MR. SPEAKER, MR. PRESIDENT, AND MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE:
In accordance with the Constitution, I desire to report to you on the condition of our State, and to recommend to you certain matters which , in my opinion, call for consideration by this Fifty-seventh Session of the California Legislature. It is a pleasure to welcome you to Sacramento—in this historic Capitol Building where throughout most of our history the laws of this State have been enacted.
This is an important session of the Legislature from many viewpoints. It is the first regular postwar session. It is the first of the annual sessions recently authorized by the people. It is the first session for the Administration that will be serving as California completes 100 years of statehood. This State Government, for which you and I are temporarily the trustees, is the one that will be expected to pave the way for a second century of progress. It will be dealing with the problems of a State that has grown and changed more rapidly than any other in the Union.
The responsibility for solving these problems in the interests of a State of over nine million people is our joint responsibility. We can make a partnership of our task if we will—and it should not be difficult for us to do so. In such a partnership, we should be able to find areas of agreement that will make your deliberations fruitful for the entire State.
Such an approach requires a determination to draw a sharp dividing line between public and special interests. It means we must recognize that a thorough consideration of human problems transcends partisanship. It obligates us to cooperate for the common good without regard to party, faction, or personality. In such an atmosphere we should be able to agree speedily upon objectives, and to devote our energies to an honest search for methods of accomplishment. That kind of partnership will pay dividends as long as we keep in focus our vision of a greater and finer California where millions of people can live ordered and happy lives.
I am encouraged by what has taken place in this building during the past four years to propose that we enter upon this session in such a spirit. Those were war years. When I took office in 1943, I told the Legislature that our greatest need was for an era of good will in our State Government. We have had it to a marked degree. There has been little blind partisanship or personal controversy to hinder our attention to the job to be done. I hope that my own approach to our problems has been conducive to that result.
I want to foster the same spirit of cooperation and mutual respect during the next four years, both because it is more pleasant to live in such an atmosphere and because it will contrite to the progress and welfare of our State.
I know that the opportunity to serve at this period of our State’s development must thrill you, as it does me. It is a wonderful privilege to be the heirs to California’s traditions and the beneficiaries of the progress that has been made in the 100 years since the Bear Flag and the Stars and Stripes were first unfurled on our soil in 1846.
The second century, if started well by us, will be filled with even greater opportunities for the generations that will follow ours. While, therefore, we are celebrating in these next few years the fulfillment of that which was sturdily pioneered by early Californians, it should be our inspiration to recall that we ourselves are pioneering the California of the future.
The frontier has changed but there can be no retreat or rest form the fight to protect our people against corrosive and destructive forces of both man and nature—against crime; against jeopardy of life and limb on the highways, in industry and in the fields; against preventable illness and disease; against the plight of homelessness; against ignorance that results form inadequate facilities for the training of young people; against floods; against the wastage of a precious heritage of natural resources.
State Must Be Self-Reliant
These problems should not be left for solution at the hands of an already overburdened National Government. They are essentially home problems. State Government must draw fully upon all its own resources in their solution. Only in this way can we avoid federal bureaucracy, which in the abstract we deplore, but which in everyday life we too often encourage. Only in this way can the tremendous values of a government that is close to the people be preserved.
I realize there are limitations upon state and local government in the solution of the problems of our people. Certainly they cannot be solved at one legislative session. Our people do not expect any such miracle. They do expect, however—and they are entitled to have—sound and steady progress.
We must adapt our framework of law and service to the welfare of 2,000,000 new residents that have been added to the seven millions who were her prior to 1940. We must also take into consideration the needs of the 10,000,000 more who, I firmly believe, will come here during the next few decades. Our task will not be easy, but it can be thrilling.
