' (az) Pay and allowances of ranit held. (ad) Plus $2,500 in lieu of maintenance. (ba) State Highway Patrol. (ae) Effective January 9. 1961. by statute. (bb) Commissioner of Welfare Is also Superintendent of Pub-.; (af) Equivalent to rank in Army. lie Institutions. . t-. (as) $16,500 after January, 1961'. - (be) For EJcecutive Counsel: Executive Assistant, $6,000. (ah) $10,000 after January, 1961. i, (bd) Title: Comptroller. (al) Plus $6 per diem during legislative sessions, and $3,900 (be) Chief Budget Officer and Comptroller same person,

after January, 1961. (bO For each of three members. (aj) $9,000 after January. 1961. (bg) State Highn-ay Patrol: in Missouri salary includes

.'(ak) $9,500 after January. 1961. longevity pay. (al) Range. $8,94() to $10,872. (bh) Per diem served, (am) Effective 1963—$15,000. (bi) Paid from federal funds, (an) Title: Commissioner of Finance and Administration. (bj) Auditor is also Insurance Commissioner, (ao) Range. $7,592 to $9,360. (bk) Controller is also Purchasing Agent, (ap) Health Includes Welfare. (bl) Plus $25 per day while acting aa Governor or presiding

« (aq) Title: Director, Department of Budget and Procurement. over Senate. "• (art State Police. . (bm) State'* share. Is supplemented by federal funds.

I Cfaal Public Works includes highways.' . (bn) Two positions: Superintendent of Buildinga and Grotuds V (at) Does not Include buildinga. at $8,400. and Manager of Planning Board at $11,000.

• ; - ^ • • , ; • , n , • • ; ' , - • : • . ; , . : • : • • > • . ,

<

^

m

128 THE BOOK OF THE.STATES

1

ANNUAL SALARIES OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS—Continued Maximum or current figures, as of September, 1959

Mines Public Works . Stale or . " and Public and

other.jurisdiction Insurance Labor Minerals Personnel Safety Buildings .Purchasing Welfari

Alabama S 9.000 S 9.000 $8 ,100 $9 ,000 $10,000 $12,000 $9,000 $tO.OOO(b) Alaska lO.OOO(f) 15,000 12.000(d) lO.OOO(g) 15,000 14.400 lO.OOO(h) 12.360 Arizona . . 9.600(i) 9.600(i) 7.200 . — — • — — '8.400 Arkansas 10.000 8.000 9.600 — 10,000 — 9,000 10,000 California 17.850 * 17.325(o) 14,400 17,400 — 21,000 16,200 17.325

'""'Colorado . . . ; . . . 10.424 lO.OOO(i) 7.332 9.000(i) 5.508 9,348 10.000 12.972 C o n n e c t i c u f . . . . 10.200 11.400 — 12,000 12.680 12,000 12,180 11,400 Delaware (p) 13,000 — — _ ^ . _ 6 , 0 0 0 ( Q ) F lor ida . . . (p) 13.000 — 10.500 11.500 11,000 9.450 li2,000 Georgia. 7,500(s) 7,500(3) 7.400 9,060 6,000 6,500 7,500 7,000

^Hawaii (p) 13,500 — 14.820 — 16.500 (w) 14.500 ^daho 7,000 7,000 8.000 — 5.100 7.000 7.000 10.200 lOinols 15.000 15.000 15.000 15,000 15,000 15.000 (ab) 15.000 Indiana ll,500(ae) 9.000 — 7,800/ 11.000. 11.000 ll.OOOJ 10.000 Iowa 10,000, 6,000 6.000 9.000 10,000 6.900 — 1 7.000

Kansas 7.S00(ai) 6.500 — ( 10,416 — — 10.4161 15,000 Kentucky 10.000 10.000 IC-QOO 10.000 12.000 12.000 (al) • 11,160 Louisiana 12.000 10.000 12.000 12.600 15.000 14.400 9.600 1 14,000 Maine 10.000 9.000* 5.82'4 8,944 8.112 8.944 8.216 I (ap) M a r y l a n d . . 10.000 7.500 ,9.360 12.700 8,500(ar) 12.000 12,475 \ 17.500

Massachuset t s . . 12.500 12.500 — . 11.024 12.500 15.000(at) 12.500 12.500 Michigan 12,000 8.500 — - 19.105 16,500 — 17,038 19,105 M i n n e s o t a . . . . . . 11.250 9.250 10.400 12*750 ll,400(ba) — 9.744 12,-50(bb)

.Mis s i s s ipp i 10.000 — 5.750 — 9.500 — — • 8.000 Missouri 12,000 • 7.500(bf) 8.000 7,500 ll,700(bg) 7.500 8.500 10.000

M o n t a n a . : (bj.) 6.000 — — ' 77000 — (bk) 8,400 Nebraska. 8.000 7.500 — — 9.950 — 7.500 6,600 Nevada. . 10.000 8.400 10.000 11.002 8.592 (bn) 10.472 11,000 New Hampshire. 10.192 8,840 — 9,516 — 12,896 9,516 12,220 New J e r s e y . . . . . 20,000 20,000 — 20,000(bq) — — 16.000 20.000

New Mexico 10,000 9.600 9.000 9.000 10.200(bs) (b.t) 10.200 12,500 New Y o r k . . ; . . . . 20.486 20.486 — 20.486(bii) 17,374(ar) 21,486 18.986 20,486 North Carolina.. 12.000 12.000 — 11.000 — - 10.000 12.000 12.000 North Dakota . . . - 6.000(bx) ,6.000(bx) 5.700 — 6.600 — 4 . 1 4 0 - 1 2 . 5 4 0 O h i o . . . ' . 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000' 14,000. 14,000 11,280 ' 14,000

Oklahoma 12.000 9.000 7.200 8.400 10.000 7.500 12.000 12.000 Oregon 10.000 U,500 9,500 11.400 — — - 10,140 11.000

* Pennsy lvan ia . . . 20,000 20.000 20.000 — 20,000 20,000 ' 20,000 Rhode I s l a n d . . . 8.242 9.500 — 10.530 — (cb) : 12.792 7.500(cc) South Carolina.. 8,250 8,500 — — — ' — 8,580 10,000 South Dakota . . . 6.300' — 3.600 "7.200 — - 11.040 — 6.300 Tennessee 10.000 10.000 6.360 \ - 10.000 10.000 7,080. 10,000 10,000. Texas 15,000 - - 9,400 17,500 - — | 17,500 12,000 12,000 8.7S0(bm) Utah 7,300 7,300 7.300 .6,300 . ' 7,300 10,000 7,300 7.300 V e r m o n t . . 8.500 7.750 — ^-^-JTSOV,. 9.500 — 8.500 7.750-

Virginia ; . 11,500 11.500 10.512 ll\''500 12,500 — 12.500 12.500 . W a s h i n g t o n ' . . . . 12.000(cl) 12,000 8r748 11,400 12.000(ctn) (en) 8.740 12.000 West Virginia . . . 9.000 8.000 12,000 6,600 8.000 7,900 9.500 8,000 Wisconsin U.500 14.000 — 13.464 — 14,304 13 ,464 .^ 17.500 Wyoming 7.200 8,000 8,000 7,200 7,560 — • (cq) 4 8,000

G u a m . . . . . F. 9.880 9.880 — (ct) 8,580 9,880(cs) 7,800(c3) (cu) Puerto Rico 12,000 14,000 (cy) 10.800 12,000 14,000 (ex) (ap) Virgin Islands. . . — — — 6,500 11.000 11.000 7.500 11,000

' , • (bo) Public Works.includcs IiiRhways. (ci) Set-by Governor. (bp) The department is headed by State Treasurer. (cj) Fiscal Advisor to the Governor. . -(bq) Administrator of Civil Service. • '' felt) Plus $200 per month in lieu of cxpenacg at the scat of (br) Plus $1,800 as executive ofTicer of vocational education. government. Constitutionality of this allowance is being tested (ba) Administrator of Governor's Traffic Safety Committee. in the courts, (bt) Non-salaried Secretary of Capitol Buildings Improve- (d) Effective on expiration of present term. •

ment Commission. ' (era) State Patrol. (bu) Treasurer is also Commissioner of Taxation. (en) Director of Department of General Administration (bv) Chief of Staff to the Governor. handles public worka and buildings. (bw) Commissioner of Labor is also Commissioner of Agricul- (co) Commissioner of the Department of Finance and Ad-

ture. ministration acta as Chief Budget Officer, (bx) Plus $1,500 unaudited expense account. (cp) $6,000 as member of Public Service Commission; $3,000 (by) Range, $11,280 to $13,200. . ' aa member of Board of Equalization, (bz) Secretary of State ia also Auditor. (cq) Assistant.Budget Officer is ex-officio Purchasing Agen' (ca) Not effective until term of incumbent expires or new understate Board of Supplies,

appointment ia made. (cr) Statutory Organic Act of Guam. (cb) Chief, Division of Public Buildings, $7,488; Director of (ca) Plus territorial post differential where applicable.

Public Works, $12,500. (ct) Department of Labor Includes personnel. (cc) Plus maintenance. (cu) Administered by Director of Finance. (cd) Auditor ia Chief Budget Officer. (cv) Official Salary, $20,000. Present Governor declined the (ce) For each of four Commisaloners; plua $10,000 for Chair- increase. " ' /

man. (cw) Title: Secretary of Juatlce. / (cO Plua $1,500 for auppllea and expenses. . (ex) Title: Secretary of the Treasury; BI«O reajponmble for-(CK) Director of Finance and Administration Is Chief Budget collection of revenues and purchaoing. /

Officer. (cy) Adtnlstatered by a Mining ComrolMlon of 5 ex-offido (cb) Per diem not to exceed 120 days during regular sessions; membera.

$24j>er day for called sesalona; same aa Governor when aerving (cz) Virgin Islaoda do not have an Attorney (Antral; the atTioveraor. . comapondlna officer !• the United Statea-Attorney. Salary

. Kt by U. S. Attomer GenersL 7

• • . ' • • • • • • • \ '

f

ADMINISTRA TIVE, ORGANIZA TION

sourde management programs in a new Department of Water Resources was en­acted by the legislature. Other recom­mendations covered a variety of subjects including land management, the account­ing system, pUlilic records management and interstate cooperationijj .

The Vermont Commission to Study State Government submitted a report in 1959 based on a two-year study. It recommended establishment of a Depart­ment of Administration and, by constitu­tional amendment, extension of the Governor's term to four years. It propose(| that administrative ppwers now vested in various boards and commissions be given to agency heads. Another recommenda­tion was that a permanent committee of state officials and employees be established to make a continuing study of administra­tive activities, and to suggest means of improvement.

The Wisconsin Legislafive Council in 1959 published . a report of its State Government Operations Committee. It included conclusions and recommenda­tions for improvements in state publica­tions and printing; provisions concerning employees' travel, subsistence and trans­portation; trainingfOT employees; opera­tion of the uneraployilient compensation system; and records management.

Proposals j ^ r administrative reorgan­ization were much more numerous from the executive branch, most of theni^set forth in messages to the legislatures.^ The Governors' recommendations in some cases reflected reports of legislative com­missions. In others they drew from recommendations of special Governors' commissions or Governors' staffs, advisors or executive officials. Messages of the Governors called for improvements of many kinds—including consolidation of departments and agencies, better budget­ing procedures, strengthened planning fa­cilities, and improved personnel services.

Among numerous examples of their recommendations was that of the Gov-

*See "Trends in State Government—1958—as In­dicated by the Governors' Messages," State Gov­ernment, March, 1958; and "Trends of State Gov­ernment in 1959 as Indicated by the Governors' Messages," State Government, Spring, 1959. The Council of State Governments, Chicago, Illinois.

129

ernor of Coldrado in proposing creation by constitutional amendment of a Gov­ernors' cabinet. He recommended that the execujtive branch be arranged in ten groups, operating under administrators named by the.Governorancf serving iat his pleasure. In Connecticut, the Governor proposed that 124 separate agencies be reduced to 68. The Governor of Illinois asked the legislature to consider reorgani­zation of the entire Code Department structure under the Governor. Major objectives included" better grouping of functions, improved direction and oncra-tion, elimination^of overlapping and ob­solete functions, arid reduction of the number of cabinet posts. In Oklahoma the Governor recommended establish­ment of a stropg central purchasing agency. The Governor of South Dakota urged consolidation of numerous bodies imder h new Department of Commerce, a reorganized Department of Agriculture and the Department of Finance. In Utah the Governor proposed establishment of the position of State Budget Officer, ap­pointed by tlie Governor and responsible to him; establishment of a State Planning Director on the Governor's staff; and pro­vision of working space, records and staff for^overnors-Elect while they are prewar- • ing for their first terms.

Those are examples only. Several Gov-^erjiors in 1959 rcquesjted legislative grants oi authority to the executive to effect reorganizations subject to legislative veto within stated periods—along the lines enacted in Michigan and Oregon during the biennium. At least three Governors proposed* constitutional or statutory action for appointment of certain officers now elected. Several, proposed creation of new or broader state civil service or merit systems. Many underscored the impor­tance of attracting and retaining first-rate personnel.

Thus the movement for improvement oi executive branches was broad and continuous through 1958-59. It produced distinct advances in action taken. More-cjver, the scope of current studies, of pend­ing proposals, and of further discussion indicate that much more action will fol­low to strengthen state executive struc­tures in the new decade now at hand.

FINANCE MANAGEMENT

FISCAL AFFAIRS have continued to com­mand major attention in the states. This has been inevitable in view of

the demands placed on them by the rapid growth in population and the increasmg needs for public services. In particular, the states have endeavored to maintain as high a level of service as possible with available resources. This has led to in­creased emphasis on improving finance management.

Major structural changes have been made, notably in the establishment of de­partments of finance and administration, and improved techniques have been de­veloped in a number of areas, including budgeting, accounting, fiscal control, and the disbursement and investment of state funds. .

Examples of major finance manage­ment developments of the past two years are reviewed in the pages that follow. The examples cited are not all-inclusive but indicate the broad nature of recent lines of organization and action.

ORGANIZATION

Creation of departments of finance and administration continues to be an out­standing development. Two new depart­ments were initiated during the bien-nium, and a third was authorized for early establishment. With the addition of these departments, twenty-eight states will have centralized a significant portion of their finance and general management functions.

State departments of finance and ad­ministration usually handle budgeting, accounting, purchasing, arid such central services as property management and motor car pools. Personnel administra­tion also may be included.^ '

As part of a broad reorganization of state government in Tennessee, which re­duced the major agencies in the executive branch to eighteen, a Division of Finance and Administration was created as one

of four staff divisions serving directly un­der the Governor. Its functions include budgeting, accounts, data processing, ar­chitectural services, property administra­tion, public works, planning, and pro­gram coordination.

The 1959 Wisconsin legislature created a new Department of Adrninistration combining responsibilities for budget preparation and management analysis, personnel, purchasing, engineering and architectural- services, accounting, and general services. Within the department these functions are organized as follows. A Bureau of Management has responsi­bility for budget preparation and also for organization and management analysis, records management, reporting, spate utilization, and systems arid procedures development. A Bureau of Finance is the central accounting, pre-auditinjg, and checkwriting agency. A Bureau of Per­sonnel is responsible for such standard functions as recruitment, examination, classification and compensation plaris, training and promotion; a Personnel Board is attached to die department, with authority to promulgate rules and hear employee appeals.. A Bureau of Purchases is responsible for setting -specifications, inspection and testing of purchases, let­ting of bids arid awarding contracts, and surplus property disposition. A Bureau of Engineermg provides state engineering and architectural services, supervises state building construction, and also super­vises pdwer plant operations. A Bureau of General Services is responsible for the maintenance and operatiori of state buildings; operation of telephone switcli-

* Two reports of The Council of State Govern­ments, A State Department of Administration, 36 pp., 1957; and Organization, Functions and Operation Of State Departments of Administra­tion and Finance,KM 335,65 pp., 1960, deal with such departments. The first describes in general terms possible lines of organization for them. The second deals with existing departments of admin­istration and presents summary tables on them.

130

V -

A DM INI S TRA TIVE ORGANIZA TION 131

boards, data processing and machine serv­ices, receiving and mailing services, cen­tral stores and records storage centers; and the production and distribution of, publications. A Board on Government Operations was created by the legislature to replace the State Emergency Board in . making emergency appropriations not covered in the budget, and also to serve as^a permanent overseer of state admin­istration and to inake recommendations on changes in the state government.

In North Dakota the 1959 legislature provided for establishment of a Depart­ment of Administration to combine budg­eting^, with purchasing and printing. Central purcliasing and printing proce­dures will be established by July, 1960, and the full department will become' op­erative after July 1, 1961.

In addition to these new departments, several other organizational changes dur­ing the 1958-59 bienriium have impor­tant effects on finance management. One of these was the expansion of the Division of Budget and Cormjtroller in Missouri to include responsibility for central pur­chasing, planning ami construction. A Planning and Construction Section is re­sponsible for supervision of state con­struction projects, exceM for the state's group of capitol buildinVs and its insti­tutions of higher educa^on. It also is charged with long-range capital improve­ment planning and for the . approval of capital improvement budgetVequests. In addition; by constitutional amendment approved, in 1958, those prVauditing functions which had been exekrised by the elective State Auditor were trans­ferred to the Division of Budget and Comptroller. As a resdlt, pre-auditing is now concentrated solely in this division, while the State Auditor is responsible for post-audit.

A Central Budget Agency was created in the State of Washington, by legislation in 1959. It includes two prihcipal divi­sions, for budget and accounting, respec­tively'. Responsibilities lodged in the new agency indude establishment of account­ing systems for the state, forms control, and financial reporting, in addition to standard budget activities.

\ In Montana, the office of the Director

of the Budget was established in the office of the Governor, who was designated the Chief Budget Officer of the state. In Ohio and Oregon separate management anal­ysis divisions were combined with the budget divisions in the Departments of Finance and Administration. Capital outlay control was transferred'from the Governor's Administrative Office to the Division of the. Budget in Virginia.

Several readjustments were made by legislation that created a State Depart­ment of Administration in Alaska, replac­ing the territorial Department of Fi­nance. Some of the accounting duties of the Treasurer, for example, were, trans­ferred to the Department of Administra­tion, and die surplus property program was transferred to the Department of Ad­ministration.

BUDGETS

Two noteworthy developments Have been the recent emphasis on a program type budget and a capital construction budget separate from the current operat­ing budget.

The increasing scope and complexity of state governmental activities have been reflected in state budgets. They have made it difficult for legislators to analyze budget requests and arrive at meaningful decisions regarding them. The program budget is an effort to facilitate adequate consideration by legislatures. In program budgeting, appropriations are made on the basis of identifiable programs within agencies rathei: than as single line items.to tlie agencies themselves. It is thus possible " to relate proposed expenditures to spe­cific progiams. Moreover, accompanymg adoptions of program budgeting has been a trend to include more performance data in budget documents.2 - .,

—-" ''Description and discussion of program and performance butlgcting are available in a number, o^ references. Among some of the jpore useful are Government Budgeting, by Jesse Burkhead < (New York", John Wiley and Sons, 1956), which includes references to program and performance !)udgcting; Program Budgeting, a method for im­proving fiscal management, by Eugene R. Elkins (Bureau of Governmental Research, University of West Virginia, 1953); and "The Performance Budget and Legislative Review," by John Wood I.ogan and John A. Donaho. State Government, July, 1953, The Council of State Governments.

