October 1 -- NADO board member Donald Rychnowski of the Southern Tier West Regional Planning and Development Board (NY) was among several panelists who testified September 29 before the House Subcommittee on the Census on the challenges local governments faced in participating in the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) program for Census 2000.

As reported earlier by the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, only 725 of the 1,540 local governments in Upstate New York reviewed and corrected the address lists and maps for their jurisdictions.

Nationally, only 40 percent of the 16,675 eligible local governments returned material to the Census Bureau, suggesting about 7.74 million changes to the federal address list.

During the hearing, a representative of the General Accounting Office (GAO) cited a lack of financial and human resources as major barriers to local government participation in the LUCA process. GAO also revealed that 2,300 communities with populations over 10,000 failed to participate in LUCA, including seven jurisdictions with populations over one million.

Rychnowski focused on problems with the quality of the LUCA training programs for local officials, timing of the overall program and level of communications with regional councils and local government representatives.

Below is the Testimony of Donald R. Rychnowski, Executive Director
Southern Tier West Regional Planning & Development Board
to the Committee on Government Reform
Subcommittee on the Census

September 29, 1999
Washington, DC

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to testify today on our experiences with the LUCA process. My name is Donald Rychnowski and I am the executive director of the Southern Tier West Regional Planning & Development Board. I am also an officer for the New York State Association of Regional Councils (NYSARC) and a director for the National Association of Development Organizations (NADO). With me today is Brian Schrantz, a staff member of Southern Tier West and the individual responsible for our regional Census related efforts.

Background

Southern Tier West was founded in 1969 as a regional planning and development organization. Primarily rural in nature, Southern Tier West serves three counties in Western New York State. Southern Tier West serves Allegany, Cattaraugus, and Chautauqua Counties, over 130 local municipal governments, and three federal Native American Indian Reservations. Throughout the years, we have developed a very respectable rapport with the local governments and the Seneca Nation of Indians in our region. This has prompted us to assist communities and become involved in the Census process.

Southern Tier West is a member of both NYSARC and NADO. Both organizations are public interest groups established to promote regional and rural planning and development. NYSARC members cover the majority of Upstate New York, while NADO is a national organization.

Census Experiences

I am here today to testify about the experiences Southern Tier West has had in the Census process, specifically the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA). Issues that arose from the 1990 Census prompted Southern Tier West to take a very pro-active stance on Census 2000. This has included involvement with the LUCA program, Census Map reviews, and the Partnership Program.

During the LUCA process, Southern Tier West was made aware of many problems that arose with the program. Because of our rapport with local governments in our region, we offered our assistance in the process. We hosted training sessions and visited communities to provide our expertise and experience to them. This was all done in an effort to develop a 'perfect' address list for our region. We are confident that our efforts greatly improved the response rate by municipalities in our region. However, the Census Bureau often stymied the efforts, and the region fell way short of its goal of a perfect address list.

Southern Tier West provided training facilities to the Census Bureau on two separate occasions for a total of four classes, absorbing all costs associated with the facility including rent, refreshments, staff time, etc. Southern Tier West advertised these training sessions to the municipalities with some success. Again Southern Tier West absorbed the costs of the mailings. These classes were nearly a disaster for several reasons.

First, on both occasions the representative sent by the Bureau to teach the class had never taught a LUCA class before. When questioning them personally they complained that they had little training, and in both cases they were hired for a completely different job.

Second, even though the Bureau was given a count of attendees by us, the instructors always had too few materials to supply the class with. The materials were designed to be a reference to use throughout the process. Less than half of our participating municipalities ever received these materials despite promises by the Bureau to forward additional materials.

Finally, the training structure often left municipalities out in the cold. Without the training session, it was difficult at best to participate in the LUCA process. Many municipal officials in our region, and in rural America in general, are part time employees. Often these people hold other jobs, making it difficult to attend training sessions. After several municipalities complained that they were not given a fair chance to participate, the Bureau informed Southern Tier West that a training video was now available. This came too late however, as the review process was nearing completion.

This leads to the next shortcoming of the LUCA process. Simply put, timing. As stated before most officials are part time employees of the municipality. They are required to perform certain duties, and there is little time left to dedicate to other activities such as the Census. This extra time is only available certain times of the year. The LUCA waves coincided with the worst time of the year for local officials in our region. That time is of course tax collection season. During this time frame there is no extra time available. When municipalities informed Southern Tier West of the need for an extension, we contacted the Bureau. The Bureau stated that no extensions would be made. The municipality could submit their address lists late and they may or may not be accepted. This alone greatly reduced the LUCA participation in our region.

