America's Crises; 19; Cities and the Poor. Part 2

[beeping, music] The following program is from NET, the National Educational Television Network. - It's like what you're doing after taking us as an individual, but I can't see my brother who don't know you, and I know you, they don't know you, and I see them running in the streets in your tracks. I see them forced to steal, not knowing. I see you knowing you're forcing them to steal, or won't do nothing about it. And I see you making them criminals, and then punishing them for being criminals. I see you making them poor, I see you making them poor, unable to live, and yet still you punish them for stealing.

You won't give them jobs, and then human beings, and blood running our veins, but you can't find ways, find ways for them to ensure that blood to keep on running. They got to steal. They got to, because they don't know, they don't have the education. They've been robbed completely, under fear, under-employed, under-enjoyed, under everything, under everything. - In its America's Crises series, National Educational Television presents The Cities and the Poor Part Two. - Good evening, I'm Paul Niven. That young man was one of the militant leaders of the newly emerging poor, the urban, often Negro poor. He was holding forth on behalf of the poor in a forum given him by the poverty program, which also gives him his salary. He was telling his immediate audience, the Los Angeles Poverty Board, that despite its

and the federal government's efforts, poverty was still widespread, abject, and intolerable. The young man's crusade is part of something much larger than Los Angeles or the poverty program. It's part of a kind of ferment, which has lately become manifest in cities across the country. Some of its roots are in the young war on poverty. Some are in the older Civil Rights movement. Ferment does not always seek precise channels toward precise goals. Sometimes it just boils. Its apostles come from a variety of backgrounds, and they bring a variety of motivations. Some are really sincere, simply know many grievances, and are reaching for a redress. They want better jobs and homes and schools, and most of all they want a stake and a voice in the community and its institutions. Others include opportunists and charlatans seeking power for its own sake, and extremists pretending to seek reform, but really seeking to promote unrest as a means towards revolution. The ferment takes many forms, speeches, marches, sit-ins, boycotts, political campaigns.

But the key word common to all the militant leaders and groups is organization. Sometimes the purpose is limited. The improvement of a school yard, more equitable treatment and a clinic, more frequent garbage collections. Sometimes it's larger and more vague, the eradication of slums. Among the multitude of groups is the Chicago organization that brought Dr. Martin Luther King to the north. It's called the "Union to End Slums" Its staff people have been moving from door to door through the slums, recruiting poor people, training them as volunteers, and then sending them back to bring in more people. The crusade has not been dramatically successful. One block party, 400 people, were individually invited, only eight showed up. But the indoctrination began. And so you knock on the door the first time, and the man opens the door and says "who are you?", and you say, "well I'm Mr. Johnson, I live up the block there," and you'll stand there and wait for a while, because he's going to try and figure out what you're doing. Maybe

your son hit his son, and you want to talk about that, and you say, "well no, we got problems in our community, we got to get together though." Now he may think you're a fool that first time, because it's going to be awfully strange. First time probably in fifteen to twenty years, someone from the community has come and knocked on his door, saying that they want to help him, and they want him to help them. But don't be, you know, don't stop there. What you're going to have to do is you might have to go back again. We, Jim, me, Susie, and I are used to that now, we just go banging on doors anyway. They slam the door, tell us don't come back. So what we decided to do then, so that you can understand who's working for Dr. King, and who's not. We got these armbands for you. - So what we got to do is, like Dr. King said the other day, you know, be dissatisfied. You got to decide if this ain't the best you can do. Go on and try to make something more out of life. - You try to get everybody in East Garfield Park, because this is a pretty big community, but try to get everybody in East Garfield Park together into this union structure so

that we can, you know, one thing that's end slums, and that'll probably be done by doing a number of separate things, like cutting the color tax, you know, making sure that if you have a five-room apartment, that you're not paying anymore, it's only $5 for it. But you're paying a hundred, you're paying too much. Also in terms of really getting Negroes some economic security in the community, but try to make sure that the minimum wage is raised to at least $2, probably better. So that every job that anybody gets, he's guaranteed to make it enough money to live. And let me see, what else, we want to try to get these schools in shape, make sure that you don't have overcrowdedness, because whenever you have an overcrowded school, that means your child isn't learning very much because teachers just can't teach all of them, so they teach one here and one there. Sometimes, you know, if you get sick, you don't get taught, because you haven't been in the school when it was your turn.