182 THE BOOK OF THE STATES

During the 1958-59 biennium a num­ber of states either established program budgeting, took steps in that direction, or improved existing program budgeting tecnniques. The 1959 legislation in Wash­ington which created its Central Budget Agency, referred to above, also provided for establishment of a program budget and a related accounting" system. The budget presented for the 1959-61 bien­nium showed'budget requests by program within the various state agencies. For each program a brief description of the pro­gram and performance was included, with . tabular presentation of performance data, such, as numbers of pupils per teacher, meals served, cost per meal, and per cap­ita program cost. Figures showed the per­sonnel employed in the program and in­cluded indication of the particular fund which would serve as the source of financ­ing for the expenditures outlined.

In Oregon the budgets for most of the medium and larger sized agencies are or­ganized around programs in the 1959-61 biennial budget, and appropriations to these agencies are in most cases either in lump sums or limited 1by program. This represents a marked departure from past Oregon budgets, - vliich had detailed line item categorical appropriations. The pres­entation of agency budgets in the current budget document are in the form of a summarized financial statement, includ­ing, summary of total expenditures by

y program and summary of agency expen­ditures by major categories, such as per­sonal services, materials and capital out­lay. This is followed by a narrative discussion of the programs and of per­formance and proposed expenditures for the coming biennium.

In Utah, pursuant to a directive from the legislature, and with recommenda­tions by,the Legislative Council and the Governor's approval, appropriations made to most of the departments are al­located to major programs or functions. Within the program allocation, sumn^ary and detail of current expenditures and capital outlay are shown.

In Puerto Rico, program budgeting has -'been adopted in the Division of Hospitals

of the Department of Health. Workload and performance units are being devel­

oped for the Divisions of Public Health and Public Welfare, anticipating the adoption of a program budget for the whole department within two years.

Although the existing system of appro­priation to agencies by object classes only has been continued in Missouri, program information has been requested of the agencies as well. They have been asked to list their requests according to programs. In the budget, a program summary is in­cluded showing the amount and tlie per­centage of the total requested that is al-

. located to each major program. Capital expenditures for buildings,

higliways, and other public works differ from current operating expenditures, since they are nonrecurring expenses, or at least are for a long period of time. This may justify special financing provisions, and certainly calls for a specialized type of review and analysis. A number of states have developed techniques and proce­dures to facilitate this special, considera­tion.

As an aid in planning, a capital outlay budget may be developed for a term longer than the immediate budget period. Some states also prepare a separate capital outlay budget for the immediate budget period ahead. This is usually incorpo­rated in the regular budget document.

For the first time, a comprehensive capital outlay budget was presented to the legislature in the 1959-61 biennial budget in Minnesota. Its developmeiTt was the result of extensive work by tlie Department of Administration in coop­eration With the Legislative Building Commission.

An interesting innovation has been in­troduced into North Carolina budget

'making. Budget requests are presented in two parts and in two separate documents. Volume I, the "A" budget, includes only requests for funds that are necessary to

. continue the existing programs at present, quality levels of service. Volume-11} the "B" budget, consists of requests for funds necessary to support what the agency-heads believe are heeded improvements, expansions or additions. Ti(ie budget re­quests are separated into "A" and "B" categories in order to clarify the purposes for which proposed appropriations are to

a i j -

ADMIJYJSTRA TIVE ORGANIZA TION 133

be used, and thus make it easier to under­stand and evaluate the requests of the various agencies and institutions as well as the recommendations of the Governor and his Advisory Budget Commission. In addition, the budget document has a Vol­ume lil , consisting of requests for capital iriiprovenients; and a Volume IV, present­ing a digest of, the state budget, with charts and graphs to facilitate considera­tion by. legislatorsand the public.^

As budget documents have grown, greatly in size and comple.xity, there has been increasing discussion of methods for dealing with the facts of governmental income and expenditures in such fashion that legislators and the public will not get lost in endless details, but rather.will be able to consider the major budget recommendations. In addition to s>ibstan-tive changes in budget procedure such as those noted above, a number of states have changed die format of their budget documents in an effort to make them more generally understandable, and thereby to facilitate the analysis neces­sary for policy decisions.

Changes in budget format in North Carolina,.Oregon, Utah, and Washington have already been mentioned in connec­tion with substantive procedural modifi­cations. Additional examples include a revision of the budget document in Ohio under which expenditure requests are shown for each agency in three different ways: by source of funds;- by object of ex­penditure; and by activity. State agencies are grouped into eight major areas of re­sponsibility. Minnesota's budget docu­ment has been revised to show expen­ditures by agency and by accounts, indicating the accounts that require legis­lative action and those that do not, and showing the funds from which expendi­tures are financed. In the New York budg­et, the statement on the financial opera­tions of the state has been revised to differentiate more clearly between current and honcurrent revenues; thus a better picture is given of the extent to which tlie

"The "A" and "B" budget procedure is de­scribed in "New Budget Procedures in North Carolina," by Paul A. Johnston, North Carolina Director of Administration, State Government, June, 1958. •

state is financing its operations from an­nual revenues or from bond funds, re­serves and other resources. The budget summary, an annual booklet published following legislative action on the "budg­et, has alsq been improved iii New York. Sections of it have bee i expanded to give a greater understanding of the budget's nature and of the factors underlying the development of the financial plan.'

ACCOUNTING AND BUDGET CONTROLS

In Oregdn, to supplement the broad legislative limitations placed on expendi­tures under new procedures outlined above, a revised allotment system has been established. It provides for the breakdown of estimated obligations by allotment period, according to program plans, without regard to. any aii)itrary percentage of the total appropriation in each allotment period.

In New Hampshire a new budgetary control based on a monthly machine-accounting appropriation statement was substituted for the standard quarterly al­lotment system. Each month a percentage comparison is shown between/the ad­justed appropriation and the total of ex­penditures and incumbrances to that date. Th t state agencies are notified if expenditures exceed the normal amounts for the period of time elapsed. There must be a sadsfactory explai^ion of any over-expenditure, or it is reported to the Governor, who may estah^ish a rate of spending for the balance or the fiscal year within the remaining appropriation. .AlsO; in New Hampshire, by 1959 legislative action strengthening 1957 legislaiioii, the Highway Department is controlled by a budget act wliidi lists complete details by division and contains legislative revenue estimates from all sources. Transfers, equipment purchases, and excess expen­ditures are controlled in the same manner as for all other state agencies. «

In recent yeagrs considerable attention has been devoted to three of the steps in the normal procedure for paying state obligadons. It has bee^suggested that the procedure of voucher approval, warrant issuance, and actual payment of warrants by three different agencies or officers is an

{Continued on page I'f6)

V . ; .

V3)

ELEMENTS .OF STATE FINANCIAL ORGANIZATION* • . • : • . < •

Slate or^other jurisdiction

' ^ . . » - •

Preparation . of budget

Officials or Agencies in Charge of Specified Aspects

special budget review agency Determination ofna- Budgetary q7id Voucher in legislative ture of accounting ' related account- ' approval and

branch system ing controls pre-audit Warrant

issuance (a) "

Actual payment of

Warrants Post-audit

ALABAMA.

ALASKA.

Governor and Finance Director (G)

.Governor and D6-partmentof .Ad­ministration (d)

ARIZONA. Governor and Auditor (E)

ARKANSAS. Governor arid Comptroller (G)

'^ CALIFORNIA. . . . . Governor and Fi-nance Director (G)

None

None

None

Legislative Council (L)

Joint Legislative Hudgot Committee (L)

Department of Ex­aminers of Public Accounts (c)

7,

Department of Ad­ministration (d)

Finance Director (G) .

Departmcntof Administration (d) .

Comptroller (b) Comptroller (b)

Post Auditor (L) Auditor (E)

Comptroller (G) Comptroller (G)

COLORADO. . . . .

CONNECTICUT.

Governor and State Joint Budget Com-ControIIer (CS) mittee (L)

Governor and Bud- N.one . '-get Director (e)

Finance Director (G) .

Controller (CS)

Comp.troUer (E)

Finance Director (G) . ,

Department of Administration (d)

Auditor (E) •

Auditor (E) and' Comptroller (G)

Controller (E)

Department 'of Administration (d)

Auditor (E)

Auditor (E)

Controller (E),

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E) and Chief Examiner of Department-of Examiners of Pub­lic Accounts (L)

Department Division of Legis-of Adininis- lative Audit (L) tration (d)

Treasurer (E) Post Auditor (L)

DELAWARE Governor and Bud- None Budget Commission get Commission.(f) . (f)

FLORIDA Budget Commission Audit and Appro- Auditor (G) (g) and Budget priation Coinmittee Director (G) (L)

G E O R G I A . . . . . . . . . Governor and De- Finance Commit- Auditor (L) • partment Heads . tec (L) (G)

Controller (CS) Controller (CS) Controller (CS)

Commissioner of Comptroller (E) Comptroller (E) Finance and . . Control ^ ) • . ' .

Budget Commis- .Auditor (E) ; Auditor (E) sion (f) • • : '

Treasurer (E)

Treasurer (E)

Treasurer (E)

Treasurer (E)

L(igislative Audit Division^ (L)

Auditor Generaf (L) and Audita Division of De-' I)artment of Fi­nance (d)

Auditor (E) .

Auditors (L)

Budget Commis- Comptroller (E) Comptroller (E) sion (g)

J TVeasurer (E) .Budget Commis-

^sioh (f) ;. ..

.A.uditor.(G) and Joint I.>egi3lative • Auditing Commit­tee (L)

Treasurer (E)

Auditor (L) (h) Auditor (L) Comptroller (E) . Treasu'er (E) .Auditor (L>

HAWAII. Governor and Bud­get Director (G)

None Comptroller (G) Comptroller (G) Comptroller (G) Comptroller.(G) Treasurer (G) t e g i s l a t i ^ Aud-.itor (L)"

0-

IDAHO.

I L L I N O I S . . . .

I N D I A N A . . .

IOWA.

KANSAS.

Governor, Budget-• Director (G) and

Budget Committee (L)

Governor and Fi­nance Director'(G)

Budget Committee, which includes Budget Director (G) (k) .

. Governor and Comptroller (G)

Governor and Bud­get Division of De-r partment of Admin-

. istration (I)

KENTUCKY.

LOUISIANA.

MAINE.

MARYLAND.

Governor and Commissioner of Finance (G)

Governor, Commis­sioner of .Adminis­tration (G) and Budget Division (1).

Governor and Bud­get Officer (o)

Governor and Bud­get and Procure- ~ ment Director (G) '

MASSACHUSETTS Governor and Bud­get Commissioner

• in Department of " • Administration and

• Finance' (G)

7 MICHIGAN

None

Budgetary Com-' mission (L)

None

Budget and Finan­cial Control Com­mittee (L) •

Legislative Budget Committee of Leg­islative Council (L)

Legislative Re­search Commission (L) .

None

None

Department of Leg­islative Reference, Fiscal Research ' Bureau (L)

House and Senate Ways and Means Committees (L)

MINNESOTA.

Governor and Con­troller, Head of De­partment of Administratifin (G)

Governor and Com­missioner of Ad­ministration (G)

Audit .and Appro­priations Commit­tee (L) -

None

Auditor (E)

Department of Fi­nance, Accounting Division (d)

State Examiner, Head, of Board of Accounts (G)

•Auditor (E) and Comptroller (G)

Accounts and Re- . ports Division (m) of Department of Administration

Department of Finance (d)

Budget Division of Division of Admin--istration (I)

Controller in De­partment of Fi-_ nance' and Admin­istration (p)

Comptroller (E)

Comptroller (G)

Department of Ad­ministration (G)

Auditor (E) (q) .

State Board of Examiners (i)

Finance Director (G)

Budget Commit­tee (k)

Auditor (E)

Finance Director (G) U) and Auditor (E)

Auditor (E)

Auditor (E)

Auditor (E)

Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) Bureau of Public Accounts (GX

Treasurer (E)' Auditor-General (G)

Treasurer (E) State Examiner "• •(G)

Comptroller (G) Comptroller (G) Comptroller (G) Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

Accounts and Re­ports Division (m) of Depart­ment of Admin­istration

Commissioner of Finance (G) '

Commissioner of Administration (G) and Budget Division (1)

• Budget Officer (o)

Budget and Pro­curement Direc- • tor (G) .

Bureaus in De­partment of Ad­ministration and Finance (G)

Controller. Head of Department of Administration (G)

Commissioner of Administration (G) - .

Accounts and Re­ports Division / (m) of Depart-, ment of Admin­istration

Controller in Fi­nance Depart­ment (n)

Accounts and Re­ports Division (m) of Depart­ment of Admin-is t ra tbn

Commissioner of Finance (G)

At agency level Comptroller (E)

Controller in De­partment of Fi­nance and Ad­ministration (p)

Controller in De­partment of Fi­nance and Ad­ministration (p)

Treasurer (E) Post Audit Direc­tor (appointed by State Auditor (E)l

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) Supervisor of Public Funds (G)

TreasurerjJL) Auditor (L)

Comptroller (E) Comptroller (E) Treasurer (E) Auditor (G)

CpmptroUer (G) Comptroller (G) Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

Controller, Head of Department of Administration (G)

Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) Treasurer (E) Auditor General •. , (E)

Auditor (E) Treasurer (E) Public Examiner-(G)

• ^

ELEMENTS OF STATE FINANCIAL ORGANIZATION—Continued Officials or Agencies in Charge of Specified Aspects

State or other jurisdiction

Preparation of biidget

Shecial budget review agency in legislative

branch

Determination of na­ture of hccoiinling

- . system

Budgetary and related account-

ins controls

Voucher approval and

pre-audit ..Warrant issuance (a)

Arluat paywnt of warrants. Post-audit

.MISSISSIPPI.

MISSOURI. . .

MONTANA.. .

• | -

bo

\

V

NEBRASKA.,

NEVADA

Governor and Bud- i^one get Commission (r) ;

Governor, Comp.-i , None troUer and IJudget'; Director (Gj

Budget Director None, (G) • 1 : ' . •..

Governor a"hd Tax l-egislative Councils Commissiorter (G) (L)

Governor arid Bud- Legislative Auditor get Director (G) of Legislative

Counsel Bureau

\ :\

NEW HAMPSHIRE Governor and : .Comp^fpller (G)

NEW JERSEY Governor and, Treasury Depart-

^legislative Budget "Assistant (L)

Legislative Budget • and Finance Dii

meat Director (G) rector (L) .

NEW MEXICO.

ft .

Governor, iDirector of• Finance'and Ad­ministration (Q) and Chief of Bud- . get Division (<l);..

I.xjgi.slative Finance Committee (L ) '

•Auditor (E)

Auditor (E) with cooperation of Comptroller(G)

Controller (G) and State Hxaminer (G)

•Tax Commissioner (G> ; •

Legislative Auditor, of Legislative

;-Courisel Bureau (L)

"PivtsioiTof Ac­counts of Depart­ment of Ad minis- • tration and Control (t) .

Division.of Budget and Accounting in Treasury Depart-m<!ttt (G)

Division of Fiiii'i-cial Control of De­partment of Fi­nance and Admin­istration (d)

Treasurer (ICJ (s) Auditor (I£)

Comptroller and • .Budget Director v(G) .: ; -

Controller'(G). .

Tax Commis­sioner (G)

Budget Director (G)

Comptroller, head of Depart-, ment of Admin­istration and ^ Control (G)

Director of Bud­get and Account­ing in Treasury Dciiartment (G)

(^omijtroller ami Budget Director (GJ

Board of Exam­iners ;E).and Conti oiler (G)

.\uditor (E) and Tax Commisr sioner (Gj

Budget Officfer (G) a id Con­troller (E;

Director of Ac­counts in De­partment of Afl-

jninisjjration and "CotTtrol (tT

i;^

.Director of Bud­get and Account­ing in Treasury Department (G)

Budget and Fi- Bu<l.;et and Fi-nanciil Cpntrol ; n-mci-il Control Divi.sions'of De- Division-) of De­partment of Fi- ^ partment of. Fi­nance and Ad- \ ^ nance and Ad- • ministration (d) .ministj-ation (d)

Auditor (E),

ComiJtroller and Budget Director ( G ;

xXuditor (li ) •

-Auditor (E)

Controller^(E)

Director of Ac­counts in De­partment of Ad­ministration and

-Control (t)

Director of Budget and . \c-counting in Treasury De­partment (G)

Budget and Fi­nancial Control Divisions of DCT partment of Fi- . hanre and Ad-mini.-itration fd)

Treasurer (li) .•\uditor (E) and Legislative Bud-

* get Assistant

Treasurer(E) Audi to r (E)

Treasurer (E) Controller (G). . State Examiner . (G), and Auditor , ( E ) . •

Trea.surer (E) Auditor (E_) and . Tax Commissioner. •(G) •

Treasurer (E) Legislative Audi­tor of Legislative Counsel Bureau. (L)

Trea3urerv.(L) Legislative Bud­get .-Vssistant (L) .

Treasurer (G) Auditor (L) .

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

NEW YORK.

NORTH CAROLINA.

Governor and Bud­get Director (G)

Budget Division of Department of .Vd-miniatratiori. (d, v)

Staff of Legislative Appropriation Committees (L)(u)

.-Vdvisory Budget Commission (L & G)

NORTH DAKOTA. State Budget Board Xone (x) 'aiid Budget Direc-

• t o r ( w ) . •

OHIO.,

OKLAHOMA.

OREGON.: ,

PENNSYLVANIA.

PUERTO RICO.

RHODE ISLAND..

SOUTH CAROLINA.

SOUTH DAKOTA.

TENNESSEE;

Governor and Fi­nance Director (G)

Governor and Bud­get Director ( G ) —

•Governor and Di­rector of Finance and Administration ( G ) •

Governor, Secre­tary of Admmi.s- . tration (G) and Budget Secretary (G) : -

Governor and Bud­get Director' (G)

Governor and Bud­get Division of De­partment of Ad- , rhinistration (y) '„•

State.Budget and Control Board (aa)

Governor, and Fi­nance ^Director (G.)

Governor and Bud­get Director (G)

None

•J None

Comptroller (E)

Budget Division ^f Department of Ad­ministration (d)

Auditor (E)

Legislative Service Commission (L)

Legislative . \udit -Committee of the

Legislative Coun­cil (L) and Legis-; lative .\p_nfopria-tions Committee (L)

Legislative Fiscal Committee (L)

House Appropri- . ations Committee (L) _ ^ _ - - . '

Legislative Fi­nance Committees (L)

None

None

Finance Director (G) and .'Vuditor (E) .

Division of Central .-Vccounting and

\ Reporting in Bud-" get Office (d)

Director of Finance and .Administration (G) and Secretary of State (E)

Secretary of Ad­ministration (G)

Controller (G)

Division of .-Vc-counts and Control in Department'of .•\dministration(d)

vVuditor (ab)

Budget Director (G) and Comp- . troUer (E) |

Budget Division of Department of • .Administration (d)

Auditor (E)

Finance Director (G) . .

Budget Director (G)

Director of Fi­nance and Ad-.ministration (G)

Secretary of Ad­ministration (G), Budget Secre­tary (G), and Director of Ac­counts (G)

Budget Bureau (d) and Treas­ury Department (d)

Comptroller (E) Comptroller (E)

-Administration Department (d)

Comptroller General (E)

Comptroller (L) and Director of Director of .Audits -Audits and -Ac-and -Accounts (G) - counts-CG)

Division of Finance " and .Administration (d) and Comptroller ( L ) •

Budget Director (G)

Budget Division ,ot D.;partrrient of Administration (d)

-Auditor (E)

.Auditor (E) and Finance Director (G)

Budget Officer in Finance Depart­ment (G)

Secretary of State (E)

Auditor General (!i) and Depart-.-n^ntal Comp-tioilers (ri)

.Accounting Serv­ice of Treasury Department {il).