We have the satisfaction of knowing that even during war years we were able to make some progress. We improved our humanitarian services, with respect to which delay would have been intolerable. We were able to reorganize the major departments of the State Government for better service under modern conditions. We inaugurated programs for the better conservation of our natural resources. We expanded our system of unemployment insurance for the protection of our working people and the stabilization of our economy. We encouraged business, industry, and agriculture to reestablish themselves on a peacetime basis. We reduced taxes.
All these things constitute a record of some progress made even during the war. Whether they are to be of the greatest value to our people, however, will depend on how we now build upon them. This a time for introspection and resolution—not for self-satisfaction.
Can Plan Hopefully for the Future
We can plan hopefully for the future. Our State has been able to change over rapidly from an economy geared to war production. At the present time, California is in a period of high employment. Six months after V-J Day it was necessary to pay unemployment insurance compensation to 227,000 persons, but this number has declined to 112,000 and the duration of payments is only 8.4 weeks on the average. We have 3,610,000 people gainfully employed in our State, compared with only 2,514,000 in April of 1940, a relatively prosperous peacetime year.
The manner in which our commercial life has adjusted itself to postwar conditions is a tribute to the resourcefulness of business and industry in our State and to the energy of their leaders.
As a result of this economic activity, our State Treasury will end the fiscal year with a substantial surplus. The budget to be presented to you for the year ending June 30, 1948, will be a balanced budget, although it will of course reflect the greater needs of our expanding population for state services as well as higher costs. Meanwhile, our estimates show that it will be possible during the coming year to continue the tax reductions made in 1943 and reenacted in 1945. I believe it is in order to continue these reductions.
State Should Provide for “Rainy Day”
In my opinion, any surplus beyond current requirements should be conserved for two vital needs. One of these is to maintain adequate hospitals, educational and other institutional facilities. The other is to provide for the rainy day which sooner or later comes into the lives both of people and governments.
If business should drop off only 20 percent in California, it would adversely affect our revenues by as much as $100,000,000 a year. When I previously proposed to the Legislature that we should set something aside for unforeseen needs, some people said I was taking a defeatist attitude—that I should be thinking in terms of prosperity and not depression—but I am still of the opinion that it is no more defeatist for a State to provide for a possible rainy day than it is for an individual to do so. I am as optimistic as anyone about the economic future of our State, but I think it is elementary prudence to establish a rainy day fund.
During this session we shall have the further advantage of working under a new system whereby the Legislature can now budget for state services on a yearly basis. In order to derive the full benefits from this system, I believe that a thorough study of the tax situation in California, such as I have previous suggested to you, should now be undertaken. Inquiries have already been conducted by your interim committees which will provide a basis for an over-all and adequately financed investigation. Such an investigation should include an examination of the respective responsibilities of local and State Government, and the manner in which they share the tax dollar of our people.
Until this is done—until we have these facts—it will be true that any tinkering with present procedures or allocations merely results in robbing Peter to pay Paul.
On the organizational side of State Government, the time has come to abolish all remaining wartime agencies, and to give consideration to revamping such permanent departments as may require reorganization.
The State War Council has already been liquidated. The State Guard is being disbanded as rapidly as the National Guard can be reactivated. In keeping with our promise made when these agencies were created, I now ask for similar action with respect to the Reconstruction and Reemployment Commission and the Farm Production Council.
This decision is supported by the recent declaration of the President ending hostilities. A careful analysis of the effect this proclamation will have upon all our wartime legislation will shortly be available for your consideration.
The Farm Production Council performed an extremely valuable wartime service to agriculture and the public. Its activities with respect to recruiting and housing farm labor were of inestimable value in producing the crops so essential for war purposes. Any of its duties that are sill necessary can now be taken over by our permanent state agencies, and the council can be discharged with thanks.
The Reconstruction and Reemployment Commission, created during the war, has served its purpose and in my opinion served it well. It was able to mobilize leadership from every walk of life to prepare for the return of peacetime conditions. It has worked steadily and effectively with our cities and counties and citizen groups representing every phase of California life in developing their postwar plans.