And we can do the same thing with the welfare department. So that's what we're starting to do now with the welfare union, getting all the welfare people together so that they can first understand what their rights are. And then to act in unison so that they can have power because right now, the case worker has all the power, the Negro community is powerless, and we don't have power to do anything. Like you said, we got to beg the welfare department, we got to beg the precinct captain, we got to beg just about anybody who we want something from, because we don't have power to stand up and say, this is what we need, now we're going to get it. So with the union, what we're going to be able to do is establish a power base. - The new militants are using some old techniques, familiar in the Civil Rights Movement. They are prodding not only government agencies, but also business and labor. They're trying to use the economic power of the poor to extract concessions.

In Chicago, a biracial ministers group decided to organize boycotts, or rather selective buying campaigns as they put it, against firms suspected of discrimination in hiring. The management of a cooperative food company called Country's Delight refused initially to show the clergymen its employment records. Operation Bread Basket called a meeting of militant leaders from all over the city and began that day what became the first of a series of picketing campaigns. [singing] - Now some of you are kind of new to this picketing and demonstrating an attempt to get free and you looking kind of dead and kind of dull and dry, but before you get free you first got to be alive, there are people who don't want to get free, matter of fact they're

indifferent to freedom. If you really get live you can intimidate the devil, stand up and be counted and really express yourself. Now we've got to talk just for a minute or two here about picket discipline. Now it is important before you even start discussing picketing that you accept non-violence, not only as a tactic but ultimately as a style of life. Those of us that have some of the experience and we would argue that non-violence has the power to transform the hearts of evil men and to shake up the powers and principalities that now enslave us. The real sense, those of you who are students, ought to have an extra kind of commitment to this, because certainly sitting at this day in time in 1966 by now you ought to become indignant over your lot in life. Many of our parents have been thrust upon the welfare rolls, our fathers have been deprived of jobs. Many of us go to inferior schools, our past, our jobs, indeed our futures are

not much brighter. And in the real sense we got a stake in this freedom movement. Somehow I have the feeling now that what we do in Chicago will determine how Negroes are living in urban America, all across this country for the rest of the century. Now when you hit that picket line and start threatening the powers and principalities sometimes people are going to try to distract your attention by talking. Don't ever talk on a picket line. Each picket line will have a leader who's assigned, who's assigned to do the talk. If anyone spits on you, you've got to have enough commitment to let your dignity be brighter than the spit. - The company quickly agreed to talk, proceeded to hire even more Negroes than the pickets had demanded. The new militants have used a wide variety of other tactics in a wide variety of causes, some good, some rather far out. The new groups have been criticized for misleading poor people, and the critics are not all conservatives.

One of them until his recent death was Chicago welfare director Raymond Hilliard. - Here you have these artificial barriers of suspicion that is being fomented, suspicion that takes the form of telling the poor they must mistrust the existing order, that white must hate Black or that white hates Black and that Black must therefore hate white. All of these things, all of these divisive things I think need to be exposed and I think the role of the media of communication about which you asked a moment ago, at this moment is to expose these phonies, these bogus leaders that parade as leaders of the poor and even in some cases as civil rights leaders. The principle cause of the poverty of the group that I call the new poor as distinguished from the old poor is lack of education, educational deficiency, or to make it as simple as possible inability to read.

There is no hope for the most numerous group among the poor people of America, not just of Chicago, until they learn to read, and anybody that would try to beguile them into believing that there is some other way out, a way by way of protest meetings or demonstrations or parades, all of which have their place and their validity to focus attention on injustices, but anybody who would lead poor people to believe that there is any way out that can be a fun game or a picnic is doing a tragic disservice to the poor. - You're talking about these private organizations, on the fringes... - I'm talking about some of the very lately come organizations that represent that they are the true representatives of the poor, I am talking about any organization that would discourage any poor person from getting an education. And if you want to be able to identify them, this is the best way.

Anyone who will discourage a person from getting an education or from taking a job, that is a bogus organization and a bogus leadership... - [crosstalk] the whole power structure that were against amelioration. - I don't believe we should, the power structure has many, many deficiencies and I don't think there's anybody alive more aware of them than I am. And they need to be corrected and they can be corrected, and one of the great glories of the war on poverty is that it seems to be on its way toward correcting them. - But the militant poor say the war on poverty is done little to shake the typical city power structure, which they consider complacent and hidebound. In Los Angeles and elsewhere, the militants are in perpetual battle against city hall, with Sargent Shriver as a distant and uncomfortable referee.