.Administratioii Department (d)

Comptroller General (E)

.Auditor ,(E) and. Comptroller (L)

Director of Fi­nance and Ad­ministration (G)

Budget Division of Department of Administration (d)

Auditor (E)

Auditor (E)

-Auditor (E)

Secretary of State (E)

Auditor General

-Accounting Serv­ice of Treasury Department (d)

-Admiiiistration Department (d)

Comptroller General (E)

-Auditor (E)

Director of Fi- • nance and .Ad­ministration (G)

Commissioner Comptroller (E) of Taxation . and Finance ( G ) . •

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E).

Treasurer (E) State Examiner (G) and Board of Audita (E)

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) State Examiner and Inspector (E)

Treasurer (E) Secretary of State * (E) .

Treasurer (E) Auditor General --= (E) .

Bureau of Treasury of Tre.'isury Department •(d>.

Controller (G)

Treasurer (E) IIou.se of Repre­sentatives Fmance Committee (L) (z)

Treasurer (E) Auditor (ab)

Treasurer (E) Comptroller (L)

Treasurer (L) Comptroller (L)

: ^

<

ELEMENTS OF STATE FINANCIAL ORGANIZATION-Continued Officials or Agencies in Charge of Specified Aspects

State- or other jurisdiction

Preparation of.budget

Special budget review agency' ' in legislative

branch

Determination of na­ture of accounting

system

Budgetary and related account­

ing controls

Voucher approval and

pre-audil Warrant

issuance (a)

Actual payment of

warrants Post-audit.

i tjXAS • • • •« . •<

U T A H . . . . •, ^

Governor and Ex­ecutive Depart­ment Budget Offi­cer (G) plus Legis­lative Budget Board (L)

^ VERMONT. 09 oo

VIRGINIA. .

: • ' - • ' • • ' • Q-.

WASHINGTON. . . .

WEST V I R G I N I A :

WISCONSIIN

\yVOMING.

Governor and Fi­nance Commission (G)

Governor, Treas­urer (E) and Audi­tor (E). *

Governor and Bud­get Director (G)

Governor and Bud­get Director (G)

Board of Public . Works (ad) and Budget Director (G)

. Governor and Commissioner of Administration CG)

Governor and As­sistant Budget Of­ficer (G)

Legislative Budget Auditor (L) Board (L)

Legislative Auditor Commissioner of (L) Finance (G)

None

None

Legislative Budget Committee (L)

Legislative Auditor (of Joint Commit­tee oh Govern­ment- and Finance) (L,) .. - .

None

. Permanent Legis­lative Ways and Means Committee (L)

Auditor (E)

Auditor (L)

Budget Director (G) ,

Department of Fi­nance and Admin­istration (d)

Commissioner of Administration (G)

Assistant Budget Officer (G)

Auditor (L)

Commissioner of Finance (G)

Auditor (E)

• / ' •

Comptroller (G) and Budget Di­rector (G)

Budget Director (G)

Board of Public Works (ad)

Commissioner of Administration (G)

Auditor (E) ' (auditing only)

Comptroller (E) Comptroller (E) (ac) .

Commissioner of Commissioner of Finance (G) • . Finance (G)

Auditor (^) . . Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) Auditor (L) and Legislative Audit Committee (L)

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) Auditor (E)

Comptroller (G) Comptroller (G) Treasurer (G) Auditor (L)

At agency level Treasurer (E)

Budget Director Auditor (E) (G) and Auditor (E) :

Commissioner of Commissioner of Administration Administration (G) (G)

Auditor (E) Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E)' Auditor (E)

Treasurer (E) Tax Commission (G) . ,.

Treasurer (E) Auditor (G)

Treasurer (E) State Examiner (G)

*S<mret of tabU: Based on a table prepared in 1957 by the Illinois Letlalative Coundl, re­vised on the basu of a questionnaire by the Council of State Gov«mtnents to state officials in 1959. *

Note: For more detailed information on state budgetary practices see table on pp. 140-143. (E) Elected. - _

' (G) Appointed by Governor, in some states with one or both houses approving. (L) Chosen by legi^ture or. in some cases, by an officer or group thereof. tCS) Civil service; laV Fact that some other ofiScial may also sign warrants is^not recorded.

Mn Finance Director appoints. . { ' ' (c) Chief Examiner apiwints personnel of the department,

(d) Director appointed by Governor, selects division chiefs. . • ce) ApiMinted by Commissioner of Finance and Control.

' (Q Budget Commission composed of ez-officio group partly elected and partly api>ointed by Oovemor. ' c&

(K) Governor as Chairman and six elected officers; Secretary of state. Comptrollers Treasurer, Attorney Geheral, Commisaioner of'Agriculture, and Superintendent of. Public Instmctlon. . . • • '

I ReaponsIbOity for allotments assigned to Governor. Composed of Governor, Secretary of State, and Attorney General. Except for agencies independent of Governor. . • i

. (k) Budget Committee: two Senators of opposite parties, two Representatives of opposite ' parties, and Budget Director, all appointed by Governor.

(1) Dei>artment director appointed by Governor; Budget Director chosen by department head in accordance with civil service act. '. '

(m) Department director appointed by Governor; Controller heads division and Is chosen by department.head in accordance with civil 8ervice;.ACt.:

(n) Appointed by director of appropriate department. (o) Appointed by Commissioner of Finance and Administration with approval of Governor. (p) Chosen by Commisaioner of Finance and Administration.

:' (cu With sdvice and assistance of Commissioner of Administration and Public Examiner.' .(r) Governor ex-officio Chairman, and Chairman House Ways and Means Committee,

Chairman House Appropriations Committee, Chairman Senate Finance Committee, and President Pro Tempore of Senate.

Director appointed by Comptroller who Is selected by Governor., (s) Accounting only (t) Director appoint _ . - . lu) Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and Means CbmmUteea. .' (V) Budget division prepares budget subject to review of the Governor and Advisory

BudJKt Commission. (w) Governor,' Attorney General. Auditor, Chairmen of. Appropriations Committees of

House and Senate; Budget Director appointed by board. . (z) But legislators share In formulation of'budget, see column 1. (y) Appointed by Director of Administration Department^ . (2) Selects independent auditing firm.. (aa) Governor as Chairman, Treasurer, Comptroller General, Chairman Senate. Finance

. Committee, Chairman House Ways and Means Committee. (ab) ' ApiMtnted by State Budget and Control Board; heads Finance Division of this board. (ac) Pre-audit of purchase vouchers is by claims division of Board.of Control before

forwarding.to Comptroller. . (ad) Governor as Chairman, Secretary of State. Auditor, Attorney General, Treasurer,

Superintendent of Schools, and Commissioner of Agriculture.

.to

• • C

.A--A-.

-<^

>

^^

^'

STATE BUDGETARY PRACTICES

.State or other jurisdiction

Budget-making authority

Official or agency pre paring'budget

Date estimates must be submitted

by dept. or agencies Date submitted .to legislature

Power.of legislature to change budget

Power of item veto by Governor

Fiscal year begins

A L A B A M A . , . . . . : .

A L A S K A . . . . . . . . . • / - • • •

ARIZONA. ARKANSAS........

CALIFORNIA../.'.

COLORADO..

E CONNECTICUT.

DELAWARE. . . . . FLORIDA..

Governor

Governor

G E O R G I A . . . . . .

HAWAII

IDAHO . . . . . . . . . .

Governor •Legislative Council

Governor.

Governor '

Governor".

Governor Budget Commission: Governor as chair­man and budget of­ficer, and six elected officers: Secretary of State , 'Comptrol ler , Treasurer, Attorney Gene ra l , Commis ­sioner of Agriculture, S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of Public Instruction

. Governor

Governor

Governor

D i v i s i o n of thie Budget in Depart­m e n t of F i n a n c e Budge t D i r e c t o r . D e p a r t m e n t of. Administration. Auditor Comptroller's Office, Budget Division' Budge t D i v i s i o n , under Director of Finance

B u d g e t s ec t ion of-Division of Accounts and Control under State Controller who is civil service em­ployee

., Director of Budget

Budget Commission Budget Director, ap­pointed by Governor

. w i t h a p p r o v a l of Budget Commission and to serve at the will of the Budget Commission • .

Head of each state • agency'

Bureau of Budge t . Governor appoints a Director ' •

Director of Budget and 6-man. Legisla-. t ive Budget Com­mittee

Feb. 1 or before, pre­ceding each regular session Nov. l o f e v e n years

Sept. 1 each year Nov. 1 even years-

Small agencies, Sept. 15 .

Larger agencies, Oct. 1

Oct. 1 or before

Sept. 1 or before

Sept. IS even years Nov. ISineveny ears, before m e e t i n g of. legislature in. April in odd years ;

Governor sets p. date-before m e e t i n g of' General Assembly Oc t . 15 or before , preceding each bien­nial session ' ,

Aug. 15 before Jan . session

By the 5th day regu­lar business session

3rd legis la t ive day of session

No date set Date of convening

• session Feb. in even years J ah. in odd years '•

10th day of session

Unlimited

Unlimited • . . ' "' I '

Unlimited Unlimited

.Yea

Yes

Yes Yes

Yes U n l i m i t e d , excep t for c o n s t i t u t i o n a l guarantee for s t a te support of public . schools, bond service charges and legisla­tive salaries Unlimited . • .Yes

1st session day after Feb. 14 ; By Sth day of session 1st day of session

Unlimited

.Unlimited Unlimited

. Yes

Yes Yes

Oct. 1

July 1

July 1 J u l y l

July 1

J u l y l

J u l y l

July 1 J u l y l

ILLINOIS. Governor . Director of Finance Nov. 1 in even years

By 15th day of ses­sion

3rd Wed. In Feb. in odd years, 20 days in advance to. members of legislature Not later than Sth dayof session. Budg­e t r e c o m m e n d a ­tions and estimates made public on Nov. 20 preceding regular Jan. session of legis-laiture April I In odd years

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Yes

Yes .

Yes

J u l y l • .

July 1 (blehnium) in odd years

July 1

Unlimited Yes J u l y l

/

INDIANA, i . . . . . . . . Budget Committee: Two Senators of op­posite parties, two Representatives of opposite parties, aad Director of Budget, all (appointed by Governor

IOWA ; Governor KANSAS Governor

KENTUCKY Governor

LOUISIANA Governor

M A I N E . , Governor.

M A R Y L A N D . . . , . . . - tUrVFernor

„ MASSACHUSETTS. Governor

ICHIGAN Governor

MINNESOTA Governor

Director of Budget

MISSISSIPPI Governor

MISSOURI. .

MONTANA..

NEBRASKA.

Governor

Governor.

Governor

"Comptroller Budget Division of Department of Ad­ministration

Division of Budget, Department of Fi­nance ' Buclget Section of Division' of .Admin­istration State Budget Officer

Director of Depart­ment of Budget and Procurement

Sept. I in even years .Feb. 10 or before in odd years

Sept. 1 Oct. 1 of year before r e g u l a r s e s s i o n ; Sept. 15 of year be­fore budget session

Oct. 1

Jan. 15 before an­nual session 2nd Mon. in May Sept. of even years

Unlimited No July 1

1 Feb. 1 or before Within 3 weeks after convening of regular session (odd years); within 2 days after convening of budget session (even -years) As Governqtdesires

Unlimited Unlimited.

Unlimited

No Yes

. •

Yes

July 1 July 1

20th day of regular Session or before

Unlimited

Sept. 1

Budget Commis- Sept. IS sioner Budgft Division of Department of Ad­ministration Commissioner of Ad­ministration

Set by administra­tive action

Budget Commission: Governor as cx-offi-cio Chairman, . and Chairman H o u s e Ways and Means Committee, Chair­man House Apjoa-prlatlons Committee, Chairman Senate Finance Committee, and President Pro Tern of Senate • Division of Budget and Comptroller Director of Budget •

Tax Commissjontr

Oct. 1 or before, pre­ceding convening of legislature July 15 preceding convening of legis­lature

Oct. 1 .

Sept. 15 of year be--fore session . Sept. IS In even years

End of 2nd week of Unlimited session or before 20th day of session in odd years; 1st Wed. In Feb. In even years

Between 1st and 4th Wed. In Jan. 10th day of session

Limited: Legislature may decrease but not increase except for own operating-budget Unlimited

Unlimited

Within 3 weeks after Unlfmlted Inauguration of Gov­ernor Dec. 1 before session Uniimited

Yes

.No

No

':Ye^

Yes

Yes

Yes

July 1

July 1

July 1

July 1

July 1

July I

•i

s'July 1

J u l y l . Appropriation on biennial basis

) •

Jan. at beginning of biennial session '1st day of session'

' ISth day of regular session

Unlimited Yes

Unlimited Yes

Llmlted:Three-fifth3 No vote required to in- . crease G o v e r n o r s . recommendations; * majori ty v o t e re­quired to reject or. decrease such Items

July I

July I

July 1

V

./. ^

/

^w ;. ,S

>

STATE BUDGETARY PRAGTIGES-Gontinued

StaU or other jurisdiction

Budget-making authority

Official or agency preparing budget

Date tttimates • muft be submitted by dept. or agencies'

Date submitted to legislature

Power of legislature to change budget

Power of item veto by Governor No

No Yea .

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Piseatytar begins

Julyl

July 1 Julyl

Julyl .

., April!

Julyl

July 1

NEVADA. Governor

NEW HAMPSHIRE. NEW JERSEY. . . . . .

Governor Governor

Governor

fe

NEW MEXICO. . . . .

NEW YORK \ . Governor.

NORTH CAROLINA Governor

NORTH DAKOTA.. State Budj^t Board: Governor, Attorney General,'Auditor, Chairmen of Appro-

• '' . . • priations Commit­tees of House Riid Senate

OHIO.. j ^ . . . Governor

OKLAHOMA.. . Governor

OREGON Governor

PENNSYLVANIA.

RHODE ISLAND.

Governor

Governor

SOUTH CAROLINA State Budget and Control Board; Gov­ernor as chairman; Treasurer, Comp­tro l l er Genera l . Chairman Senate Finance Committee. Chairman House Ways and Means Committee

Budget Director

Comptroller Director of Division of Budjtet and Ac-countins of Depart­ment of the Treasury i3udgetDivision.be-partment of Finance and Administration Division of Budget

.Governor as ex-offi-cio Director of the Budget Budget Director

Sept. 1

Oct, 1 in even years' Sept. 15

Nov. 15

Sept. 15

Sept. 1 preceding session

No date set: About Aug. 1

Director of Finance Nov. 1

Budget Director.

Management Divi­sion. Department of Finance and Admin­istration Budget Secretary

Budget Officer

Sept. .1 of even num­bered years Sept. 1 of even year •preceding 'legislative year

Nov, 1 of even years

Oct. 1

Finance Division of State Budget and Control Board

Nov. 1 or discretion of Board

lOtb day of session Unlimited or before Feb.. 15 in odd years Unlimited Feb. 1 Unlimited

On or before 25th day of session -

On or before Feb. 1

1st week of session

Unlimited

Limited: May strike Yes out items, reduce items or add separate items of expenditure Unlimited

Beginning of session Unlimited

1st week In Feb. in odd years 1st day of session Dec 1 of even year preceding legislative year~

As soon as possible after organization of General Assembly 24th day of session

Unlimited

UnUmited -

Limited: Appropria­tions set by consti­tutional amendment cannot be altered Unlimited

2nd Tues. in Jan.

Yes

Yes, in general ap­propriation act only Yes, constitutional

Y ^

July 1

July I

Julyl in odd years

June 1 _

Limited: If increases-or additions cannot be covered by reve­nue estimates or sur­plus, additional fi­nancing must be en­acted as part o/ same legislation ' Unlimited

No Julyl

Yes, in appropria­tions bill

July 1.

SOUTH DAKOTA.. Governor

TENNESSEE Governor

TEXAS Governor

Budget Director Oct. IS By 5 tti day of session Unlimited

Director of Finance Dec. 1 or before of Jan. 14 or before uh- Unlimited and AdministratioTx even years' less change in Gover­

nor; then Mar. 1 or before

Executive Budget Aug. 15 of even years 5 th day of session or Unlimited Officer, Executive before Department

UTAH. . . . . . Governor Finance Commission No date set

VERMONT. Governor

VIRGINIA Governor

Governor assisted by Treasurer, Auditor of Accounts and Fiscal Advisor to the Gov­ernor

Oct, 1, biennially

Governor appoints a Sept. 15 in odd years Director of Division of Budget, and other assistants .

WASHINGTON...,

WEST VIRGINIA.

irai Governor

Board of P u b l i c Works: Governor as chairman; Secretary of Sta te , Auditor, A t t o ^ e ^ General. TrediSrer. Superin­tendent of Schools . and Commissioner of Agricj^ture

Budget Director

Division of Budget, Department of Ft-nafiemand Adminis-. t ration

Date set by Gover­nor

Sept. 15 0r4)efore. of year preceding an­nual session

, 10 days after conv. of session or before

3rd Tali, of regular biennial session or before

2nd Wed. in Jan. in even years •

.5th day after conv. of se38,/br before

10 days after con­vening of session or before

Unlimited

Unlimited

UnUmited

Unlimited

Limited: May not increase i tems of budget bill except appropriations for legislature and ju­diciary

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yet

No

G U A M . . . . . . . . .

PUERTO RICO

Governor

Governor

Governor

Governor

C o m m i s s i o n e r of Administration

Assistant Budget Offi­cer

D i rec to r , B u d g e t Management

Bu reau of the Budget

Date set by Com­missioner of Admin­istration

Oct. 1 preceding ses­sion in Jan.

Nov. 1 preceding session in Jan.

Date set by Btidget

Feb. 1 in odd years or before

Within 5 days after beginning of session

1st week of Jan. ses­sion c

2na Mon. in Jan.;

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Unlimited

Ye«

• Yes

Yes

Yes Director. UsuaUjL^opening day of regu-not later than Sept. lar session 15

J u l y !

Ju ly l

Sept. 1

Ju ly l

July 1

J u l y l

July l^

July 1

July 1

J u l y l

Ju ly l

Ju ly l

VIRGIN ISLANDS.. Governor DitectoroftheBudg- Jan. 15 et

Upon convening Limited Yea Ju ly l

144 THE BOOK OF THE STATES

AGENCIES ADMINISTERING MAJOR STATE TAXES* As of July 1, 1959

Stale Income Sales Gasoline Motor VehicUia)

^

Alabama. . A l a s k a . . . . Arizona. . . Arkansas . . California.

Colorado Connect icut . D e l a w a r e . . . . Florida Georgia

Dept. of Rev. Dept.' of Rev. Tax Commn,, Dept. 6t Rev. Fran. Tax Bd.

Dept. of Rev. -Tax Commissr. Tax Dept.

H a w a i i . I d a h o . . . lU lno l s . . Indiana. I o w a —

Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commissr. Tax Collector

K a n s a s . . . Kentucky. Louisiana. M a i n e . . . . Maryland.

Tax Commn.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev.

•V

Massacliusetts . M i c h i g a n . . . . ' . . Minnesota Miss i s s ipp i . . . . . Missouri . .

Comptroller

Commissr. Corp. & Tax.

Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commn. Dept. of Rev. Bd. of Equal.

Dept. of Rev. Tax ComniisJr.

Comptroller Dept. of Rev.

Tax. Commissr.

Dept. of Rev." Dept. of Rev. Tax Commn.

Dept. of Rev.

Dept. of..Rev.. Bur. of Tax. Comptroller •

Montana . ^ N e b r a s k a . . . . . . . N e v a d a . , New Hampshire. New J e r s e y . . . . . .

Dept. of Tax,. Tax Commn. Dept. of Rev.

Bd. of Equah

New M e x i c o . . . . New York. . . North Carolina. North Dakota. . Ohio

Tax Commn. Dept. of Rev.