The commission has made exhaustive studies of great value to our people on such subjects as retail trade outlets, new industries, self-employment opportunities, steel and steel uses, aviation, harbors, mineral resources, and our educational system. Many if its recommendations to the Legislature have been enacted into law.
When the Reconstruction and Reemployment Commission was created, you gave to it the responsibility for administering the Planning Act of 1935, and the State Planning Commission was abolished. Unless other provisions are now made for state planning, that important function of government will automatically lapse. To say the least, this would be illogical in an expanding state such as ours.
Inasmuch as it was the Governor who formerly appointed the planning commission, and inasmuch as he is charged both with proposing and administering programs for the development of our State, I suggest that the responsibility for planning be transferred to his office and that a new Planning Act be enacted to accomplish this.
The Governor’s Office should also have the responsibility of assembling the statistical information obtained by our various State Departments and integrating it with the research that is essential in evaluating economic trends. Our cities and counties, and the public at large, are entitled to have this information made available to them as a composite economic picture of our State.
The need for constant planning is illustrated by the work we have had to do in preparing a Master Airport Plan for the State. Lacking other means, we called upon the Reconstruction and Reemployment Commission, but a State Aviation Commission should now be created.
Within our borders are the plants at which were constructed 50 percent of all the airplanes used by our Nation’s armed forces during the war, and we should be the peacetime capital of the aviation world. Surprisingly, however, we are one of only five states that have failed to establish an aviation authority. Until we do so, the State can neither help our cities and counties in planning for the air age, nor in turn receive help from the Federal Government.
Of all the problems in our State, housing remains the most critical. Jurisdiction over building materials, priorities, and surplus housing has been in the hands of the Federal Government, but its programs so far have been marked by confusion and frustration.
Last year, you appropriated $12,000,000 for participation in several federal-state-local programs of utilizing surplus housing in California. Recently, the Federal Government summarily abandoned its emergency housing program for veterans—leaving between seven and eight thousand units in various stages of construction
This clearly demonstrates that we cannot place ourselves wholly at the mercy of the federal bureaus in this matter, an I wish to present to you a proposal that has been studied by our Department of Finance, Department of Veterans’ Affairs and the Reconstruction and Reemployment Commission. These state agencies have ascertained that large quantities of dwelling units and housing materials not heretofore declared surplus are now becoming available. The material is usable not only for temporary housing purposes, but also in the construction of good permanent housing.
It is the obligation of State Government to assist in every way to make this material easily and promptly available to veterans who desire to purchase it. In order to accomplish this, I suggest that you make available a revolving fund to be used by the Department of Finance for the purchase of this material and its resale to veterans.
An unprecedented volume of home construction could be under way the present time if materials were available. The stumbling block is not a lack of money. Our financial institutions and the real estate and building industries of our State are fully prepared to go ahead with their part of the job. We have kept closely in touch with the building materials situation, and will continue to press the Federal Government for action
In the meantime, we should be giving consideration to implementing the Urban Redevelopment Act which was passed by the Legislature in 1945, because the time will soon come when building conditions will make it possible to eliminate the blighted areas of our cities.
We should also reappraise our building codes and regulatory services to assure that they are not cumbersome and that they conform to present-day conditions.
The people, acting upon proposals of the Legislature, have approved bond issues aggregating $130,000,000 for home and farm purchases. Although this program also lags because of construction delays and inflated prices, our Department of Veterans Affairs has been able to make 5,269 loans for a total of $28,383,214. We are ready and able to do our part in placing California Veterans in the kind of homes for which they longed while overseas and which they now desperately need.
Our educational program for war veterans is moving forward more rapidly than was anticipated, and I recommend an emergency appropriation to finance it from this date to the end of the fiscal year.
I also recommend a continuation of all our services that help us in our desire to assist our veterans in every possible way.
Comparable only to the distress resulting from the housing shortage is the tragic situation in which we find ourselves as the result of an outgrown highway system. Our streets and roads have become places of frightful danger, and our economic development is being retarded.