The federal poverty bill called vaguely for maximum feasible participation of the poor. In theory, the recruitment of neighborhood people as employees of the program. In practice, the policy has enabled many poor militants to demand radical changes from the very establishments which pay their salaries. - In Los Angeles, 400 poor people are employed in a community action program called the Neighborhood Adult Participation Project or NAPP. From the inception of the project, their leaders have been at loggerheads with NAP's current group: the overall Los Angeles Poverty Board known as the Economic and Youth Opportunities Agency. This spring, the NAPP aides mutinied. The insurrection began as the aides arrived at a local church for what had been scheduled as a training session in community leadership. Mrs. Opal Jones had become director of the NAPP project after a long career in private settlement

houses. Like many another social worker recruited by the war on poverty, she quickly found herself caught up in controversy: ideological, political, and bureaucratic. This meeting was to have been an extension of a series of workshops on community relations. Mrs. Jones arranged it and invited guest participants without consulting her EYOA superiors. EYOA ordered her to cancel the meeting. On the appointed day, she allowed the aides to gather and only then informed them of the orders she had received. - We will be one year old in NAPP on April 1st and almost say 100 years old on April 1st. If we could match it up as far as wisdom and understanding and knowledge and common sense, I would think that NAPP is 100 years old April 1st. Last Monday morning, we sat together and watched five films on the dynamics of leadership.

We talked about the anatomy of a group, how a collection of people can move and become a group, how they bring into their group all of their own past experiences. We talked about what are the characteristics of a group and we put this in our framework of our own outposts. This was why we had invited people to come and listen to the points of view that we had about the issues that were to be discussed. I was advised and ordered on Friday morning to not have this meeting this morning. [muttering] And so this is why I have asked you all because I wanted to be the one to interpret this to you. I wanted to be the one to explain the whole historical background for this and why we wanted to have a community relations conference.

So yes, Dorothy? [inaudible question] Well, I would be guilty of insubordination. [crowd muttering] She asked me what would happen. And I said, I would be guilty of insubordination. [muttering] All the learnings that we've had, we want to be able to hear each other and remember those roadblocks to communication. No matter how we feel now, this is where we connect that knowledge and the feelings together. And let's all listen to each other and really do what we feel that we need to. But let's keep our states in shape. I so move that we continue in some ways and means without a director to get this conference

through. If not, we now go to EYOA, where we can owe [?]. Ernest Priestly, an assistant to Mrs. Jones, took charge of the rebellious meeting. OK, let's have your attention, please. I'm not going to recognize anyone else, everyone, sit down and let's talk about this peacefully. Sit down and listen to the other participants. - I think the man, you asked to spoke. - Yes, I did. In the case if our needs and purposes are not heard or will not be listened to, there is always Washington, D.C. and Sargent Shriver Because this is getting to be too much of a bureaucracy. - That's right. - And I think it's time that something should be done. - That's right. - There we go. The emotion is that either we go back to our outposts and form some type of way we can have this conference, or we go to E.Y.O.A. OK, let's have your attention, please.

We can be very emotional, but we should really know the consequences. If they fired one of us, what are we going to do? [cheers] If they fired two or three, so one is going to be thrown on the carpet. We know who's going to be on the carpet. We got to know what we're going to do. Now, one of the real big hangups that used to be very emotional when meeting, then we don't follow up and let them know how we're real concerned about what these problems are. - This is why we have a union. - ...the shifting represents us... [inaudible] it happens to us. Good. [cheering] [cheering] Thank you. OK. Let's not talk anymore. I think we've talked enough. Let's approach the... Bill Abbott has walked before. Jefferson, be a monitor. Connors, Calloway, Mrs., uh, Harris. Anyone else want to volunteer for monitor.... Mrs. Lewis? - The 400 NAPP aides set out in a protest march to EYOA's downtown headquarters about 20 blocks away. - I have made arrangements for Mr. Kip Trailer to talk to you and he'll be glad to do this

over at Pershing Square. - Well, we feel they'd go upstairs because we want to wait for Mr. Maldonado until he either comes to the building or until he sends someone that can give us some official decisions on why we as a community action program can be involved in our own training and our own framework without being dictated to by downtown. - The aides crowded into the EYOA boardroom, and rather angrily awaited the man who had ordered the cancellation of their meeting. The man who was executive director of EYOA is Los Angeles Poverty Chief, Joseph Maldonado. [booing, crowd crosstalk] - Mr. Schifflet will read the grievances that we have.