Bur. of Rev. Dept. Tax. & Fin. Dept. of Rev. Tax Commissr.

O k l a h o m a . . O r e g o n . . - . . , Pennsylvania. •.. Rhode I s l a n d . . , South Carolina.

South Dakota. . Tennessee Texas. . U t a h . . . . V e r m o n t . . . . . . .

Virginia Washington . . . West Virginia. W i s c o n s i n . . . . Wyoming

Tax Commn. Tax Commn. -Dept. of Rev.

' Dept. of Admin, Tax Commn.

Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commn. Commissr. of Taxes

Dept. of -Tax.

Dept. of t a x . " '

Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commn. Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commn.

Bur. of Rev. •

Dept. of Rev. Tax Commissr. Tax Cornmissr.

Tax Commn.

Dept. of Rev." D'ept. of Admin. Tax Commn.

DeRt. of Rev. Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commn.

Tax Commn. Tax Commissr.

Dept. of Rev.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Highway Dept. Dept. of Rev. Bd. of Equal.

Dept. of Rev. Tax.-Commissr. Highway Dept." .. Comptroller Dept. of Rev.

Tax Commissr. Tax Collector Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Treasurer

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Bur. of Tax. Comptroller.

Commissr. Corp. & Tax. Sec. of State Dept. of Tax. Mot. Veh. Compt. Dept. of Rev.

Bd. of Equal. ^Dept. Agric. & Insp. Dept. Mot. Veh. Commissr.'Mot. Veh. Dept. of Treas.

Bur. of Rev. Dept. Tax. & Fin. Dept. of Rev. Auditor Tax Commissr.

Tax Commn. Dept. Mot. Veh. Dept". of Rev. Dept. of Arii'iip. Tax Comm.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. *-Comptroller Tax Commn. Mot. Veh. Dept. /

Div. Mot. Veh. Dept. of Licenses Tax Commissr; Dept. of Tax. IJppt. of Rev.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. l^Iighway Dept. Dept. of Rev. Dept. Mot. Veh.

Dept. of Rev. Commissr. Mot. Veh. Commissr. Mot. Veh. Commissr. Mot. Veh. Dept. of Rev.

Local Dept. of Law En^ Sec. of State Sec. of State Dept. Pub. Safety

Highway Commn. Dept. of Rev. Dept." of Rev. Sec. of State Commissr. Mot. Veh.

Reg. Mot. Veh. Sec. of State Sec. of State • Mot. Veh. Compt. Dept. of Rev.

Reg;Mot.^Veh/ Dept. Rds. & Irrg. Dept. Mot. Veh.

, Commissr. Mot. Veh. Dept. Law & Pub. Sfty

Div. Mot. Veh. Dept. Tax. & Fin. Dept. Mot; Veh. Highway Dept. Reg. Mot. Veh.

Tax Commn. Dept. Mot. Veh. • Dept. of Rev._. Reg. Mot. Veh. Highway Commn. •

Dept. Mot. Veh. K Dept. of Rev.

Highway Dept. Tax Commn. Mot. Veh. Dept.

Div. Mot. Veh. Dept. of Licenses Dept. Mot. Veh. Mot. Veh. Dept. Dept. of Rev;

, iv-

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 145

AGENCIES ^ADMINISTERING MAJOR STATE TAXES* j As of July 1, 1959

Tobacco Death Alcoholic Beverages No. of

Agencies(,a) Stale

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Tax Commn. Dept. of Rev. Bd. of Equal.

Tax Commissr. \i.sj, Tax Dept.

Bev. Dept. Dept. of Rev.

Tax. Commissr. Tax Collector

. Dept. of Rev. Alcoh. Bev. Commn. Tax.Commn.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Bur. of Tax. Comptroller.

Commissr. Corp. & Tax. Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Tax. Tax Commn. Dept. of Rev.

Bd. of Equal. Dept. Agric. & Insp. Tax Commn. Tax Commn. Dept. of Treas.

Bur. of Rev. Dept. Tax. & Fin.

Tax Commissr. Tax Commissr.

Tax Commn.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Admin. Tax Commn;

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Comptroller Tax Commn. Commissr. of Taxes

Tax Commn. Tax Commissr. Dept. of Tax. Dept. of Rev.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Treasurer Dept. of Rev. Controller

Dept.-of Rev. Tax Commissr. Tax Dept. Comptroller . Dept. of Rev,

Tax. Commissr. Tax Collector ^ Atty. Gen. Dept. of Rev. Tax Commn.

Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Rev. Local Bur. of Tax. Local

Comr. Corp. & Tax. Dept. of Rev. Dept. of Tax. Tax Commn. . Dept. of Rev.

Bd. of Equal. •Tax Commissr.

Tax Commn. Dept. of Treas.

Bur. of Rev. Dept; Tax. & Fin. Dept.v^of Rev. Tax Cteimissr. Tax 'Ge i^ i s s r .

Tax Coti Treasurer\ Dept. of R' Dept. of Ar. Tax CommnV

Dept. of Rev.' Dept. of Rev. Comptroller Tax.Commn. Commissr. of Taxes

Dept. of Tax. Tax Commn. Tax Commissr. Dept. of Tax.

-Dept..pf Rev. .

:*

Air Bev. Contr. Bd. 2 , Dept. of Rev. 1

Tax Commn. 3 Dept. of Rev. 1 Bd. of Equal. 4

Dept. of Rev. 1 Tax Commissr. ( 2 Al. Bev. Contr; Commn. 4 Bev. Dept. \ 3 Dept. of Rev. 1

Tax. Commissr. 1 Tax Collector 2 Dept. of Rev.; "^ . 3 Alcoh. Bev. Commn. 3 Tax Commn. 3

Dept. of Rev. & Dir. Al. Bev. Contr. . 3 Dept. of Rev. 1 Dept. of Rev. 2 Liquor Commn. 3 Comptroller 2

Commissr. Corp. & Tax. 2 Liquor. Contr. Commn. 3 Liquor Contr. Commn. 3 Tax Commn. . 2 Dept. of R^v. . 1

Liquor Contr. Bd. 3 Liquor Contr. Commn. 4 Tax Commn. 2 Liquor Commn, 3 Dept. of Treas. _ "" • 2

Bur. of Rev. 2 Dept. Tax. & Fin. 1

- Dej»«fSf Rev. . 2 Treasurer • 4 Tax Commissr. 2

Tax Commn. 1 Liquor Contr. Commn. 4 Dept. of Rev. 1 Dept. of Admin. 2 Tax Commn. ,2

Dept. of Rev. 2 Dept. of Rev. 1 Liquor Contr. Bd. .3 Tax Commn. 1 Commissr. of Taxes 2

Dept. of Tax. 2 Liquor Contr. Bd, 3 Liquor Contr. Commn. 3 Dept. of Tax. 2 Liquor Commn, * 2

Alabama . . . . . " . . . . Alaska

Arizona .Arkansas

. : . . . . .California

. . . . . . . .Colorado . . . .Connecticut

Delaware . Florida ..... Georgia

. . . H i w a i l Idaho

: . . . . I lHndi8 Indiana

Iowa

Kansas Kentucky Louisiana

. . . . . Maine . . . . . . . M a r y l a n d

. . Massachusetts Michigan

. . . . . .Minnesota , Mississippi

Missouri .

.Montana Nebraska

^Nevada . New. Hampsh ire

New Jersey

New Mexico N i w York

. .North Carolina

. . .North Dakota Ohio

Oklahoma Oregon

. . .Pennsylvania

. . . Rhode Island ;South Carolina

. . . S o u t h Dakota Tennessee

Texas U t a h

Vermont

. . .Virg in ia . . . : Washington

. . . W e s t Virginia Wisconsin

. .Wyoming

CP.

•Prepared by the Federation of Tax Administrators^ (a) The motor vehicle column refers to the administration of

motor vehicle registration taxes and special taxes on^jnotor carriers. The latter include mileage taxes, gross receipts, taxes and special levies on a weight or capacity basis, but exclude additional motor fuel taxes imposed on carriers. In eleven states, apedal taxes Imposed on carriers are administered by agencies other than those responsible for motor vehicle licensing. Tnese ' states and the agencies are: California, the Board of Equaliza-

tion; Florida,^he Comptroller; Iowa, the Commerce Commis­sion: KentucEV. the Department of Motor Transportation: Michigan, the Public Service Commission; Montana, the Board of Railroad Commissioners; North Dakota, the Highway Com­missioner; Ohio, the Tax Commissioner;.Oregon; the Public Utility Commissioner; South Carolina, the Public Service Com­mission; and Virginia,-the Corporation Commission. The tabu­lation of taxing agencies excludes these special taxes, although" In someof the eleven states they are major revenue producers.

146. THt BOOK OF THE STATES

unnecessary duplication. In a number of states voucher approval and warrant is­suance have been combined under a single officer, such as this Controller or the Auditor, or an appropriate officer in a department of finance and administra­tion.

In two states during 1958-59 the war­rant issuance function was transferred from the Auditor to the Treasurer. In one of them, Michigan, diis transfer had been considered for several years on the grounds that warrant issuance by a sepa-' rate officer was unnecessary. In the other state, Washington, the agencies equipped with machine installations (or the Cen­tral Budget Agency for those not so equipped) prepare the warrants for the Treasurer.

In order to simplify the accounting sys­tem and allow greater flexibility in the use of financial resources, the numbers of special funds were reduced in Connecti­cut and Minnesota. In Connecticut the number of funds Was reduced from 242 to 94; in Minnesota, besides a reduction in the number of .funds, the number of indi­vidual appropriation accounts was greatly reduced.

Among other developments was a shift of the pre-audit function from an elective State Auditor to 1?he Division of Budget and Comptroller in Missouri and from an elective Auditor and the Director of the Budget in Washington to the various state agencies.

State action on investment of state funds included an important new pro-

.gram in New Mexico, authorized by con­stitutional amendment, It provides for in­vestment of up to one-quarter of the state's permanent fund in select stocks and bonds of private corporations. Deci­sions regarding the s tocks to be purchased are made by a new State Investment Council. New legislation in 'Nevada en­ables the state to receive interest on money deposited in inactive bank ac­counts, and in Minnesota a^series of clear­ance accounts has been established, pro­viding for immediate deposit. of all receipts and subsequent transfer to the

proper funds, thus enabling the.state to increase its earnings on invested treas­urer's cash. V

A number of states established central electronic data processing facilities dur­ing the biennium. An electronic data processing center set up in Pehnsylvania uQ^er the Department of Property and Supplies is now processing ap­proximately a fourth of the state's payroll; plans are under way to trans-ler all other payrolls to the center, and to place in it additional record keep­ing, accounting and related operations. In Oregon the Office of the Secretary of State, which is responsible for several financial functions, including certain au­diting and accounting processes, recently acquired a random access electronic data processing machine, upon which have been placed the central accounting rec­ords of the office. An electronic tabulating center has been initiated to mechanize a major part of accounting for the govern­ment of Puerto Rico. It was anticipated that its entire payroll would be computed and processed through the center by early 1960, and that later it would process in­come and excise tax records, retirement system records, governmental property in­ventories, the demographic register, po­lice statistics, and motor vehicle registra­tion data. An electronic data processing center was authorized for installation in Texas by September, I960—to include central state accounting, state payrolls, revenue receipts, taxpayer accounting and tax auditing records.

For the first time a condjensed annual financial report was issued to the public in Rhode Island. The condensed report, summarizing general fund income and expenditure, includes,-,data for local asr sistance and major constriiction projects, details of state financial assis-tance to cities and towns, expenditures ujider the federal grant programs, and a summary of state debt figures.

(Reference to changes in revenue ad­ministration in several states are included in "Recent Trends in State Taxation,"\ page 201.) .,

Ci)

REGENT DEVELOPMENTS IN STATE PURCHASING ^ • -

BY JOHN R . DYER*

/

APERUSAL of each edition of The Book competitive bid, obtaining reductions up o/ the States for the past decade to 30 per cent from previous rates, while provides strong evidence of continu- reducing the numbers of policies froni

ous advances in state purchasing. The several hundred down to one digit figures, efforts of the state purchasing officials to Consolidated buying according to a receive recognition are recorded, the diffi- predetermined schedule has produced culties in purchasing imposed by global savings through larger quantity discounts, conflicts are recalled and the progress re- through reduction of the number and suiting from the diligence of the members, frequency of requisitions, bids and pur-committees and officers of the National chase orders,.and through the resulting Association of State Purchasing Officials is acknowledged.

STATE ACTIVITIES, PROGRAMS

State purchasing officials are r.esponsi-ble for total annual purchases amounting to more than $1.5 billion—some states purchasing as much as §150 million an­nually in equipment, materials^ supplies and services. Tne recent raising of Alaska and Hawaii to statehood increases the number of states having some variety of central purchasing to forty-seven. Mean­time, legislative enactments in several

reduction in accounting. It has been proven that open-end or term contracts produce savings in obvious ways. Each state purchasing official is strivihg to in­crease the number of commodity classes covered by such contracts. Leaders in this area report term contracts numbering as high as 1,000 currently in effect.

Purchasing trade names or proprietary items, as well as use of restrictive specifi­cations, continually threatens the more desirable competitive aspect of govern­mental procurement. The purchasing of­ficial finds this most troublesome in

states in the last two years have given respect to drug buying. Standardization, greater responsibilities to the procure- use of generic names and formularies ment officials. have saved, oyer a period of a year, more

Central warehousing, inspection and than the annual operating cost of several testing, purchase of bonds, insurance and state purchasing departments. A few state printing commanded particular interest purchasing officials are fortunate enough

to have a registered pharmacist on their staffs. Several others are assisted in pur­chase of drugs by committees of doctors and pharmacists from state health agen-

in the 1959 legislatures in many staties. whereas central warehousing in the past has been confined to office supplies, there now has been significant expansion to in­clude a wider variety of commodities, cies, colleges and institutions. Connecticut's Purchasing Diyision will " Pre-itemized requisitioning,, standardi-

"='=-=-"======== Qgnj3perate a central meat cutting and; zation, lists of acceptable products and refrigerated food warehouse, three re- prequalification. of bidders continue to gional bakeries and three regional ware­houses. A sufetantial number of state pur­chasing departments have established inspection and testing divisions since 1957, while others have expanded existing facilities. Several states have been very successful in the purchase of insurance by

*Mr. Dyer is Purchasing Agent of the State of Maine and was President in 1959 of the National Association of .State Purchasing Officials.

draw the attention of alert purchasers as devices to reduce administrative costs, to insure receipt of satisfactory products and to facilitate treating bidders in a fair and equitable manner. ""

Commodity classification and catalog­ing, despite the tedious job that it is, has aroused the interest of several states. Such a program was pioneered by Virginia through a contract with a nationally

h

147

• ^

148 THE BOOK OF THE STA TES

known systems c6ncern. Another is being developed in Connecticut, for the adop­tion and utilization of the federal supply classification and federal supply catalog in the state's supply operation.

The increasing requirements for and use of statistics in this fast moving, elec­tronic age call for detail far beyond hu­man capacities. To remain abreast of these demands in the purchase of 80 to 100,000 different items, several states have installed systems and equipment to handle commodities purchased repeti­tively. The surface has hardly been scratched in the use of these highly techni­cal processes, and the ultimate usefulness of electronic devices in purchasing is limited only by equipment costs.

The responsibility of distribution of federal surplus commodities is generally not a function of central purchasing. Re­cently, however, the purchasing' depart­ments of several states have been designated as the official agencies to ac­quire, warehouse and distribute property under the federal surplus program. In another state the purchasing department has been relieved of this duty, r

In spite of somewhat.opposhig.develop­ments in certain areas, a review of the various laws under which state purchas­ing agencies operate reveals ihiportant similarities in all of them. It appears that through the years, as state upon state has establish^sd or revised purchasing laws, the best of thelaws of certain stateMiave been selected, passed and are now in ^ e c t in ^thers. Thus the resemblance of laws, cme with another. rM the spring of 1959, the purchasing

officials of Connecticut, Vermont, Michi­gan, Minnesota, North Carolina and Maine had thq privilege of assisting another state in drafting a bill for more centralized purchasing. The bill was not adopted in 1959—but the work of the special committee comprising the purchas­ing officials of the six states mSy result in development of a model purchasing law by the National Association of State Pur­chasing Officials..

Within the past year at least three states have completely reorganized their central purchasing agencies in order to provide more forthright spending of the tax dol­

lar. Since 1957 there has been a steady increase in dollar volume of purchases handled by tlie procurement agency of each state. Likewise the operating budgets are larger; yet operating costs remain at a conservative i/| to 3^ of 1 per cent of the total volume purchased. Savings of 10 to 30 per cent over decentralized pur­chasing continue to be enjoyed.

W O R K OF THE N A T I O N A L ASSOCIATION

The National Association?of State Pur­chasing Officials has pusheia forward in a series of important tasks in 1958-59.

Its Committee on Standardization of Specifications has continued its review of federal specifications. Haying acted upon 2,250 of the 3,087 federal specifications involved by the fall of 1958, die,commit­tee faced the task of completing the suryey of those remaining. Miich credit is due the three committee members,'who have nearly completed the job. The commit­tee is expected to be continued, to con­duct surveys of specifications from other sources.

In mid-1958 state purchasing officials from coast to coast were advised of a'sub-stantial increase in automobile fleet prices by the tbree major manufacturers. Some of the larger states hjid found it profitable

-40 sell one-year-old cars at auction. With the possibility that several thousand used automobiles with loiv mileage might be offered for^ale each year, dealers com­plained that such a procedure would up­set the used-car market. This, coupled with the fact that each manufacturer was seeking to outdo his competitor iri order to make sales to states on bid, led to the fleet price increase. The increase, of from $300 to |500 in the purchase price of each new aiitomobile, had not been calculated in state budgets. Many states were forced to purchase fewer automobiles, delay trading in cars for a year or more, or cease

"to purchase new automobiles. Consequently, a Committee on Auto­

mobile Pricing was appointed by the President of the National Association of State Purchasing Officials in 1958. A sur­vey was made of all states to develop data for presentation to each manufacturer. In April, 1959, this committee met in Detroit with the national fleet managers

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 149

and other top officials of the three largest manufacturers in this field. The new pric­ing policy, however, remains unchanged, and states are making changes in automo­bile pi|^hasing policies to compensate for • tiie increased costs. OAe state previously prohibited by statute from paying in ex­cess of §2,000 for a new automobile, ob­tained legislative approval to pay up to $2,500 per vehicle. Certain other states have been contemplating purchase of the "compact car" or cars of forq^n manu­facture. /*!

As past experience has dof^nstrated, periods of war or national ehiergency have meant difficult problems for state purchasing officials in obtaining critical supplies. States in the past sought assist­ance from the federal government without, success. In February, 1959, the National Association of State Purchasing Officials was represented by its President at a meet; ing Of several groups with representatives of the Office of Civil and Defense Mobili­zation in the nation's capital to clarify state and local governmental requirement problems "during emergencies. NASPO and municipal and county official associa­tions had as their goal that machinery be set up in OCDM to provide a specific placQ for governmental procurement of­ficials to obtain answers on the availabil­ity of critical materials and supplies, and to act a? a claimant office for the emer­gency reeds of their respective jurisdic­tions. The results of. the meeting were good. A central claimant office has now been established in Washington, to which the states and other governmental juris­dictions may take any defense-connected supply problems.