A community in our region approached the Bureau with what they said was a perfect address list. A combination of events including the institution of an E-911 system and a town wide revaluation prompted the creation of this list. The municipality said that the LUCA process would be a waste of time since they had the list. The Bureau refused their list and said that they would have to go through the same process. Other municipalities also said they had an accurate mailing list, but once it was discovered that it would do little good, they were less willing to participate in the process.

A final example of the shortcomings of LUCA involves the Town of Olean in our region. The Olean address list was split between the two phases of LUCA. This meant that Olean had to participate in LUCA, including the training sessions, twice. However there was an election year between the two phases which further complicated the scenario. The new administration came in and decided to participate in LUCA. They did a little investigating and found that the former administration had not participated. To this point the Town did not know that they had been split between the two phases. Brian received a call from an almost panicking Town Supervisor. The LUCA deadline was growing very near and they were having problems. A meeting was set and Brian traveled to Olean to find an address list with two addresses on it. The Bureau was immediately contacted and at that point it was discovered that the Town had been split into the two phases. The first phase contained several thousand addresses, while the second phase contained two, not two-thousand not even two hundred, just two. Remember, the first phase had not been completed. The Town officials asked to complete all addresses in the second phase, the bureau refused. The Town offered to work directly with a Bureau representative to improve the address list, the Bureau refused. The Town even offered to accompany an enumerator through the Town when they did their verification. The Bureau rudely informed them that the Town had their chance and it had passed.

These examples resulted in bad addresses that we could do nothing about. It was very frustrating and tarnished the reputability of the Bureau in many municipalities in our region. Past failures by the Bureau had also hurt their reputation. LUCA maps failing to depict changes that had been made by municipal officials for the 1990 Census and even the 1980 Census made them wonder if changes would be reflected for 2000.

The examples given here are specific to a rural region of New York State. In speaking with colleagues throughout the State and the Nation, I have found that every region has a similar story, some even worse than what was experienced in our region. These experiences have caused great alarm at local, state, and national levels. Many organizations, including Southern Tier West, NYSARC, and NADO have stepped up efforts to help ensure accurate counts.

Corrective Measures

As we reflect on the experiences of the LUCA process for the 2000 Census, it is imperative to plan for the 2010 Census in a way that deals with the issues we face today. The LUCA process was designed to be the single most important aspect of the 2000 Census. Never before has there been this much pressure placed on one aspect of the Census plan. The problem with placing this much importance on LUCA is that it relies on municipal participation. The accuracy of the Census comes down to a part-time municipal official that knows little about the Census process and has no time to learn about it.

When planning the 2010 Census, a rethinking of the 2000 Census must take place. The inflexibility of the Census Bureau needs to be rethought. The weight placed on local governments and providing no compensation for their efforts, needs to be rethought. The lack of input from regional councils, local governments, and rural America in general needs to be rethought.

The Census Bureau has been stern in its message that there will be no post-Census review process after the 2000 count is complete. All efforts should be made before the Census is taken, not after it is complete according to the Bureau. I am not here to argue about anything except what results in the most accurate counts. We have demonstrated that problems exist with the LUCA process. Failures in the Census Bureau and on the part of municipal governments have resulted in a less than desirable product.

From even before the LUCA process began, Southern Tier West was an advocate of regional council involvement in the Census. No other organizations have the national coverage, rapport with municipalities, and expertise that regional councils have. Not even the Census Bureau. They are too far removed from the day to day operations and concerns of municipalities.

NADO was an advocate for regional council involvement as well. They lobbied for funding to regional councils to assist the Bureau in programs like LUCA. These pleas were denied and many regional councils could not afford to dedicate time or money to the process. None could participate to the highest levels capable, and thus this resource was lost. Some states, including New York, recognized the issues that LUCA and the lack of a post-Census review created and provided state funds to regional councils to carry out various programs. These efforts are aimed at rectifying the problems caused by LUCA. They mainly focus on outreach programs in an effort to reach households that the LUCA process failed to find. These efforts will help, but they will not solve all the problems that may lead to an inaccurate count.

The most obvious way that the Bureau could have lessened the burden and increased the participation rate of LUCA would be to listen to the concerns of local government. This can be done through regional councils or by developing a good rapport themselves. The inflexibility of the Bureau on many issues has greatly decreased the potential for an accurate count.

We, including local municipal officials, are aware of the importance of an accurate Census. The lack of assistance to anyone for pre-Census activities like LUCA, and the elimination of the post-Census review process causes great concern for many. I feel it is necessary for you to be aware of the issues that were faced in a small region of rural America. I am sure you can see how these problems may adversely affect our region and result in political, economic, and social hardships if we are undercounted. And, frankly, we are not alone.

On behalf of the Southern Tier West region in rural New York State, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to express our thoughts on the LUCA process. Brian and I will be happy to answer any questions you have at this time.