Then the gentleman will be allowed to have conversations with us. One, since we have a director who initially was told she would have a great deal of freedom, why was a training session planned by NAPP aides stopped in direct contradiction to the wishes of the director as well as the need of the aides? Two, we call for a federal investigation of the growing bureaucracy and the dictatorial nature it is taking. - Now, that is the grievance with Maldonado and Nicholas are both here, they will talk to the grievances and any other way they want to express to this body. Then, if you have questions, answers or anything you want to contribute, I will arbitrarily

call on you. - First, let me start by telling you that Mr. Priestley described, I want to start by telling you that in Mr. Priestley's description of what you are, he left out the fact that you're also an employee of the Economic Youth Opportunities Agency and I think you ought to recognize that. - We are running a program that is best characterized by saying that we're in a fishbowl and I don't regret this. I think people are entitled to know what we're doing. We explain as best we can and we've certainly enlisted your support in the programs to tell people what we're doing. Not in the least ashamed of anything that we're doing, I think that we're providing services to people. My estimate is that we're serving around 200,000 people in this community and it seems to me that for starters, and I'm talking about a program that's been in operation seven months, there's nothing to be apologetic about. Because I think the worst thing that we can do in this community is to present a face that

shows a division. I believe that in the NAPP program we have been working together unitedly and I hope that we continue that way. - We want everyone to have an opportunity to speak that want to but it has to be an early fashion. - The first speaker was Charles Knox, an aide to Congressman Augustus Hawkins whose district includes Watts. - Let's begin by talking about the NAPP program. Mr. Maldonado has said that the NAPP program's major focus and he said that the focus, even from the very beginning, was to try to provide a career training opportunity for poor people. - I think you weren't listening very closely, sir. If you're going to quote me, please quote me correctly. - Let me say this in order to be correct. During the last board meeting, it was stated that the NAPP program is going to become a manpower program. It was stated that the plans from the very beginning... - Sir, I must interrupt again.

That was not what the board did and if you want to examine the minutes of the board meeting you can. - I welcome a correction at the end of my comments. It's my understanding. This is based not only on the last board meeting last Monday. It's my understanding as a result of having through the months talked to various persons, not only in the NAPP program, but persons down here in this office. And I had a conversation with Mr. Maldonado three or four weeks ago in which he explained to me that at the NAPP program, major focus was going to be in providing job opportunities for poor people in the various public and private agencies. My position at that time, and this is a position of the Congressman, is that if you place poor people in the bureaucratic institutionalized organizations, you offer disservice to the community. Let me explain to you what we mean by this. The major focus, the major objective of the community action legislation, as legislated by Congress, was to provide for the first time in the lives of poor people, an opportunity for

the poor people to involve other poor people in a self-help process. I think you have a right to be here today. You have a right to be where you were this morning, and the congressman feels this way. and he'll back here 100%. You have a right to question Mr. Maldonado and to question this program. [applause] But I know and you know that when people feel great sense of despair, when nobody will listen, when there's no hope, you're going to have the kind of things that happened last August, and the kind of things that happened two weeks ago. It's up to you and it's up to me to do what we know has to be done to stop this sort of thing. This is the kind of thing that we're all embarrassed by, and we don't want to see it continue. We have got to work together to bring about the kind of changes that guarantee us the kind of security in our communities that we know will end in a result not like last August. That nightmare is behind us. Let's not let it happen again. - You're being told some things here that are also very, very regrettable.

And that is, no matter who you work for, you can be irresponsible and do anything that you want to. That is not so. Anytime you're holding a job, there are certain rules and regulations that are set by boards of directors, and I don't care whether it's the EYOA or any other agency. And you're going to be expected to follow those directors. And I hope that you will follow the directives that come out of our board of directors. - As a result of the uncancelled meeting and of the protest march that followed, Maldonado dismissed Mrs. Jones as NAPP director. Thus, two citizens, two officials of vaguely similar backgrounds in welfare work, were thrown into battle against one another.