The successful effort of the NASPO . > Committee on Competition in Govern-

raentaL Purchasing in revising a pricing clause of the "federal General Services Administration, used in federal supply, schedule contracts, was a.significant ac­complishment. The Association found that obtaining the lowest prices possible for the states was hampered by this clause. In order to remove many problems of in­terpretation relating to the effect of Gen­eral Services Administration prices on state and local governments, tlje commit­tee met several times witli^pfficials of the

GSA. Early in 1959, after nearly two years' work, the committee's efforts were ac­knowledged by inclusion of the following parenthetical sentence in "Clause 13," the-provision at issue: "(For purposes of de­termining a 'General Price Reduction' under this clause, sales to states and other local political subdivisions by a contrac­tor, or reductions in price schedules of the contracter to such agencies, shall have no application)," '

Thus the Association won a long discus­sion with GSA to free governmental pur­chasing agencies from a provision which had worked to their disadvantage.. Tiie net result is that a tontractor now is free to make sales to states and political sub­divisions at any price, without regard to prices at which the contractor sells to the federal government and without fear of jeopardizing his contract with the federal government.

The Committee' on Competition in Governmental Purchasing is currently making a study of price fixing iii the area of identical bids. .

The Association's ,Price Comparison Committee continues to publish an an­nual reik)rt of prices paid by the. various states foit selected commodities. The re­port is diVributed to the states that con­tribute the requested information taljulated in it. The Association voted in 1958 to classify and conspicuously identify the report as "Confidential—Not To Be Released," which will prevent embarrass­ment by indiscriminate revelation of the data. "

An effort in Congress to obtain passage of a federal fair trade law, and a request made of the United States Department of Agriojjlture by a special group to discon­tinue grading of lamb were vigorously op­posed by the Association. The fair trade legislation is dormant at present, and the Secretary of Agriculture ruled in July, 1959, that the department would con­tinue: the grading of lamb and mutton carcasses. Release of revised'^ASPO meat specifications was delayed pending this lamb and mutton policy determination.

According to a recent survey by the As­sociation, purchase of foreign-made goods, is permitted by law in thirty-four states, with fifteen states prohibiting such pur-

o

isai

/ •

«r

150 V .

THE BOOK OF THE ST A TES

chases. It is believed that this problem will assume a more distinct position in governmental purchasing in the future. Another survey by an Association com­mittee indicates that in-state preference of from 2 to 10 per cent is granted in eight states and that in thirty-three states there is no preference except on tie bids.

The Association's Newsletter has shown steady growth in the last year and is now in healthy condition.

Since 1957, important advances in cen­tralized purchasing have been made. The

work of the various committees of the National Association of State Purchasing Officials has been fruitful. Governmental purchasing has made definite progress in becoming a profession; And the future is full of challenges to render greater service to the puElic in many aspects of state pur--hasing.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Purchasing by the States, The Council of State Governments, 1956.

Purchasing Week, McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., Inc., Albany, N.Y.

/•..

. ,i' * k .

• ' ^

: 2 ' Personnel Systems

DEVP^OPMENTS IN STATE PERSONNEL^ SYSTEMS

BY KEITH OCHELTRF.F?= . • /

STATES continued to make progress in personnel administration in 1958-59. The two-year period, which included

the seventy-fifth anniversary of the civil service system in New York State and New York City, and the fiftieth anniver­sary of the civil service system in New Jersey, saw a growth in the number of states having over-all merit systems, as well as a number of innovations and im­provements in established systems.

NEW SYSTEMS AND EXTENSIONS

A new statewide merit system was es­tablished by the Oklahoma legislature in 1959. The law provided for a Personnel Board of seven members and a Personnel Advisory Council of fifteen.'^The system will absorb already existing agencies, such as the Personnel Board, which has covered only federally-aided programs, and the Salary Administration Board. _ '

New Mexico also established a State Personnel Board, covering all employees except those under the Merit System Council. This board had previously ex­isted by executive order of the Governor; the new legislation gives it formal status. A major provision of the law is a prohibi­tion of wholesale dismissal of employees when an administration (Ranges. The law also provides for qualification of new em­ployees by examination.

A merit system also cameintd existence in Kentucky in 1959 through executive

'*Mr. Ocheltree is Senior Staff Assistant of The Public Personnel Association.

order of the Governor. AH present em­ployees are required to pass qualifying examinations in. order to retain their posts.

The new State of Alaska, meantime, was preparing for a statewide merit sys­tem, A bill introduced in. the first session of the state legislature, which could not be considered for lack of time, was ex­pected to be one of the first considered when the legislature reconvenes in Jan­uary, 1960. Hawaii state employees are al­ready covered by a statewide merit system of some years' standing.

Existing merit systems were also en­larged in coverage. Florida's was ex­tended to cover about 3,000 adtUtional employees, makinga total coverage of ap­proximately 12,000. The abolition of counties in Connecticut and the absorp­tion of county employees into state em­ployment increased the coverage of the. State Personnel Department.

In Washington, Iowa and Nebraska, proposals for statewide merit systems in ;j the 1958 or 1959 legislative sessions failed of passage but may be reintroduced in fu­ture.

JREORGANIZATION AND STUDIES

l^eorganization of the personnel agency was also effected in some-states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and. in the .Virgin Islands. In Wisconsin the ; Bureaii of Personnel became a unit within the OiBfice of Administration, with the aim of providing better coordination to staff.

151

13

/ •<*.>.

152 THE BOOK OF THE STATES ~,

• t

'.{••

activities. In the Virgin Islands final re­sponsibility foF^operation of the personnel program was assigned to the Government Secretary. Although the details of opera­tion are delegated to the Director of Per­sonnel, the change means that the official with final personnel responsibility is now an officer of cabinet rank. ,

In Ohio, following a two-year study, the legislature created a Department of Stat^ Personnel, consisting of a Director and la three-member Personnel Board, of Re­view. The new department will, replace a former two-member bipartisan civil service commission; the commission's former administrative duties are assigned to the Diiector, Functions of the Board of Review are chiefly quasi-judjy:ial.

Several states authorized studies aimed . at improving personnel operations States in which such studies were authorized or. under way included Connecticut, Ohio] and Vermont. A previous study of the Colorado civil service system recom­mended changes which were embodied in a constitutional amendment spbmitted to the voters at the 1958 elections. The amendment was defeated, but the 1959 legislature passed legislation which im­proved the personnel organization within the restrictions imposed by the present

' constitutional provision. The new law provides for a state personnel director, limits the" length of provisionalappoint-ments, establishes a career promotional system, provides for in-service training and grievance procedures, and sets up a general procedure for hearing of discipli­nary charges by the Civil Service Com­mission.

ATTRACTING AND TRAINING EMPLOYEES

While most personnel agencies contin­ued to seek ways of improving ^ei r oper­ating procedures, the chief'emphasis went to the pressing problem of attracting and retaining competent state employees. Although there was an increase in appli-

' cants for government employment, these were mostly in the unskilled and semi­skilled categories. In general, the recession of 1958 brought little relief to govern­ments needing scientific, technical and managerial personnel. Applicants';. for lower-paying jobs increased in number

but were not always of the caliber desired. Most state personnel agencies, accord­ingly, concentrated on obtaining quali­fied employees, developing methods of training for shortage categories, and en­couraging employees to remain in state service by making state employment a'S attractive and satisfying as possible.

In-service training continued to be used extensively, both to combat shortages in many occupational fields and to ihcreas'e efficiency. Maryland established a train­ing division in the office of the Commis­sioner of Personnel. Both Alabama and Oregon continued highly successful work-study programs for engineering students. Pennsylvania established a training pro-grani for bank examiners, in cooperation • with banks throughout the state. Trainees are selected by examination from a^.oiig college giaduates in accounting, comrner-cial law, or business administration. After a brief orientatibn program of the State Banking Department, the trainees gain practical experience in banks throughout the state and are eventually assigned to the department as examiners.

Oregon's Civil Service Commission, in. conjunction with the Uniyersity of Ore­gon, has established a public affairs fel­lowship program. The program provides study and research grants for selected state officials in political science, public administration and other social sciences. Executive development was also empha­sized by Pennsylvania, which offered a ten-week seminar on administration and management for middle management per­sonnel. New Jersey set up an executive management program of four three-hour sessions; it eventually will be extended' to more than 200 state administrators. Con­necticut started an executive develop­ment program by conducting a seminar on the American economy and its rela­tionship to state administration;

Puerto Rico led the field in granting scholarships to government employees for Outside study designed to improve their work performance. The Puerto Rico Of­fice of Personnel "in 1959 offered eighty-seven scholarships for graduate training in twenty-five professional fields, includ­ing ten scholarships in public administra­tion. '

•QX.

t^K

j

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 153

\

Internship training continued to be" widely used as one means of attracting competent young people to state service. In 1959 Connecticut established a govern­mental internship program in coopera­tion with Yale University, Wesleyan Uni-ve'-sity, the University of Connecticut and Trinity College. Pennjylvania's second group of public administration trainees . began six-to-twelve-month internships with the state governmen; in 1958. The first six months of training are devoted to seminars and other formal ^raining tech­niques, followed by assignments to vari­ous state agencies during the second six months. Oregon established summer in­ternships, beginning with students who have finished the sophomore year in col­lege.. Trainees are selected by competitive examination, may return for consecutive summers, and may be appointed to the state service upon graduation without fur^: ther examination. New Mexico also set up a pilot internship program in state gov­ernment. After a week's orientation, in­terns carry a full time work load in vari­ous state agencies. /

EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION

The growing strength of employee or­ganizations in the public service has brought recognition in varying degrees. State employees of Minnesota are how permitted to join labor unions, which previously was denied them. Rhode Island's legislature enacted a measure rec-^ ognizing the right >of state employees to organize but not to strike. The measure also_created a nine-mercber commission to study the possibihty of establishing mediation and arbitration procedures for use in disputes between state employees and their employer. Ah executive order of the Governor of Washington recognized the right of state employees to^jrganize.

RETIREMENT AND COUNSELING

Various changes were made in em­ployee retirement plans to make public employment more attractive. A number of states—including California, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, New York, South. Carolina and Washington—adopted laws providing for supplementing retirement systeiiis with the social security system. A

variable annuity plan was adopted by Wisconsin under which employees can choose to have half their retirement con­tributions invested in real estate, common stocks and other convertible equities in order to relate . retiremer^it allowances more closely to the cost of living. A New York enactment permits persons to ^ake their service credits from one retirement system to another when .transferringv.their employment.

Preretirement counseling continued to receive emphasis as a means of adjusting older employees to retirement. A program established in Minnesota, sponsored jointly by the Civil Service Department and the Governor's Special Assistant on Aging, consisted of a series of seven ses­sions for a selected group of employees between the ages of 60 and 70. Each ses­sion, conducted by an expert in one of the problem areas under study, consisted of a lecture followed by a discussion. Par­ticipant response was enthusiastic, and the program will be repeated periodically for other groups of older employees. :

An innovation is a Minnesota counsel­ing program for employees with a prob­lem of alcohol. The program was planned jointly by the Civil Service Commission and the head of a state.psychiatric hos­pital which specializes in alcoholism, with counseling personnel provided , by the State Department of Welfare.

i INSURANCE

Group insurance plans continued to grow in number. More than 80 per cent of New York's state employees registered in a health insurance program which, went into efJFect in December,;.1957! The plan provides" basic medical-surgical and hospitalization coverage plus major medi­cal insurance. It is administered by a newly-created health insurance unit in the State Civil Service Department, Subse­quent to establishment of the plan for current employees, it was extended to re­tired employees, WHOTC premiums are de­ducted fr^m their pension checks. Retired employees must have had at least five years of state service to be eligible. .

Connieeticut provided for death bene­fits for its employees, to be paid over a

(Continued on page 158)

' ^VX

154 THE BOOK OF THE STATES

STATE PERSONNEL AGENCIES

Coverage, Organization and. Selected Policies*

S'umber of Slate or other employees jurisdiction Coverageia) covered

Alabama. • State Personnel Pepartment General- *' 11,783 Merit System C o u n c i l ; . . . . Local Health ' 500

Alaska ^ Merit System • . . . Grant-in-aid •'': 525

Arizona Merit System Board . . . . . . Grant-in-aid 1,363 Merit System Council . Highway Patrol • 215

Arkansatf F Merit System Counci l . . . . . . Grant-in-aid(Ii) 1,726

California State Personnel Board General 84,339-

Colorado Civil Service Commn General 9,282 Merit System Council. . . . . . Local Welfare 995 Merit System Council, . . . ; . Public Welfare 904

Connect icut State Personnel Dept General . ' 20,283

Delaware >. Merit System Council .- . ; . . Grant-in-aid 497

Florida Merit System; -• Grant-in-aid(h) 12,000-

Georgia Merit System of-Personnel

Administration . . . General' 13,236 Hawaii

Dept. of Civil Service. . . . . General 6,305 -.Idaho

Personnel Council..^ ".• Public.^Assistaiice' 160 . Merit System Counc i l . . . . . . . Grant-in-aid(h) 1,560

Illinois /Civil Service Commn.d) . . . . General .;. 3S;098 (Personnel Dept.(1) State Police^Merit Board... State Police 1,200 Univ. Civil Serv. System... .Non-academic 7(510,

Indiana State Personnel Bureau Grant-in-aid(li) 11,456

Iowa Merit System. C o u n c i l . . . . . Grant-in-aid 1,800

K a n s a s . • Personnel Div.. Dept. of

Administration General '24,000 Kentucky > •

Personnel Council ( o ) . . . . . . * Grant-in-aid,(li) 1,300 Merit System • , • ^ . • V"~'

Advisory Counci l (o) . . . . . Health 1,000 Division of Personnel(o). ' . . General 15,000 Fish & Wildlife Commn Fish '&, W'ildlife 298 Police Personnel B d . . . . . . . State Police 600

Louisiana ',• ' Dept. of Civil Service . V . . . General 32,000

Maine Dept. of Personnel General 7,500

Maryland : ^ . Commnr. of Pe r sonne l . . . . . GeYieral 21,157

Massachusetts Div. of Civil Service General 95.203

Michigan Civil Service Commn.. . . . . ' General . 29,752

Minnesota Dept. of Civil S e r v i c e . . . . . GeneTal liS.Oll

• County Welfare Merit Sys.. Local ; 1,350 Mississippi

Merit System, Empl. • ' -Security Commn . . . . , . ; Empl. Security 477

- Merit System Council Health 810 Merit System Cpuncil(o)... Piiblic Welfare .830 Merit System Council Crippled Chil- . ,

dren's Serv. 28

•Prepared by the Public Personnel Association. Abbreviations: G—Governor, A—Agencies, GA—Governor

and Agency heads, GC—Governor and cabinet, Comp.— compensatory.

(a) The pattern of-personnel agency coverage varies widely from state to state. Where coverage is shown as "General. ' most employees in thestate agendes are covered by the pro­gram. Seldbm, however, is coverage complete. "Grant-in-aid"

Board members A

r .

No.

3 3

3

3 • 3

3

5

3 3 3

3

3

5

3 .

S

•3(k) 3 .

3. •

3 5

• 4 - ,

3

3

5

• 5 ' 3 9

5

5

1

5 '

4

3 3

3 10 3

How appt.

•G(b) G

G

G(f)

G

..G(b)

G A

G(b)-

A, .

GC

G(b)

G(b)

G G

G(b).

G(b) (n)

G

. G(fj

G(b)

G

-A -G

:.G(p) G

G

(a), • G

G(r)

G

G(b) G

G G(s) G(b)

Term (years)

6 4

3

6 (g) !

3.

.10 ',

6 3 3

6

3

4

7

. 5- •.

• 3 '. • 6

6

6 (g)

. 4 .

3 .

• 4 -

4.

3

4 . 4 ,

6

6

5

8

" 6 3

4 . 6 3

Work week . for office workers

, --^ . Days Ilrs.

S : 40 5 . 40

• S : 37>4

5 - 40 5 40

5 40

5 - 4 0

5 3ni 5 40 5 40

5. 3.S .:

S . .37ViJ

5 40

'5 40 .

5 40

5 40 5 40

5 37 j : ^ ' 5 37>^ 5 40

S 37H

5 40

5' 40 ,

S 37>^

5 ^ 37,^ S 37J5 5 43>^ 5 3734

5 40

5 40

5 3SH

5 . 37H

5 40'

5 40 varies

4k

5 40 5 - 4 0 5 40 '

Overtime Pay for office workers

, : A — _ ,

Comp. . Time time Str. " and, . off lime • Iri .

X .. . .

X . . .

. X ... ' . . . (c) . .

X ' . . , . . . ' . •

• • ( c ) .

X - ' . . - • • . • . .•

varies

. (c)

• ( c ) .

, - X - . ; . ; . • . • : • •

X • . ' . . • ; . . ••

X . . . .

X . . . .

X • . . . ' . . X . . . .

• - • • - ^

^ -fiv. . - -X .'. '- ...

0 ( c ) . ••

/ (c) : \

X • . . • . .

(c) • c X . . . . . V

• X .... ' , , . • . . .

( 0 -

(c) ,

• ( c )

. ( c ) ;

(c)

(c)

( c ) - • X . •; . . . , . •. X

\ "

.. •

: <•

, . • ' •

A 40 X .

indicates that the program covers employees engaged in actlvi-""""." ties aided by the grant-in-aid programs administered by the U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. "Local" indicates that the program covers only local government em- . ployees. administering grant-in-aid programs. Other entries indicate-that the program covers the activities designated, ., e.g., state police, public welfare, he.-ilth, employment security, y

(b) With confirmation of legislature.

A DM IMS TRA TI VE ORGANIZA TION 155

< ' Jv ;

STATE PERSONNEL AGENCIES

Coverage, Organization and Selected Policies* r

Orertime pay for labor and trades •

A

Comp. time-off

X

X %

X

V

~~";~.- .

X

X

X

••

X

. .'

••

X

X

•

••

. . X • • •

• • •

> Time Sir. and

time H

(c) • • ' - . . \* ^

• > • •

r > • •

(c)

. .

(c)

Xk varies

- . . • . i

"""""-—.. (c).

(c)

• •

• • .

X X, . ., , . •

.(c)

'.'• . X

. . • .

(c)

• •

. . . •

(c) . . • ' . •

• •

(c) .

(c) 1 ^

_Jc) (c)

(c)

(cj • » ' > * *

. . . .

• . .

.".

Paid vatdr-tion (u-ork-ing days)

r ^

Cumu-After la-1 yr. tire

12 30 12 30 .

t 30 ) 60

I2(i) 30 15 30

12(i) 30

15(1) 30

15 30 15 30 15 30

lS(i) none

varies

12(i) 30 ,

15 30

20 ' 90

12 24 ""-12 24

10 (m) 10(i) 20 10(i) 15

12(i) no lini.

5(1) none

12 18

12 .24

12 24 12 24 >-12 24 12 24

12(i) \ 4 S

12(i) 24

10(i) 30

10(i) 24

13(i) 30

12(i) 24 12 24

24 '75 12 no lim. 14 28

15 30

Sick leave {working

days) t

After 1 yr.

12 12

IS

12 15

12

12

15 IS 15

15 ,

Cumu­la­tive

90 90

60

90 no lim.

15

no litn.

180 60 60

. , , 120

varies

. 12

IS

20

10 12

5 5

12

12

. 30

12

12

12 12

. 12 12

12

12.

30

IS

13

12 12

i2 12 60

IS

no lini"-

90

. no lim.

1S> 18

no lim. no lim. no lim.

no lim.

90

90

60

' 60 60 60 60

no lim.

90 ^

100

no lim.

no lim.

100 • 50

60 -no lim.

none

30

Paid . holi- '= days •

13 13

11(d)

10(d) 11(d)

u) 11(d)

11(d) varies

10 • ——

11

• •

.-, 7

11

11(d)

8 8

11(d) 11 6

11(d)

.'7 •'

6

13

13 13 13 13

'8(d)

9

13

: *"

8(d)

11

u

10 10 10

8

>

.Grout

Hos­pitali­sation

X X

X(e)

X(e) X

X

X(e)

X ""Os

X • —

X

.-.