They were not natural or voluntary enemies, but in the heat of conflict, their roles were oversimplified. To Mrs. Jones's allies, those who spoke at the meeting, Maldonado was the symbol of the power structure, of city hall, of mayor Sam Yorty. Maldonado considered himself the servant of a board which simply represented the whole community. Its mayor, its welfare and school departments, its business and labor groups, and its poor people. He may have viewed some of Mrs. Jones's friends with suspicion, suspecting that they would like to become a power structure. This particular fight was a sharp one, and it made headlines. But the same suspicions and distrust have divided other people and other communities, people of goodwill seeking the same ends. The implications of their arguments soar far above administrative discipline into political and social philosophy. We heard some of those arguments in separate interviews with Mrs. Jones and Maldonado. - Do these neighborhood people, these recipients, do they want in, do they want a voice in the poverty programs? - I'm not sure you know about this idea that was advanced by someone here in the State Department of Social Welfare a few years ago.

It's called the X-Factor. It is my belief now that this X-Factor is one of our biggest problems. This feeling of the alienation, this feeling of not being a part, and it is my feeling that the people do want to be a part. They not only want to be a part to look in and to sit there, but they want to have a hand and a voice in saying what they'd like to have happen. The exciting thing to me is to see this new voice in these groups. They may not be as smooth as ours. They're not sanded down as much as some of us are. But they are clear. They're loud and they're very clear. And the problem, I think, is the fact that people like me who have been sanded down in the image of the great, whatever this is, have tended to be the spokesmen for the neighborhood people. And the point I want to make is my best point that I feel in this whole movement is that we've got to learn when and how to get out of the way so people can speak for themselves.

- Some of the militant leaders of the poor who have been demonstrating and watching and making speeches against your organization are in fact employees of the organization, or its subordinate agencies. Is this a tolerable situation for you? - No, it isn't. And I think it's particularly intolerable when the employees of this organization engage in such activities. And we don't believe that when there's a job to be done that we're paying employees to do is getting done when they're marching or taking part in other activities. I think that one of my concerns is that we not put poor people in the position of being captives of political machines or for that matter of professional staff. And I for one am always willing and responsive to assist in the problems of people as one can listen to them very directly. - The power structure in a community may be afraid of the power of the people because for the first I think that they're afraid of the whole idea of people speaking on their own behalf.

They're... because they're not used to this new voice in a neighborhood. So really because people have been quiet so long when people are active and people do react, there's a great fear on the part of people who've been used to making the decisions all the time. The concern that I have is that the people in the community must recognize their power and use it in a positive way. - When the poor of a neighborhood begin to organize especially with massive federal funds for their own purposes for anti-poverty purposes, jobs, landlords, when they begin to fight what they call the power structure on economic matters. isn't it possible that they're eventually going to start fighting the power structure, what they call the power structure, in elections politically and isn't this naturally going to build up a considerable resistance on the part of elected officials?

- I think so. I think that change comes hard no matter what kind of change you're trying to institute. I think the real test is whether or not we're going to be able to identify those things that need to be changed in the institutional structure. And then after they're identified, go ahead and try to change them so that services are more meaningful and helpful to the people that they were meant for in the first place. And I think that to me that to purely irritate and to in a sense condemn an entire institution is not the way to solve the problem. It seems to me that to say that all schools are no good and that what we need to do is to create new educational institutions outside the structure for going to solve the problem is a mistake. Because in my judgment the institutional structure that we have now for educational purposes is going to continue and we can't afford to start all over and create a new system.

- Isn't it almost unprecedented for leaders in any field to say to their followers, "All right, you can move yourself now. We're going to get out of the way." - You don't have to say when you can move out of the way, you're referring to the statement I made a few minutes ago. You don't say. You say it with your actions because if you lay the sufficient groundwork, if you've done a good job of training, if you have a good relationship, if your communication has been clear. That's the genius of the neighborhood people, you don't have to explain. They know when you're moving out of the way. I've moved out of the way a lot of times and I certainly feel that the new look in the settlement movement to me will be more neighborhood people sharing more of these leadership roles until people like me can see this point of view and are not afraid of the people if they do disagree with us, that we don't feel uncomfortable when 10 or 15 come to see us at one time, that we'll realize it, and we're coming through. And we've opened the door for people to participate for themselves. And you see I think the greatest tribute to in a neighborhood center in this country is when a group of people will say to them, "No, I don't think this is the way we should do it."

Mrs. Jones' dismissal led to new protests; civil rights groups called a rally and wanted to hold it at Wrigley Field, her headquarters. The city refused to let them use the big stadium and in fact the crowd that turned up hardly filled a parking lot. The militants always claim more followers than they have and predict larger crowds than they're able to turn out. - Everyone please come to the front. - Those who did appear ran the gamut to the new spokesmen for the poor: social workers, politicians, civil rights leaders, poverty workers. - The audience if you will please. - Those of you who were wondering why Mrs. Jones didn't say anything, you know times are very difficult now and it seems that if you say things that people misinterpret, you have all kinds of problems so we've heard it kind of remain silent

a while. - The first person who did speak was Mrs. Jones' associate and friend Mrs. Mary Henry. - I'd like to share one of two things with you this afternoon that I have gotten out of a book called The War on Poverty, which is a community action program booklet from the Office of Economic Opportunity which starts out by saying that "the central problem today is to protect," now hear me now, "The central problem today is to protect and restore man's satisfaction in belonging to a community where he can find security and significance." And this is why we're here today, this is what it's all about, that we're making efforts to establish a community where our people -- and when I say our people out that means all of us -- can find security and significance.

Through community action. Now community action isn't a new thing, it didn't just start last week when the eruption happened, but it started a long long time ago. I was just listening this morning to some programs on television where community action has been going on such a long long time that those of us who are just beginning to get involved in it need to know that what we're doing now is not particularly new but it is unique because it's happening to NAPP. NAPP is trying to forge ahead now in the field of getting people involved and doing things for people and people doing things with people and this is what community action is all about and this is what it's got to be. - Congressman Hawkins, supporting Mrs. Jones, had flown from Washington after her dismissal. - This is one of the few programs that is a grassroots program that comes close to arousing the people out of their letharfy and their indifference.

It is a program that is designed to take the people at the neighborhood level to listen to their problems and to do something about those problems. These programs are opposed by the local public officials for various reasons. [applause] If individuals begin to think for themselves and to do something for themselves they will begin to become involved in rent strikes, in political organization, in consumer education, in trying to do something to get jobs for themselves. Now this is what the Congress intended. We do not intend that the poverty money is going to be spent as another relief program to provide just temporary relief for individuals. And I want to tell you now that unless this mess in Los Angeles is cleaned up, we will strike our title to the bill completely. And we're going to give it, we're going to give it to federal agencies because we're tired of the local public officials knifing this program.

- The National Civil Rights Leadership was represented by CORE director Floyd McKissick. - One of the things, one of the things that you're going to have to be concerned with is the real watching of the poverty program, how it affects you and really giving some stringent support to Miss Jones. I think she represents Negroes all over the United States. And what we have to say is that the Congress of Racial Equality stands behind Miss Jones to give her any support that she needs and to give this organization any support that you might need. So all you have to do is to really call upon us and we'll be right here to help you. God bless you, keep your strength up, keep your will.

But by all means remember that you will have to take a part in the economic structure, in the political structure, and as consumers we're all going to have to get organized in order to make the man really feel the sting of our power. I thank you. - On the day following that rally, Mrs. Jones and her friends attended and overwhelmed the regular monthly board meeting of the EYOA. It too became a mass protest against her dismissal by director Maldonado, but he was not the only object of criticism. The militants had come to voice their pent up dissatisfaction with the board itself and the city power structure which controlled. The board members were to sit and hear themselves attacked for some three hours. They themselves were divided into two groups, readily identifiable by differences in dress, speech, and ideology. Seven of them were representatives of the poor community, selected by the poor in a special poverty program election. Balloting was unsuccessful because few people bothered to vote.

On the other side of the room sat the 18 non-poor board members, officials of city and county agencies including the school systems and civic leaders. Mrs. Jones had as counsel the eminent lawyer A. L. Wirin, of the American Civil Liberties Union. - She was entitled to a hearing and at the board will give her a hearing. That was expected at discharge and that's quite satisfactory. However, she is here also in the capacity of a Negro and a leader and of a spokesman for a group of people who are very much concerned in the larger issues. And it seems to me that elemental fairness on your part would submit and would require that you listen to the briefly on the matters other than the discharge.