X

V -

X

X X X '

x' '' . X

v ••"•

X X X X

X ^ )

• X

X '

X(e)

X

, , ••

X X X

X(e)

> insurance A

Medical or

surgical

X X

X(e)

X(e) X

X

X(e) • /

X varies

X

X

X

X

. . . •

, . . :

X -X

X X X

X

X ' •

• •

' X X X X

X

X(e)

X /

X(^)

J i /

X ' • •

X X X '

• . . -

N •

\ Life

X X

. .

X(e) •-. ;

X

X(e)

X

„.X...._^

X(e)

• . .

X(e)

X

X , ,'

: . . . .

X

-r-.

, , . . .

X X

X{e)

X(e)

X

X(e)

. X

X ... • ' '•

• X . . X

X(c)

. ,

. -. Stale or otker . • • jurisdiction

Alabama State Personnel Dept.

. Merit System CouncU Alaska

Merit System ~ Arizona ' Merit System Board

Merit System Council Arlcansas

Merit System Council California

State Personnel Board Colorado

Civil Service Commn. ^ Merit System Council

- - ' M e r i t System Council Connect icut

State Personnel Dept. Delaware

Merit System Council Florida

Merit System Georgia , Merit System of Personnel

Administration Hawaii

Dept. of Civil Service Idaho

Personnel Council Merit System Council

Illinois /Civil Service Commn.(1) (Personnel Dept.(l) State Police Merit Board Univ. Civil Ser\'. System

Indiana State Personnel Bureau

Iowa Merit System Council

Kansas Personnel Div., Dept. of

.Administration Kentucky

Personnel Council (o) Merit System

Advisory Council(o) Division of Personnel (o)

. Fish & Wildlife Commn. Police Personnel Bd.

Louisiana Dept. of Civil Service

Maine Dept. of Personnel

Maryland \ Commnr. of Personnel

Massachusetts Div. of Civil Service

Michigan ^ Civil Service Commn.

Minnesota \ Dept. of Civil Ser\'ice County Welfare Merit Sys.

Mississippi . Merit System, Empl.

Security Commn. Merit System Council Merit System Council(o)..,.

Merit System Council .-

(c) Two or more (>ossible methods reported. , ' , ' (d) Plus election days. — • (e) State pays all or part of premium.

• (f) Appointed from names submitted by covered axencies. • {g) No fixed term. (n) Plus some additional coverage.

. (i) Additional vacation after a specified number of years. , (j) As prescribed by statute or by the Governor. , u

' (Ic) Commissioner of Public Assistanc;^ is ex officio a fourth memberof the Council. ,

(1) Commi^ion is: an appeals and inspection body only. Personnel program is sldmmistered by the Department. of Personnel, an arm of the Executive Branch. -^

(m) Accumulation varies with length of sei^ce. (n)/Trustees of colleges and ,unive{|itiies from among their

own membership. • .

J

\

ivemt

- % •

156 THE BOOK O^ THE STATES

STATE PERSONNEL AGENCIES—Continued

Coverage, Organization and Selected Policies*

Overlime pay for

Number of State or other employees jurisdiction Coverage (.a) covered

Missouri Division of Personnel Grant-in-aid(h) 9.800 Merit System Crippled Chil­

dren's Serv. 40 Montana

Joint Merit System Qrant-in-aid 694 Nebrasica

Merit System'Council Grant-in-aid 1,000 Nevada

Dept. of Personnel General 2,393 New Hampstiire

Dept. of Personnel General 4,975 New Jersey

Civil Service Coriimission.. General 27;300 New Mexico

Merit System Council(o)... Grant-in-aid 975 New York

Dept. of Civil Service General 93,154 North Carolina .

State Personnel Dept General 26,319 Merit System Council Grant-in-aid >> 3,900

North Dalcota « -Merit System Council Grant-in-aid 585

Ohio Civil Service Commission.. General 54,000

Oklahoma , Merit System of Personnel

Administration General 24,000 State Personnel Board ( v ) . . Grant-in-aid 2,371

O r ^ o n Civil Service Commn General ' * 17.141 Merit System C o u n c i l . . . . . Local

Pennsylvania Civil Service Commn Grant-in-aid(h) 23,400

Rhode Island ^ Div. of Personnel .\dnHn.{o) General "^ 7,750

South Carolina Merit System Council Employment Sec. 606 Merit System Council(o)... Public Welfare "600 Merit System Council Health

South Dakota Merit System Council Grant-in-aid(h) 500 Civil Service Commn State Police 74

Tennes see . Division of Personnel Grant-in-aid(h) 3,742

Texas Merit System Council : Grant-in-aid(h) . 5,171

Utah Joint Merit System Council Grant-in-aid(h) 1,314

Vermont Personnel Board General 3,206

J ^ ^ i r a l n i a • ^ ^ State Div. of Personnel . . . . General 25,794

Merit System C o u n c i l . . . . . Grant-in-aid 2,936 Washington ' \

State Personnel Board . Grant-in-aM(h) 8,867 West Virginia \ J ^

Merit System Council(o)... Grant-in-aid(h) 1,600 Wisconsin '

Bureau of Personnel General • .• 17,128 Wyomiqg .

Personnel Commission General 3,000 Joint Merit System. , Grant-in-aid' . .335

G u a m Dept. of Labor & Pers General - 3,494

Puerto Rico Office of Personnel General • 34,050

Virgin Islands Div. of Personnel General ,1,800

(o) Data 8ho%vn current as of August, 1957. (p) From list of eliftiblcs submitted by wildlife districts. (q) Governor appoints three members for four years ^ c h .

employees elect one member for two years; these four members choose a fifth member.

(r) With confirmation of (Governor's Council. (s) Nominations made by State Medical and Dental Associa­

tions.

No.

3

3

3

3

5

3

5

3

3

5 5

S

3

7 3

3

3

3

3 7

3 5

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

5

3 3

3

3

3

Wofk-mtek Board members for office

* •—1-~^ workers How Term . *- , appi. (years) Days Mrs.

G(b)

(t)

G

GA

G

GC •

G ( b ) -

A

G(b)

G G ~

G(f)

G

G G

G

G(b)

G(b)

A . (w)

G G

G

A

G(b)

G(b)

none • A

G

G(b)

G

(X) G(b)

G(b)

G(b)

G(b)

6

. 3

6

3

4

3

3

6

varies 6

5

••

7 3

3

6

2

s. 4

3 5

6

. (B)

6

6

6

6

3

i 3

^ 4

2

5 40

5 40

5 40

5 . 40

5 40

S 37>^

- 5 - 35'

5 40

5 3 7 H

5 40 5 40

5 40

5 40

5 40 5 40

5 40

5 37>.^

5 35

5 40 39

5H 44 Syi 44

5 38Ji

5 40

5 40 .

S 37M

5 40 5 4 0 ^

5 40

5 40

5 40

5 37>4 5 , 3 7 H

5 40 .

5 3 7 «

5 40

office workers A

Com p. time off

.X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

-

•

••

X

X

X

X

. .

X

X

X

X

Time Str. and time a

(e)

. .

(c)

. .

(c)

. .

. .

: : : :

(c)

(c)

(c)

. . .

(c)-

.(c)

X X

. .

. .

• • . • •

(c)

(c)

( c ) ••

:•. - x "

. .

. .

. . • •

(c)

. .

(c) .

(t) Appointed by Board of Curators. Slate University. (u) Available through employees' association. (v) At the rate of time-and-one-half. • (w) Elected by General Assembly.

• (x) Consists of Governor, Assistant Budget Officer, and Personnel Director.

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION

STATE PERSONNEL AGJ^NCIES—Continued

Coverage, Organization and. Selected Policies*

Overtime pay for labor and trades

Com p. time off

- •

X

••

X

• . .

, ,

X . •• ,

X

^'

X

. , • *

» .

• ;

••

X

X

X

t 1

Time Sir. arid time J4

• • • • •

. .

. . .

(c*)

X

(c) .

X

. . . . • •

(c)

(0

1 •(c)

• •

(c)

• . . . .

• >!.

* >

• • •

X . . .

• •

• ( c )

(c)

(c) ' -.(c)

X

. . .

• •

• . .

• . .

(c)

• • .

(c)

Paid vaca- . tion (work' ing days)

Cumu-Afler lyr.

IS.

15

15

10

15(i)

15

12(i)

IS

14(i)

15 15

\ 12(i)

10(i)

15 15

10 . . - . . -

15

""13(1)

15(i) 18

15(i) 14

12

10

12(1)

12(i)

12(iO 12(i)

12(i).

15

10(i)

12 12

. 15

30

26

la-live

30

30

30

none;

30

30

24

30

3 0 , , ^

30 30

30

none

15 15

, 2S--.-" f

15

26

(m) 26

30 none

24

20

30

25

24 , 24

25

30

none

20 20

60

60

60

Sick leave iiinrking

days)

Cumu-After la-1 yr. tire

IS 75

IS 45

12 .• 60

"12 60

IS 90

15 90

15 no lirn.

12 60

13 150 .

10 no lim. 12 no lim.

12 120

15 9& "

^15 . 45 M5 ) 45

-•12(i) 120

IS 15

18 90

IS 90 15 26

14 28 15 none

12 120

18 36

12 30

12 no lim.

11 1 12 60

18 60

12 60 .,

12 ,60 12 60

15 60

18 90

IS 90

Paid holi­days

U

4

10(d)

6

8

10(d)

11(d)

10

10(d)

9 8

11(d)

10

8(d) 8 .

9

12(d)

11(d)

12(d) 11(d)

9(d) 10

.. 14(d)

11

• • 1 - ; • 12

10(d) 10(d)

10(d)

10(d)

7}4

9(d) . 10(d)

9('d)

19

18

? Group insurance *

Hos- 'Afedical pitali- i or zation '•'Surgical . .

1 • • • '

X X

X

. .

X X

X . X

X X

. X X

X(e) ' X(e)

•X(e) X(e)

X X X

X X

X X

- X X X ^ X

X ; ^ x

X X

X X

X X X X

X(e) X(e)

X X

X(e) X(e)

X(e) X(e)

X X

X

• '

X X .

X X

. .

X(e)

. .

. -^^^^

Life . .

»

. . .

••

X •

X

X(e)

X(u)

X X

X X

' ••

X(e)

X

X X

X(e)

X

X(e)

X(e)

, ,

X ,

X

• , ' ,

••

••

X(e)

stale or other jurisdiction

^Missouri Division of- Personnel

Merit System Montana

Joint Merit System Nebraska

. Merit System Council Nevada

Depti of Personnel New Hampshire

Dept. of Personnel New Jersey

Civil Service Commn. r New Mexico

Merit System Council(o) New York

Dept. of Civil Service North Carolina

State Personnel Dept. Merit System Council ' .

North Dakota Merit System Council

Ohio Civil Service Commn.

Oklahoma Merit System of

Personnel -Adminf^tration State Personnel Boai'd(v)

Oregon Civil Service Commn.-Merit System Council

Pennsylvania • Civil Service Commn.

Rhode Is land Div. of Personnel Admin.(o)

South Carolina Merit System Council Merit System Council(o) Merit System Council

South Dakota "Merit System Council . Civil Service Commn.

Tennessee Division of. Personnel

T e x a s . Merit System Council

Utah J^int Merit Sys. Council

Vermont Personnel Board .

Virginia • State Div. of Personnel

Merit System Council Washington

State Personnel Board West Virginia

Merit System Council(o).. Wisconsin --

Bureau of Personnel Wyoming

Personnel Commission ' Joint Merit System

G u a m Dept. of Labor 4 Pers.

Puerto Rico Office of Personnel

Virgin Islands Div. of Personnel

r

' • \

158 THE BOOK OF THE STATES

r

V

period of five years. Payments are $4,000 to a spouse or parent, or $7,500 to a spouse if there are surviving dependent children, plus |20 per month for each de-pendento-child up to the age of 18. Also authorized was payment to the estate of a deceased employee for time off due the employee and for accumulated vacation allbwances. The state authorized payment of a*ll medical and hospital expenses for. law enforcement personnel injured while

""on diity, plus full salary benefits for 260 weeks if total incapacity results, and one-half salary thereafter for the period of disability.

Wisconsin awarded a contract for $85 milliori in group life insurance. The plan is joint-contributory, the state and the

employees contributing to the cost of the premiums.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Public Personnel Administration (4th Edition). O. GLENN STAHL, Harper & Bros. New Yorji. 1956.

Public Personnel Administration. FELIX A. .NiCRO. Henry Holt arid Co. New York. 1959.

Personnel Research Frontiers. CJECIL GOODE. The Public Personnel Association. 1313 East 60th Street, Chiciago 37, Illinois.

Elements of Position Classification in Local Government; How to Prepare a Sound Pay Plan; Public Relations for Government Emfjloyees; Re-ducirtg Sick Leave Abuse; Employee Evaluation; Effective Procedures for Handling Employee Grievances; Regulating Political Activities of Pub­lic Employees; Manpower for Government—A • Decade's Forecast; The Public Personnel Review (a quarterly journal). The^' Public Personnel As­sociation. 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago 37, IIH-nois. . ^ „ .'

J I

STATE EMPLO^ENT IN 1958*

STATE GOVERNMENT payrolls amountgd gctlier as die next ranking functions in

to |465 million per month in Octo- terms of state employment, and together ber, 1958. This compares with $388 they account for another one-third of the

million six months earlier and with $185 total. Next, as employing functions, come million in October, 1948. natural resources activities, general con-

During 1958, state employment trol, administradon of employment se-reached a new high, exceeding 1.4 mil- curity, correction, and public welfare, lion. A functional distribution of the em-

As indicated in Table 1, state employ- ployment and payrolls of individual state ment rose rapidly after World War 11 and governments appears in Tables 5 and 6. then more gradually; state payroll ex- Some of the interstate differences evident penditure has climbed at an even more' there result from differing degrees of dele-rapid rate during recent years, gation of responsibility to local govern-

Figures on average monthly earnings of ments for particular functions, full-time public employees, available since 1951, help to explain this deyelop-ment.

Average earnings of all full-time state government employees rose from $253 per month in the year 1951 to $355 per month public payrolls—federal, state and local

T H E STATES' SHARE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT V '

State governments accounted for almost 18 per cent of the 8,297,000 persons on

in October, 1958. The states have about 60 per cent as many employees as the fed­eral government and about one-third as many as all local governments com­bined. Of total public payrolls, amount­ing to $2,977,000 ^for die month of October, 1958, the states accounted for 16 per cent.

The states' share of public employment differs widely as among various govern-niental functions. National defense and

in 1958. The average for state school em ployees, mainly employees 'of higher edu cational institutions, rose from $284^ in 1951 to $416 in 1958.

Of the total number of persons on state government payrolls in October, 1958, 1,263,000 were employed on a full-time basis and 206,000 were part-time em­ployees. '

FuNcrriowAL DISTRIBUTION OF

STATE PAYROLLS . ^Q postal service are federal functions, ' More state personnel and payrolls are 4r\voiving about one-fift^ of all public required for education than for any other employment at that level. At the other ex-iPunction. As indicated in Table 2, the treme, local schools, police and fire prp-467,000 state educational employees in- -tectj on, and local recreation and puolic elude 3^2,000 working for institutions of utility services primarily involve local goy-higlreReducation, 61,000 dirdlqtly engaged ernment personnel. The states accou-nt, wit^'Ipblic elementary and secondary however, for most employment of public school^ and 25,000 others—mainly em- institutions of higher education and for a ployees of cefntral state educational agen- sizable fraction of all governmental em-cies and\9flficesi Altogether, this function ployees engaged in highway, public wel-involves about three-tenths of all person- fare, health and hospital, and natural re-nel and payrolls of state governments. \ sources activities. These facts are reflecled"

Hospitals and highways"^are close to- in Table 2/relating to employment and _ payrolls of state and local governments,

*Adapted from U. S. Bureau of the Census, >^^^ ^^ ^^e folloWi.ng summary distri-State Distribution of Public Employment in 195S. "^^tion of civilian public personnel of

• 1 5 9 •. ^ " > . . • ' •-'

•-V

^

160 THE BOOK OF THE STATES all governmental levels as of October, 1958:

Function

Total National defense. •. . Postal s e r v i c e ; . . . . . Education Highways Health and hospitals Police protection. . . Natural resources... General con t ro l . . . . All other

jVumbtr nj employees {in thousands)

Differences among states in the pattern for assignment of functional responsibili­ties as between the state and local govern­ments also result in considerable geo­graphic variation in the fraction of all state and local employment accounted for byhthe state governments.

-L Nationally, local gbvernment person-^^^_^ nel outnumbers the personnel of the

states by a ratio of three to one, and in some areas the ratio is over four to one. In, North Carolina and Delaware, however, persons on state payrolls outnumber local employees—mainly reflecting direct state payment of local school staffs—and em­ployees of soirie other state governments

. also comprise a considerably larger-than-average fraction of the state-local total.

AVERAGE MONTHLY EARNINGS

Average monthly earnings of full-time state and,local government employees in October, 1958, amounted to §365. This compares with $264 in October, 1951.

Tnere is considerable range in average earnings of fiill-time state and local em­

ployees among various states. As indi­cated.irf Table 4, such average earnings in October, 1958, ranged^from |400 or more per month in eight states down to less than $275 per month in four states.

EMPLOYMENT BY INDIVIDUAL STATES

Almost half of all payrolls and em­ployees of forty-eight state governments are accounted for by eight states. These, in descending order of number of em­ployees, are New York, California, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois and Texas. ;

The relatively high yolume of state em-, ployment in North Carolina reflects state\ operation of local public schools therie, in' lieu of local operation, as is commonly the case elsewhere.

As this example suggests, care must be exercised in comparing,employment and payroll data for individual state govern­ments, which differ considerably in the scope and intensity of functions they per­form. These differences arise from eco­nomic, geographic and traditional factors that influence the total scale of public services and the?" allochtion of responsi­bility as between the spates and their re­spective local governments, particularly^ in such fields as schooli„hign^yays, pub­lic welfare, and health and hospitals.

It will be noted from the summary state-by-state figures in Table 3 that ai relatively high level of state government, employment often is asso^ciated with a relatively low level of employment by local governments. The Bureau of the Census report. State Distribution of Pub­lic Employment in 1958, provides addi­tional data in this regard by showing em­ployment and payrolls for both state and local governments, by state-area, in terms of various functions.

^ •

^

MK

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZA TION 161

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF STATE EMPLOYMENT: OCTOBER, 1946-i;958

Ytar •

Oct. 1958 . . . Apr. 1957 October:

1956 • 19.55

1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 1049 1948

• 1947 1 9 4 6 . . .

Number of emploi

Total

All

1,469 ' 1,358

1,322 1,250 1,198 1,129 1,103 t,.070 11,057 1,037

963 909 804

School

467 433

407 384 359 341

^316 312 306 286 271 233

Non-school

1,002 925

915 866 839 788

' 768 754 745 731 677 638 572

lees (in thousands', • •

Full-time equivalent

All

1,312 1,206

1,183 1,129 1,071 1,011

999 973

NA NA NA NA

- NA

School

337 310

302 292

. 269 256 • 2.54 240 NA • NA NA NA NA

Non~ ,school

975 896

886 837 802

ns 745

. 733 • NA

NA­NA.. NA­NA

Monthly payrolls (in millions of dollars)

All

$465.3 388.4

38 J .6 340.4 314.6. 291.8 270.8 •245.8 218.4 209.8 184.9 160.8 128.0

School

$140.3 111.1

108.2 97.5 87.3

. 81.8 75.*, 68.1 61.0

.58.5 50.9 44.8 34.6

Non-school

$325.0 277.2

273.4 242:9. 227.3 210.0 195.3 177.7 157.4 151.3 134.0 110.0 93.5

Ave ear till

All .

$355 320

321 302 294 289 271 253

• NA -N.\ NA NA NA

rage monthly nings of full- . le employees

School {

S416 355

358 334 . 325 320 298 284 NA NA NA­NA NA'

Non-schbol

$333 309

309 290 283 278 262 242 NAi NA NA • N A • NA

'NA" Indicates data not available.

\ • • \

• . ^ TABLE 2

EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS OF. STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BY FUNCTION, OCTOBER, 1958

T Function

\ .

'>-^

All functions. Education

Public schools Instructional personnel ; Other.... . . . ^

State institutions of higher edu­cation ;

Other , . Functions other than education..

Highways , Public welfare. Hospitals; H e a l t h . . . . : S a n i t a t i o n . . . . . . . . . .-Police protection Local fire prtoect ion. , . . . ; Natural r e s o u r c e s . . . . . . . . . . . . Water supply.

. Other local utilities. General control,.; All other.

All employees [full-time and Part-time) {in thousands)

Total

5.892 2.589 2,177 1,495 682

382 30

3,303 525 115 549 79 130 316 207 131 103 133 473 541

\S<o late gpvern-

. ihents

I .'469 '467

61 41 20

382 25

1,001 236 45

280 25

~ • 30 • -102

83 200

Local govern­ments

4.423 2,122 2,116 1,454-

662

6 2,301

289 70

270 53

130 285 207

29 103 133 390 341

T

Monthly payroll (in millions of dollars)

Total

SI,885.8 905.7 782.3

^ 635.0 147.3

112:9 10.5

980.1 161.0

' 34.5 142.2 25.3 40.9

III.O 56.9 40.1 32.6

' 57.0 113.6 165.0

State goverit-meitts

$465.3 140.3

18.8 16.4 2.S

112.9 . 8.5 325.0

79.6 14.2 77.1

9.1 •

11.7 • -

32.7

31.7 68.9

Local •govern­

ments '

Sl.420.5 ' 765.3

763.4 618.6 144.8

1.9 655.2

81.4 20.4 65.0 16.2 40.9 99.3 56.9

7.5 32.6 57.0 81.9 96.1

Average monthly

earnings TO/ full-time employees

<i^

S365 399 395 447 263

436 362 338 327 314 265 356 327 387 412 346 343 435 353 347

''"indicates riot applicable.

«

.t'.

162

!

THE BOOK OF THE STATES " - ' ' • ' • • • , • • • • • - • . ' .

_. . ._ TABLE 3 .

NUMBER OF STATE. AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: 1

(

state or other jurisdiction

United States total

Cal i fornia . . . . . ' . .

C k i n n e c t l c i i t . . . . . : .

Florida

Illlnola

Indiana.". Iowa.

Kentucky. . . . . . *

Maine .":...•

Massachusetts

Michigan '. ' Minnesota

Missouri

Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire

New Jersey

New York. North Carolina

North Dakota

Oklahoma •.....! Oregon

Rhode I s l a n d . . . . . . . : South Carolina South Dakota

Tennessee

) Utah ; : Vermont .

V i r g i n i a . . . . . • Washington

West Virginia Wisconsin .'.. j Wyoming •......*".

OCTOBER, 1958

Number of employees

State

Total

1.468.793 24.905 11.041 16.228

114.675

18.411 24.936

7.734,

36.051 25.332 8,280

60.801

38.002 25.867 23.460 22.860.

40,517 11.198 24.438 39.498

64.794 32,207 17,912 30.446

9.478 15,317-3,201 8.058

32.597 11-.264.

117.474 92.514

6.866 57,883 27,985 22,909

80,790 8,454

20,122 7,895

24,402 . 66,325

11,093 6.067

38,153 29,944 18.706 27.154

4,549

Full-time equivalent

1.311.616 22.091 9,284

14,005 110,696

15,104 22.660

7.132

33.902 23.968 6.720

52,040

31.660 22.475 19,288 20,202

36.123 10.294 22,602 38.491

56,256 27.442 15,254 26,023

7,583 12,867 2,815 6,145

30,249 9,202

. 115,428 84,090

5,740 • 51,695

21,070 19.096

76.385 7,828

18,378 6.346

22.008 56.712 3.304 5 J 85

34,769 24,510 16.523 21.115

3,861

Local

Total

4,422,991 71,212 30,486 38,144

437,628

48,074 51,903

6/140 24,162

115,867 90,699 18,554

.241,607

109,123 75,643 74,096 56,692

74,857 24,745 65,607

138,728

220,79i 102.022 55.931 93.039

18.264 43.981

8.265 15,231

149.596 20,405

515,165 , 32,588

23,977 250,446

56,183 48,060

223.881 16.748 49.113' 2.^.734\

82.425 228.595

22.803 9.956

76.353 80.700 36.004

113,401 11.367

Full-time equivalent

3.858.942 65.686 27.902 32,499

. 401,810

41,257 46,016 5.544

22,956

107,850 83,578 15,116

213,343

93.671 60.792 56.199 51.070

69,291 16,789 59,743

122,815

184,272 76.538 43.254 81.965

15.825 35.793

7.332 . 10.578

132.121 18.166

" 472.960 28,525

14,688 203,030 50,295 41.113

192,823 14,929 421757 16,121

76,068 210,339

\ 19,036 \ 6.742'

69,637 70,226 32,923 87,274

9,685

Number {full-time eq\ Per 10,000 popuh

State and • . local

298.4 273.4 326.2 263.3 357.5

329.4 • 296.5

279.2 278.3 •

319.1 281.7 329.8 268.4

273.6 295.1 356.7 231.4

339.0 284.5 278.6 331.8

305.8 308.1 267.6 252.8

340.2 334.0 380.0 28^.4

282.4 325.0 362.6 247.6

314.3 272.6 ' 312.3 339.6

242.5, ' . .260.1

254.3 321.4

282.7 284.8

J 16.1 320.6 .

265.3. 342.1 251.1 275.2 423.3

Stale

75.7 - 68.8

81.4 79.3 77.2

88.3 97.8

157.1

76.3-62:8

• 101.5 52.6 •

69.1 79.6 91.2 65.6

116.2 108.1

• 76.5 79.2

71.5 81.3 69.8 60.0

110.2 88.3

105.4 IPS.2

52.6 109.3 71.1

184.9

88.3 „55.3 •^92.2 107.7

68.8 89.5 76.4 90.8

63.4 60.5 96.0

139.4

88.4 88.5 83.9 53.6

120.7

iivalent) ition

Local •

222.7. 204.6 244.8 184.0 280.3

241.1 198.7 122.1 278.3

242.8 ' 218.9 228.3 215.7

204.5 215.4 265.6 165.8

222.8 . 176.4

202.1 252.6

234.3 226.8 197.9 -191.9

230.0 245.7 274.6 181.1

229.8 215.7 291.4

62.7

226.0 217.3 220.1 231.9

173.7 170.6 177.9 230.6

219.3 224.3 220.1 181.2

177.0 253.6 167.2 221.6 .302.7

\

•^

ADMINISTRA TIVE ORGANIZA TION 163

TABLE 4

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PAYROLLS AND AVERAGE EARNINGS 'OF FULL-TIME STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES, BY STATES: OCTOBER, 1958 \ , - \ —

Slate or other jurisdiction

United States total . .*. . . .

Arkansas California

Delaware Dlst* of'CoIumbla

Flqrida

Idaho T-. I l l inois . .

Kentucky

Nfaryland.

Nevada. , J New Hampshire

New Mexico New York. North Carolina

NorttL D a k o t a . .

Rhode Island. .<..

Texas . Utah , .

Vlrftlnla.. Washington. West Virftlnla

Amount of October payroll (thousands of dollars)

Total

$1,885,813.8

23,733.6 15,382.6 12.07,*.6

• 233,638.1

19,973.3 28,253.6

4.641.9 10,534.6

46,278.9 27.512.3 6,90hS

109,282.1

44.«26.9 27,452.4

• 23,408.6 . 20,949.8

32,570.2 7,918.0

31,244.7 S7.86<>.7

. • • • • • • ^ •

101,465.0 39,580.8 14,432.2 34,854.6

8,276.4 14,542.5

, 3,959.3 5,473.3

66,055.4 9,575.2

237,676.0 35,414.5

6,845.8 93.541.6 21.925.6

. 22,693.6

V 95,709;4 7,608.7

6,850.9

27,370.2 85.423.2

9,402.0 - 3,713.0

32,549.7 37.906.4 15.493.3 42,573.6 . 4,475.3

Slate govern­ment

$465,304.8

6,333.8 .3,592.4 3.865.1

51,912.3

; 5,711.3 8,412.1 2,433.4

-» 10,560.3 6.911.8

• 2,296.2 20.430.3

10.372.3 7.355.8 6,267.2

. 6,535.8

10,703.7 3,1.18.1 7,750.7

13,353.6

24,723.1 10,541.2 4,078.2 8,037.9

2,888.8 3,756.9 1,211.0 2,130.1-

10,957.3 • 3,097.1 42,496.3 28,139.5.

2.027.2 18,188:6 6,388.5 7,437.9

24,801.7 2,367.2 5,025.2 2,160.8

5,993.2 18,514.9 3,230.8 1,701.3

10,829.6 " 10,283.5 .

5,085.2 9,836.3 1,439.3

Local govern­ments

$1,420,509.0

17.399.8 11.790.2 8,208.5

181,725.8

14,262.0 19,841.5 ^2,208.5 TO,534.6

35.718.6 20,600.5 4,605.3

88,851.8

34,454.6 20.096.6 17,141.4 14,414.0

21,866.5 4,779.9

23,494.0 44,516.1

76.741.9 29.039.6 10.354.0 26.816.7

5,387.6 - 10,785.6

2,748.3 3,343.2

55,098.1 6,478.1

195,179.7 7,275.0

4,818.6 75,353.0 15,537.1 •15,255.7

70,907.7 . 5,-241.S

- 10,954.7 4,690.1

21.377.0 C6.908.3 6,171.2 2.011.7

21,720.1 27,622.9 10,408.1 32,737.3

, 3,036.0

Per cent of October Payroll.

Stale govern-'inent

24.7

*26.7 23.4 32.0 22.2

28.6 29.8 52.4

22.8 25.1 33.3 18.7

23.1 26.8 26.8 31.2

32.9 39.6 24.8

-23.1

24.4 26.6 28.3 23.1

34.9 25.8 30.6 38.9.

16;6 32.3 17.9 79.5

29.6 . 19.4

29.1. 32.8

25.9 31.1 31.4 31.5

21.9 21.7 34.4 45.'8

33.3 27.1 32.8 23.1 32.2

Local, govern­ments

75.3

73.3 76.6 68.0 •^ .8

71.4 70.2

" 47.6 100.0

77.2 74.9 66.7 81.3TS

76.9 '• 73.2 i 73.2 68.8

67.1 60.4 75.2 76.9

75.6 73.4 71.7 76.9

65.1 74.2 69.4 61.1

83.4 67.7 82.1 20.5

70.4 80.6 70.9 67.2

74.1-63.9 68.6 68.5

•'78.1 78.3 65.6 54.2

66.7 72.9 67.2

Average earnings of full-time state and local government employees

All

$365

270 414 260 456

354 411 366 459

326 256 316 412

358 330 310 294

309 292 379 359

422 381 247 323

354 299 390 327

407 ' 350 404 314

335 367 307 377

356 334 261 305

279 320 344 31.1

312 400

76.9 393 67.8 1 ''lO

School

$399

293 463 279 490

375 478 428 545

375 268 341 434

432 , 3 6 4

337 304

358 304 429 399

454 423 262 357

394 308 417 352

486 397 490 346

366 390 351 401

396 403 273 322

300 353 374 327

331 421 357 408 348

Non-school

§338

249 359 240 430

.334 364 310 427

292 245 296 395

291 291 282 283

269 283 341 341 •

396 341 231 296

317 292 374 311

348 299 366 280

300 347 262 356

324 294 249 284

262 286 311 293

294 383 260 380-

'314

'VJ

&

164 THE BOOK OF THE STATES

TABLE 5

STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT), BY FUNCTION, BY STATE: OCTOBER, 1958

•\ • • •

Education • A

State /

State

All,, func­tions

institu­tions, of

• higher education Other

High­ways

Pub­lic

wel­fare

Hospi­tals Health

Po­lice . pro ' lec­tion

Natural re-

Em ploy-ment

securi­ty ad-minis-trd-

sources tion(a) All

other

T o t a l . . 1,311,616 259,187 78.066 233,529 43,637 276,733 24,608 30,382 92,523 56,364 216.587(a)

Alabama 22,091 5.227 Arizona. ..: 9,284 2.841 A r k a n s a s C b ) . . . . 14.005 2.746 C ^ U f o m i a . . . . . . 110.696 31,179-.

Colorado . / 15,104 4,254 Connect icut 22.660 2.418 Delaware 7.132 1.199 Florida . ; . . . 33,902 7.254

Georg ia 23.968 4.698 Idaho . 6,720 1.318 Il l inois 52.040 ,10, 105 I n d i a n a . . 31,660 9.322

Iowa 22,475 7,178 Kansas 19.288 5.250 K e n t u c k y . . . . . . 20.202 2.898 Louisiana 36,123. 6.525

Maine . . : 10,294 1,131 Maryland 22,602 -4,573 Massachusetts . . 38,491 2,133 M i c h i g a n . . . . . . . 56,256 22,185

Minnesota 27.442 7.585 M i s s i s s i p p i . . . . . 15.254 3.814 Missouri ^26.023 ' 4.090 Montana • 7.583 1.775

609 215 198

2,281 •

1,102 1,188(c) 1.739 1.000

4,001 2,276 3,148

14,005

1.851 4,317 1,279 5,700

960 .345 701

1,339

.208 . 931

420 1,400

3.190 818

3.119 18,021

3,484 6,794 1,107 5,302

305 132 306

1.734

162 '608 165

2,220

1.157 370 553 344

537 312 555

1.114

682 249 274-630

461 186 408 129

5 . 6 7 < ^ 199 93 ^ - 1 7 7 1.693

6,760-4,983

3.385 3.906 6.905 6.660

2.940 3.605 5.222 4.266

4.993 2.814 5.564 1.812

2.885 531

1.380 401 683

2.180

4.369 524

12.763 8.082

635 260

1.009 482

699 220 368

3,151

349 653 223 800

637 214

1,614 981

2,930 725

1.512 8.888

1.055 597 320

4.621

2.874 1.036 2,949 1,746

805 495 551.

5.735'

529 1,110

127 1.350

3,950 4,719 2.796 9.498

380 1.200 90 6.579

1.233 14,032 1.905o>l 2.480

520 899

1.897 340

6,170 2,947 5.112

904

227 240 449

1,130

214 761 990 738

336 546 306

96

608 1.83.3 239 1.106 693 1.896 596, 3,321

287 1,061 654 / '977 637 1,012

1,418 3il42

429 2,690 392 1,930 788 2,525 160 n624

534 . 449

789 682

330 1,135 2,252 2,723

880 482

1,064 249

Nebraska 12.867 3.402 " 283 2,188 ^159 3.67.7 120- 203 980^ 265 Nevada 2.815 437 44 1.010* 105 It. 87 54 203 175 New Hampshire 6,145 1.005. 156 1.330 208 1.335 126 108 618 227 New J e r s e y . . . . . 30,249 3.512 681 4.874 830 7.894 582 1,256 1.399 2.575

New M e x i c o . . . . 9.202 2.426 221 2.117- 631 . 877 2^48 177 708 273 New York 115.428 6.771 1.915 16.620 2 .396.42.264 1.510 1.633 5.681 7.344 North Carolina. 84,090 6.950 52.116 8.843 300 5,946 394 740 2.794 1.009 North Dakota.: . 5.740 1.529 103 1.320 , 99 877 116 72 506 176

Ohio 51,695 10,737 551 9.368 1.648 12.566 445 1.190 2.232 2.909 Oklahoma 21.070 6.259 270 .3.289 1.400 4.479 259 498 J , 851 656 Oregon.".. 19.056 4.153 253 3..308 856 2,797 196 489 1,625 620 Pennsy lvania . . . 76.385 6.694 788 17.003 3.862 19.310 1.374 2,160 3,762 5.168

Rhode l8land(d) 7.828 943 173 940 681 1.875 264 192 425 532 South Carolina. 18,378 3.714 426 4.939 .661 2.990 671 427 2.307 540 S o u t h Dakota(e) 6.346 1.773 130 • 1.432 258 931 103 144 556 ISO T e n n e s s e e . . . . . . - 22.008 5.204 555 . 5.346 1.254 2.582. 919 654 2.204 817

Texas 56.712 14.820 979 15.450 2.107 10.722 877 710 2.828 2.430 U t a h 8..304 2.662 194 1.468 307 696 214 258 771 343 Vermont 5.185 1.120 . 1 8 5 1.206 140 544 168 221 418 166 Virftinia(0. ' 34.769 6.116 .677 11.141. 193 7.201 1,035 835 2,440 541

Washinftton.*.. . 24,510 6.455 4 0 8 . 3,904 1,715 3,335 241 734 2;416 977 West Virginia.. . 16.523 2.917 345 5,850 681 4,994 274 343 1,175 550 Wisconsin 21,115 7,153 252 1.623 953 3.333 26.3 411 2.223 • 813 Wyoming 3.861 737 . 6 3 1.196 189. 404 71 63 631 131

(a) Including general control, correction, and atate liquor tent actual full-time employees, atorea, as well as miscellaneous. » - (d) Data are for April, 1957.

(b) Nonschool data are for June, 1958. fe) Nonschool data are for September, 1958. (c) Full-time equivalent was not computed as total payroll (0 Nonschool data are for July, 19S8.

(full-time and part-time) was not available; these figures repre- . .• .