- Just analyze one other thing if I may. Is it fair to have a hearing at this particular time as Mrs. Jones is going to appeal to this board and start prejudging it before she was ready to present the hearing and a special meeting called for the hearing. [crowd calling out] - Let Mrs. Jones take her time. - The point that I'd like to make: there are two separate issues it seems to me. One is my own personal rights Mr. Wirin is going to help protect. The second has to do with the project that I was directing and it's my desire to keep these two issues in clear focus. The concern I have is about the project that I was directing. The Neighborhood Adult Participation Project which was the Community Action Project,

has been a very important project to all of us in this community. And the thing that has happened with the moving this project into a manpower arena, and the stifling of the rights and privileges of those of us who are committed to real community development. This is a concern that I have as the director of this project, as a past director of this project. And the whole idea of the project has been the need for us to consider more flexible and non-traditional ways of operation. So the point that I'm trying to make here that I have a serious question as to whether or not a community action program can operate under the supervision and the direction of an organization like this. composed of.... [applause] - [chanting] We're trying to be fair here, we will. - May I just ask you and the board whether or not you could have a special hearing tomorrow or the day thereafter or something real soon. [shouts from crowd] - That will come up at a later time. Please. Now will you let the board take care of a couple of items that we have before the house. [crowd jeering]

But the board did not get to its other items of business. Instead the meeting became in effect a preliminary hearing on Mrs. Jones dismissal in particular and the grievances of the militant poor groups in general. - You have the floor at this time. - Thank you. - Ok, fine. What I want to ask you is who made the motion to the board? I don't know who made the motion. [crowd noise] First of all, the meeting was not taking a motion it was just an opinion. 17 people voted for it. I don't have to be quite for you. - Don't tell me to be quiet because I'll never be quiet. You'll never shut me up. [crowd noise, gavel] - There was a poll taken. Unanimous. - You're not going to say it. But pending what? It's certainly certain. It's the supposed to be brought up at this meeting today. - Oh yessir, today.

[crowd applauding, argument] This discussion was going on. Mr. Gold stated that all that was being asked that to clarify among the board members that Mr. Maldonado had the authority to fire Mrs. Jones or anyone else that was guilty of insubordination or misconduct. We did not, and I don't want to call anyone a liar because I don't like to be called a liar. But as far as I remember, we did not vote unanimous on anything. We just said that Mr. Gold asked that there was only a consensus of the board that Mr. Maldonado had this right. And we have the right. So we all agree that we have this right to fire anyone. But as far as I know, this is all we took.

- Most of us were not at our executive committee meeting, and we don't know what happened. Apparently there is some difference of opinion as to what happened. And I don't want to go into it because I don't know. But on April 1st of this year, Mr. Maldonado made a statement to the Los Angeles Times in which he said that he did not recommend Mrs. Jones' dismissal. Nonetheless, on the day before, on March 31, Mr. Maldonado dictated a letter to Mrs. Jones saying she was dismissed. And there obviously is some serious misunderstanding of something. [crowd cheers] - You will say all along you will do that. Let's have a hearing now. We're prepared to go ahead. The matter is of public interest. It's of concern of Mrs. Jones. If you don't want us to be concerned with you, let's have the hearing and get it over with one way or the other. Let's have it in the open for a change. - I don't think it's up to me to make this decision. I think it's up to the board as a whole to make this decision.

[crowd jeering] We're trying to be fair here, we will. [crowd chanting] - The first speaker was Mrs. Mary Henry, who's a member of the National Advisory Council of Community Representatives, set up by Shriver. - I represent Mr. Maldonado, Mrs. Cook, Mr. [inaudible], anybody here, as much as I represent any NAPP aides. And I am disenchanted to say the least. The people whom I took upon myself to feel very good about representing have found it necessary to deal very dishonestly with the people in Los Angeles. I have been working in community action for a long time, before the poverty program came to Los Angeles. I have been a group worker, a community worker for many years.

And if I am an expert in any field, it is in the field of planning conferences and meetings and workshops for quote, "grassroots level people." If the manner in which you carry out your board meeting, if the wording for the actions that you take in your board meeting, is beyond the comprehension of the people who were elected by the people to sit here, then an investigation needs to take place immediately. - I am Doris Joyce Fuller. I am with BPA mothers and the Imperial... Improvement Committee and my God, how many others that you said we had to phone. We have followed your orders down the line. We have poor groups on top of groups on top of groups. Then your student professionals in the area with your criteria from downtown say we will tell you what to do. We take months of patient work, working with these people, trying to train them what is our problems in the community. Once they find out our problems, nothing is known one bit on the fire. I have seen a many professional that has worked with us fired.