3.365 1.217 1.356

24.363^

2.110 4.044

553 4.255

718 3.002 316- 812

2.593 10.809 1.079 4.110

2.843 2.666 2.538

.4.417

2.069 . 3,979

10.706 6.769

3.378 1.244 4,269 1,094

1.590 556

1.032 . 6.646

1.524 29.294 4.998 •

942

4 ^ 10.049 2.109 4.799 ^

16.264 •*•

1.798 1.703

869 . 2,473

5.789 1.391 1.017 4.590

4.325 2.394 4.091 376

A'

/ - .C'-.-

ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION

' T A B L E 6 •

STATE GOVERNMENT PAYROLLS, BY FUNCTION, BY STATE: OCTOBER, 1958

. . . (In thousands of dollars)

165

Education

State

Stale institu­tions of

All higher functions education Other

High­ways

Public Ilos--.welfare pitals

Employ-- nient

. / • Police security Protec- Natural adininis-

Ilealth tion resources tralion (a) All

others

T o t a l . . . . . . . 465,304.8 112.945.7 27,375.8 79.611.2

A l a b a m a . . . . . . ; . 6.333.8 1.609.7 174.1 1.063.2 Arizona >3T592.4 1.263.1 69.7 910.6 Arlcansas ( b ) . . : . 3.865.1 977.4 53.6 829.9 California S1.9.12;3 16.617.3 893.9. 7.248.0

C o l o r a d o . . . . . . . . 5.711.3 1.913.6 319.5 785.9 Connecticut 8.412.1 1,102.7(c) 538.4 1.538.4 Delaware 2.433.4 326.5 -844.2 396,3 F l o r i d a . . . . 1 0 , 5 6 0 . 3 2.727.2 391.6 1.820.7

14.153.0 77,142:6 9,113.6 11,689.7 32,660.1 20,096.8 80,516.3

Georgiar.^ 6,911.8 1,631.8 IdabV> 2,296.2 570.4 Illinois 20.430.3 5.966.0 Indiana 10,372.3 3,704.9

Iowa 7,355.8 2,896.5 Kansas 6.267.2 2.257.1 Kentucky 6.535.8 1.071.6 L o u i s i a n a . . . . . . . 10,703.7 2,474.5

Maine; 3,138.1 418.9 Maryland 7,750.7 2,066.6 Massachuset t s . . >4a.353.6 896.1 Mlchiiian 24,723.1 9,748.8

Minnesota I n * . . . 10.541.2 4,172.9 Mississippi 4,078.2 1,108.7 Missouri 8,037.9 1,588.2 Montana 2.888.8 833.7

Nebraska 3.756.9 1.068;S /• Nevada 1.211.0 209.1, New Hampshire. 2.130.1 410.2/ New Jersey 10,957.3 1.645.6/

New Mexico -3.097.1 New Y o r k . . . . . . 42.496.3 North Carolina.. 28.139.5 North D a k o t a . . . 2.027.2

Ohio 18.188.6 4,479.1 Oklahoma 6.388.5 2.369.2 Oregon 7,437:9 1,873.2 Pennsylvania . . . . 24,801.7 2.972.9

Rhode Island(d). 2.367.2 382.0 South Carolina.. 5.025.2 1,044.2 South Dakota(e). 2,160.8 792.0 T e n n e s s e e . . . . . 5,993.2 1,526.3

.Texas. 18,514.9 •6;d64.1 Utah 3,230.8 1,244.5 Vermont 1,701.3 377.6 Virginia ( 0 . . . . . . 10,829.6 2,270.1

W a s h i n g t o n . . . . . 10,283.5 3,263.1 West Virg in ia . . . 5,085.2 1,449.9 Wisconsin,^ 9,836.3 3,554.1 W y o m i n g . ' . . . . . . 1.439.3 352.2

353.5 89.0

192.5 122.7

168.2 , 101.0/ 188.7 431.0

/ •

197.3 107.6 108.4 321.0

158.5 49.4

/ 129.4 ' 49.9

1.502.7 626.4

2i783.7 1.686.0

1.139.1 1.209.0 2.267.0 1,887.1

800.9 1,141.3 2,043.8 2,195.4

1,667.7, 804.4

1,878.7 763.3

97.5 683.2 21.0^ 382.9 83.4 477.0

286.4 1,824.7

.943.,1^' 80.5 3.3ip/2 . 784.1 2.4S9a.7 17,748.7

709.6 28.9

208.0 88.0 98.2

282.6

300.1 104.4.

> 168.9 530.9

76.5 . - 332,7

106.4 3S7.1

67.4 S&A

1,051.1 .127.0

359.0 127.6 222.5 791.0

112,2 36.2

422.7 812.0

185.4 271.5. 483.5 104.9

42.3 45.7 66.3

272.9

643.1 190.1 592.4

6,400.0 1,007.1 2,211.0

278.8 1,309.7

976.7 120.7

3.606.7 1,849.2

904.6 1,115.5

677.3 1.785.2

337.2 1,769.6 4,122.7 4.734.0

1,750.9 . 399.4

1.300.7 235.1

.872.1 43.9

373.2 2.284.9

677.6 5.768.5 2.799.7

389.5

2.935.7 973.3

1.325.5 5.418.0

187.4 185.3 876.2 13.432.7 107,1 1.543.8 33.5 221.7

^ 53.1 253.8 \142.4 1.224.8

38.6 - 471.8 165.1 1,423.0

338.7 4,943.4 95.5 SSl.l 62.9 371.8

219.0 3.228.6

170.2 1.798.7. 103.4 1.509.4 100.2 767.7 . 26'.3 422.0

523.4 371.4 312.2

1.297.4

183.8 • 187.3

78,3 351.8

3,833.7 904.8 828.1

5.401.0

469.6 614.1 171.9 478.9

605.7 2.454.3 102.2 198.6 49.2 128.0 73.7 1.797.7

597.0 1.013.8 178.2 368.7 339.7 1.107.6

62.9 96,5

92.7 237.8 43.7 95.3 71.5 109.2

813.2- 1.526.7

'72.4 255.2.

• 62.8 675.8

244.8 82.0

378.4 197.0

71.8 88.8

160.2 351.7

72.9 268.1 417.6 356.8

125.2 166.2

. 110.2 .M.0

35.5 47.5 48.5

s.233.5

92.2 610.4 151.4

. 41.5

/180.3 ' 89.8

87.1 485.3

88.8 216.4

31.1 ^88.1

319.6 74.6 63.0

382.1

105.4 75.6

115.7 30.2

144.7 258.9,

87.1 260.6

177.7 72.0

610.4 406.3

755.3 263.8 425.0

4.393.5

446.9 246.3 110.0

1.114.6

757.5 325.9

1.118.9 664.8

197:4 571.9 84.9 336.6

231.4 665.5 200.2 1.092.3

297.9 1.159.9 209.3 442.4 198.4 438.8

2.402.4 11.086.4

193.8 750.9 361.1 1,567.4

50 .6 , 170.7 475.4 .1,427.6

257.3 942.4 114.4 239.0 898.4 3.824.2 347.7 1.266.7

177.6 869.7 143.7 803.0

•262.4 789.2 239.5 1:451.2

• 99.6 344.0 101.3 653.8 217.2 338.6 371.4 1,434.1 265.9 394.6 760.2 3.921.6 718.4 1.415.8 1.146.9 3,274.0

171.0 114.9 276.2 '56.2

77.8 24.3 39.9

487.5

73 616 260

26

462 166 208 807

72.1 155.9 46.8

212.0

268.6 83.4 77.2

322.3

293.5 ^9.5

163.4 24.4

883.5 551.4 796.4 380.5

321.1 102.8 199.4 569.4 .

259.3 2,012.7' . 938.2

189.4

856/5 538.7 709.6

1,203.6

, 123.8 643.4 203.7 649.3

840.1 278.0 170.9 822.2

1.069.1 424.3 900.8 240.2

276.0 1.150.1 202.7 409.6 323.0 1,151.6

90.4 333.8

80.2 478.7 66.1 267.7 7 3 . 9 ' 358.3

859.2 2,493.2

102.3 496.3 1,683.1 12,402.0 351.2 1,548.6

62.9 323.7

1,007.4 3,701.8 257.3 629.4 236.3 1,759.1

,607.0 5.326.8

161.8 218.3

51.3 254.4

841.8-155.7 56.2

172.3

375.5 157.8 310.3

52.7

578.4 578.4 275.3 644.3

1.838.6 447.2 344.5

1.541.6

1.597.2 718.4

2,476.8 131.9

(a) Including general control, correction.-and state liquor stores, as well as miscellaneous.

(b) Nonschool data are for June, 19585%, * , (c) Does not include payroll for- part-tim^ employees) data

not available. (d) Data are for April, 1957. (e) Nonschool data are for September, 1958. (f) Nonschool data are for July, I9S8.

• >

O .

/ .

' ' • • • A ; . /

TRENDS IN RETIREMENT SYSTEMS FOR STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

BY A. A. WEINBERG*

^

I HE scope and magnitude of retire­ment system operations for state gov-erntnent employees has been steadily

increasing in terms of membership and beneficiaries, and in respect to financial resources. This trend is a concomitant of expanded state services wit!i the accom­panying increases in personnel. It also reflects the evolutionary progress of the state retirement programs, which has re­sulted in the accumulation of greatly in­creased reserves to meet accruing pension obligations.

Retirement legislation during recent years affecting state government employ­ees has taken the . form of changes de­signed to give effect to economic and so­cial trends, and to meet more adequately the needs of government as an employer. Old age, survivors and disability insm-ance coverage has now been embraced by the great-majority of the states for their employees. More comj^lete provisions for dependents have been made by means of group insurance programs to augment or supplement the survivors insurance pro­visions of tlie Federal Social Security Act. Less restrictive qualifying conditions for disability have been established for tlie pur'pose of providing a greater measiue of protection for employees in connection with this hazard.

The plight of retired employees has become intensified^by the persistent rise in living costs and the consequent depre­ciation in the value of their pensions. Some states have taken steps to ameliorate this condition, either by direct increases in present pensions or by provisions de­signed to offset future decreases in the value of pension income. Investment pro­visions -adopted earlier have proved

*Mr. Weinberg, a consulting acuiary, is Chair­man of the Committee on Public Employee Re­tirement Administration, Municipal FinanccOf-ficers Association.

)M

impractical and too restrictive, and exten­sive revisions of the investment author­ity have been made or are under consid­eration. The financing provisions^of the retirement systems are being reexamined critically in view of their increasing im-. pact on the fiscal affairs of government. Public officials are evaluating these costs/./ in terms of their relation to salary ex­pense rather than as an extraneous or sundry expenditure of government, since basically pension cost is a part of compen­sation for services rendered.

SCOPE OF RETIREMEIVT GOVERAGE . •

According to a report by the United States Department of Commerce^ the total number of state government em­ployees in service in .1957 was 1,358,000, consisting.of 1,154,000 full-time employ­ees and 204,000 part-time. The extent of retirement coverage of these emplo^^es under the several types of systems was as tollows:

State-administered retirement systems Locally administered retirement

systems Old-age, survivors and disability

insurance only , . • Private insurance contracts

Individuals Covered

975,000

2.000

172,000 i 13.000 1,1.62,000

Of the total number of employees in­cluded under some form of retirement plan, 383^000 had combined coverage under OASDP and a supplemental re­tirement plan. State government employ­ees with no retirement coverage numbered approximately... 200,000.

Altogether, there were in bperation

*U. S. Department oJE Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1957 Census of Governments, Vol. IV, No., 1. Employee-Retireme7it Systems of State and Lo­cal Governments.,

-Old age, survivors and disability insurance un­der the Federal Social Security Act.

166

• ' /

ADMINJSTRATIVE ORGANIZATION 167

2,205 separate contributory retirement systems for employees of state and local. governments. As of the date covered by. the survey, all systems combined had an aggregate membership of more than four million persons, and assets totalling $12.8 billion. In the final month of the fiscal year 1957, recurrent benefit payments amounted to |60 million and were being paid to more than 500,000 persons, with an average monthly payment of about $116.

i . • - ^ - . . • . . •

STATE GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS

Retirement systems administered by state governments numbered only 147. However, these state-administered sys­tems accounted for three-fourths of the total membership of all retirement sys-" tems for public employees, about two-thirds of their assets, and about one-half of their aggregate benefit payments.

Many of the state-administered retire­ment plans also cover employees of local governments rather than applying ex-cliisively to personnel of 'the state,gov­ernments. Local government employees represented about two-thirds of the cur­rent contributing membership of the state-administered systems, with state em-

~ ployees making up the remaining third. Total membersnip of all systems, by

states, ranged from almost a half million each in California and New York to less than 5,000 in Delaware and South Da­kota. In Delaware nearly all public em-; ployees are covered under OASDI, and most of them have supplemental protec­tion under the state noncontributory-pen­sion plan, in which the state assumes JJie entire cost. In South Dakota most public employees are covered by OASDI. The five largest individual retirement systems in rank of total membership are: New York, state employees plus local

employees 187.830 California, state employees plus local 173,4521 Ohio, state plus local nonschool 140.713'. California, teaching personnel 152.989. Texas, all school and teachipg personnel 134,431

State Coverage Only Oif the state-administered general-

coverage systems in operation, ihcluding that of; die Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, fifteen apply to state government

y -employees only. These systems are in:. Ar­kansas, Cqnheiiticut, Geo'rgia, Illinois, Kentucky^^^^sbiusiana, Massachusetts, Michigi^^ 'WminesdjiC "MissQun, North Carolina,^ Pennsylvania, Pueftb^-Ricor" Texas and Vermont^; V. -j >

State and Local Co-derme^, ' Others of the .s|^te-administered gen­

eral-coverage plafhs p!:o\|ide coverage for state employees and also for all or some groups of local employees. These plans fall into two broad categories, as follows:

1. Sixteen systems, besides applying to., state erhployees, apply to Ipcal employees generally, subject only to specific excep­tions. Very broad coverage, open to sub­stantially all local employe^^, Js provided in,nine of the sixteen states which do not maintain a separate/special system for school employees. These nine states are: Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Missis­sippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon and Virginia. / /

In seven states of this group of sixteen— i.e., those which have separate "teachers'" systems—the. general/ plan excludes loc^ employees eligible for coverage under the separate plan. However, Califoniia pro-; vides for optional coverage under either system. The remaining, six states are: In­diana, Maryland, ^ontana, New Hamp­shire, New York and Wisconsin.

2. Of the remamder, eight systems ap­ply to all or limited groups of nonschool employees of local governments, in addi­tion to state employees. In this group,, the Florida system applies only to counties among local governments. The North Da­kota system was scheduled to ,be.liqui­dated and all/members tranisferred to OASDI cdverage under terms, of state leg- . islation of" 1957. The other six systems. falling under /this lieading are those of: Alabama, New Jersey, Ohio, Puerto Rico, ' Tennessee and Washington.

Four general state.systems—in Maine, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Wyo­ming—covermainly public school employ- ' ees as well as state employees.

In six other states, state-administered plans operate primarily for local govern-

> c

1C33

•The North Carolina system iticludes public school employees.

A.

168 THE BOOK OF THE STATES

nient employees—in Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska and North Carolina. One of these, however— the Nebraska plan—has been adopted by few local units.

As indicated under "State Coverage Only," above, Connecticut, Illinois, Mich­igan, Minnesota a;nd North Carolina also have state-administered general-coverage systems for state employees only.

FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY

A number of changes in the Federal So­cial Security Act directly affecting state goVei-nment employees occurred during 1958 and 1959.

In 1958 Congress approved an amend­ment increasing contribution rates 4 of 1 per cent above the rates then in effect, and future increases were also scheduled. The rates for employees and employers were increased to 2i/4 per cent effective January 1, 1959, 3 per cent from 1960 to 1962, 31/ per cent from 1963 to 1965, 4 per cent from 1966 to 1968, arid 41^ per cent in 1969 and thereafter.

The earnings base on which contribu­tions are made was revised from |4,200 to |4,800 beginning January 1, 1959. Benefits for those on the pension rolls were hicreased about 7 per cent, with a minimum increase of_$3.00 per month. A benefit table is now set out in the law, and the benefit formula which was for­merly used has bemjieleted. Under this table the maximum an individual may. receive under OASDI is 1127 per month as a primlary insurance benefit. The max­imum family benefit was raised from 1200 to 1254 per month.

Under a 1958 aniendment, persons in positions cova^db|y^more than one retire­ment system may obtain social security coverage when one of such systems adopts that coverage.Employees who had not ex­ercised a choice of joining a retirement system embracing social security and em­ployees who elected to stay in a noncov-ered division were given the right to elect coverage.

The 1958 amendments also authorized the Maine St4te Retirenieht System to cover its state employees without covering its teacher members, provided such action is taken before July 1, 1960.

Also in 1958 it was provided that sepa­rate referenda may be held, among em­ployees compensated from federal funds for. unemploymerit insurance administra-tiorl in Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Minne­sota, North Dakota, Pennsylvania and Washington.

Under the social security law, the ppsi-tions of policeman and fireman are gen­erally exempt from social security cover­age. A number of states have been excluded from this exemption by specific reference in the social security law. In 1959 Congress added California, Kansas, North Dakota and Vermont td'lltdse pre­viously grarited authority to cover police­men's and firemen's positions on the same basis as other employees.

The following states now have this priv­ilege:. Alabama, Cahforni a, Florida, Georgia, Kapsas, Maryland, New'York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennesr see, Vermont and Washington.

States now having authority to grant social security coverage only to those pres­ent members of a retirement system who indicate their desire to be covered, with new employees coming in coriipulsorily under a combined program which em­braces social security, are as follows: Cali­fornia, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minriesota, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Verinont, » Washington and Wisconsin.

Nonprofessional school employees of the following states in positions covered by a retirement systeni may be covered by federal social security without a referen­dum, and as a separate coverage group, priavided such action is taken prior to January 1, 1962: California, Florida, Hawaii, Kansas, Minnesota, iNevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Penn­sylvania, Texas, Vermont and Washing­ton.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

Wisconsin in 1958 adopted the variable annuity plan for members"~of~its-retire-ment systems. This plan, optional with inembers, provides an annuity derived in wheie or in part from amounts invested inM:ommon stocks or other equity-type in-

•'-

ADMIN IS TRA TIVE OR GANIZA TION 169

vestmjents. The annuity varies in amount according to the market value of the in­vestments, jthe income from them, and the mortality experience.

Illinois inits r959 legislative session ap­proved another type of plan for several

. of its retirement systems, to alleviate the conditions resulting from the upward trend in living costs. It provided for an automatic' annual increase in pension payments for the lifetime of pensioners at a sp>ecified rate, financed by additional revenues from ecjiployees and govern­mental contributions. . Also, survivors' benefit : provisions were approved for several Illinois retirement systems, com­parable in scope and amount to those prescribed under federal social security.

The State of New York created a com-, mission to reexamine the investment au­thority of its retirement systems, with the view of determining tlie feasibility of au­thorizing investment in equity and other types of securities not now permitted,

Rhode Island established a cornmission to study retirement provisions for state employees and teachers. Illinois made permanent an interim legislative commis­sion, created in 1945 to study pension laws^ for pul^ic employees. Wisconsin contin­ued its Governor's Retirement. Study Comniiif4on, comprising representatives of the public, the legislatiiri&j'emplpyeesj govemmehtal units arid the administra­tors of the retirement systems. ,, ^

Ohio enacted legislation in 1959 provid­ing for an average increase of 12 per cent in the retirement benefit and a«Iike in­crease to disabled retired persons, as Well as to survFvors of persons* who die;befpre

retirement. Survivors' benefits are how provided after one and one-half years of service instead of three years, and the pe-;, ' riod of service for vesting was reduced from ten to five years. IVfembers may alsd purchase piension credit for public em- : ployment outside of Ohio. "^California has provided for coordinat­

ing the State Employees Retirement Sys­tem with federal social security. It also has made available an'option within the sys­tem for an employee to qualify for a sur­vivor benefit or to remain under the pres­ent system of retirement benefits only, with no change. „

SELECTED REFERENCES • . • - 1 •

Summary of the Old-Age, Survivors and Dis­ability Insurance System (and Major Changes . Made by 1958 Amendments).'SocizX Security Ad­ministration, U. S. Department of Health, Educa­tion, and Welfare. Washington 25, D.C.

Social Security Coverage of Public School' Teachers (as of November 1959). National Educa­tion Association Research Division. 1959.

Employee Retirement Systems of State and Local Governments. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Departmentof Commerce, 1957 Census of Govern- ' ments. Vol. IV, No. 1.1959.

Report of the Il'.nois Public Employees Pen­sion Laws\Commission. State of Illinois. 1959."

The VaViable Annuity. State: Teachers Retire-nient Boar^.^State of,Wisconsin.

The California State'Employee, official publica-\^ tion of the California State Employees' Associa­tion. August,yl959. '

Retirenipri Plans for Public Employees. Basic principles and essential provisions governing*re­tirement planning for jiublic employees. Muni­cipal Finance Officers Association of the United States aftd Canada, 1958.

Public Employee Retirement Administration. Papers delivered at the 53rd Annual Conference, 1959. ^jfunicipa^ F.inance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. • ',

V «

C

/

A

•V