When we once began to form and work things out to our complete satisfaction, work things out to our care and our concern. When I first met you people, I met you people because of one simple reason: I was looking for a job. I wanted independence. I didn't ask that much for that job, but everybody yelled while I didn't. I didn't work for that. That's really not going to improve enough. So great. I'm just a citizen without a job that have put my little pennies, nickels and dimes into this thing, have paid babysitters, have gone hungry, walking, trying to make appointments and meetings and things on time that you ride around in your fine cars. Now, I watched over here. Now, I made this statement. This would happen. I seen amendments passed this afternoon. These people then vote, they're still reading to see what the amendments were. These people holding their hands up. I haven't even heard them from out here. Do they know what they are? This is what you call you put the power structure. It is so neatly done. They're not even mixed out there.

One is put on one side. The other one is put on the other. And I'm hoping to God and pray that I have formed, I have been with one group as another. I don't stand it as a leader. I was BPA mothers one time. I belong to 32 different anti-poverty groups. Now, if I don't tell that following EYO's criteria for steady organizations, I don't know what criteria is. - Mr. Maldonado. We're poor because we have been denied the opportunity. And these are the people who denied us this opportunity. Now, if the EYOA is going to do a job, it will have to do something pretty fast. It will have to allow community action programs. It will have to allow for NAPP to exist because all we're getting are the same kinds of things that you have been handling for many years. BPA's budget is far larger than EYOA's and what are they doing? What is the Board of Education doing? Is it educating our children? We wouldn't need a war on poverty. If you who are denied, who voted against her, actually did your jobs. Thank you.

For the long time, the things that are in my heart to say to people like you have been waiting, not really warning to but knowing one day I would have to say it. And with us right now, we've been left out put out. And now, when we struggle back to be and to try to be, we have to continue to fight our way again with Mrs. Opal Jones right now. A woman. A real woman, the kind of woman that we would all like to be proud to know, at a time of truth when she's proud to be herself and do what is right, just and good for people. She's stopped. Now, I don't think that this is just because of say insubordination. I want to know what did she do? What does she do to make her be dismissed in the first place?

Was it because she was going to really bring people up and was it because the power structure itself is afraid to give these poor people power? Is it true really that this board is controlled by another board, like the mayor's board, and that is Mayor Yorty using all of y'all as little whipping boys. And the only reason why the truth doesn't come out here now is because you got so used to living off of them little fat checks that you sold your own human dignity down the drain. [cheering] And what is going wrong is you scared to tell the truth. You scared to tell the truth. I don't know why you might be scared of living in a neighborhood like that. And so you lie to keep on staying where you live. You go home and you lock your door. You lock them up tight. And you know, sit in the other house with sit in the other man.

And what you're doing, what you keep on doing is that you want to make my people be the same way. And if you're going to sit there, if you're going to say you are for the poor, then be. You got a choice. If you're not going to be, get out. [cheering, applause] Los Angeles poverty board is still there and that young man is probably still angry, but the immediate occasion for his protest is gone. Mrs. Opal Jones is back in office as NAPP director. And by order of Washington, her project has been removed from the day-to-day operational control of the Los Angeles board. It's been given a considerable measure of autonomy. This is what the militants are demanding across the country. Their programs be funded more or less directly and independently of the city power structures.

But often the battle itself does damage. In Los Angeles, each side continues to suspect the other of plots and intrigues. The result has been virtual paralysis throughout much of the poverty program. Thus the ferment sometimes becomes a force in itself independent of its origins. It extends across the country. It transcends the poverty program and the civil rights movement. The new militants have won some local battles. When they've kept their sights realistic, when they've sincerely tried to solve problems and not exacerbate them, they've often succeeded. They've established community centers, pressured school boards into repairing buildings, secured reductions in water rates, forced merchants to address injustices and pricing and hiring. Thus constructively channeled, the ferment can grow and in time perhaps make a significant dent in the problem of poverty. When the militants are less honorably motivated, when they preach revolution instead of evolution, they're less likely to succeed and more likely to do damage.

Whenever they persuade a poor person that he need not seek an education or a job, but merely organize and inherit the earth, they mislead that person. Whenever they inculcate unproductive impatience, whenever they persuade a poor person that half a loaf is worse than no loaf, they damage the cause they purport to serve, be it civil rights, the war on poverty or what have you. But one thing is certain, for better or for worse, the ferment is there. Good evening. [gospel music, bumper music] This is NET, the National Educational Television Network.

The National Educational Television Network.