To enable the Legislature to give its undivided attention this problem, and to hasten the effective date of the statutes enacted relating to it, I am calling you into special session next Monday. At that time I shall submit my views more fully for your consideration.
We must also work for the greater safety of life and limb in industry. Tremendous increase in the use of machinery makes it imperative that we keep industrial safety abreast of industrial methods.
We have put into effect badly needed safety regulations and have written new safety orders for various occupations. We will continue to try to protect life and limb in preference to compensating for the loss of them. Unfortunately, accidents cannot be eliminated entirely. We can, however, in accordance with our obligation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, make adequate provision for the victims of accidents.
Consequently, I recommend that the act be studied with a view to restoring California to its former enlightened place among the states in this program which so vitally affects our working people.
Our families must also be protected as far as possible against preventable illness and disease. The first line of defense on the public health front is in the local community. Every county should be in a position to provide communicable disease control, maternal and child health services, environmental sanitation and food inspection, public health laboratory facilities, adequate health records and community health education. These are the minimum essentials.
At the present time, 26 counties in California do not have a full-time health officer. Over half of the counties having full-time health offers are unable to provide even the basic health services. In nearly every county, there is need for improvement.
In order to step up our health services throughout the State, the State Government should offer not only consultation, but financial assistance to those counties that have full-time health officers and comply with reasonable standards. These funds should be allocated so that the counties least able to finance health programs will be given a special opportunity to bring themselves at least up to minimum levels. The joint operation of health departments by two or more small counties should be encouraged where this will be more economical and still result in better service to the people. I recommend than an adequate appropriation be made for this purpose.
It has also become necessary for the State to lend a stronger helping hand to the counties in their fight against tuberculosis. In 1945, tuberculosis was responsible for 3,840 deaths—40 percent of all deaths due to communicable disease in California. This disease can be eliminated as a major cause of death if all cases are found early and treated properly.
However, the cost of hospitalization has increased to such an extent that additional State aid to the counties is necessary. This assistance should be proportionately greater to the smaller counties, and especially designed to assist those that have no facilities or inadequate facilities for the care of tubercular patients. If this is done, uniform care may be made available and another step taken toward the ultimate eradication of this disease.
Our fight on the public health front is not limited to physical illness. California is now caring for 30,000 extreme cases of mental illness in its state hospitals, and thousands of others are in need of medical care. Through the acquisition of Hammond and DeWitt General Hospitals from the United State Army, we will be able to relieve the congestion of our mental hospitals to some extent, and through other provisions in the budget we prose to improve their services to our afflicted citizens. A great deal of this waste of human usefulness could be avoided, however, by early and intelligent preventive action.
We are operating out-patient clinics at San Francisco and Los Angeles, where people undergoing mental strain may obtain treatment in time to prevent a complete breakdown. I am convinced that these clinics can save thousands of people from a lifetime of suffering, and that they can actually save dollars for the State by decreasing the number of people that must be hospitalized at state expense. Therefore, I request you to give serious consideration to the establishment of additional clinics at San Diego, Fresno, and Sacramento, and a second clinic at Los Angeles. The staff of these clinics will also be able to furnish mental hygiene service to the smaller communities on a mobile basis.
Higher standards of public health in California require more and better hospitals and laboratory facilities. Many of our people must travel long distances and beyond their county borders in order to reach an adequate hospital. This travel time can easily represent the difference between life and death . In an enlightened State like California, a hospital within an hour of every resident should be the ultimate goal. To achieve it, the assistance of the State is necessary.
In the opinion of public health authorities, there should be 4.5 hospital beds for every 1,000 people, which means in California that we should have not less than 41,000 beds. We actually have 34,000, of which 10,000 are in substandard hospitals. Consequently, California should have 17,000 new hospital beds to take care of the present day normal requirements of its people, and even this does not take into consideration the fact that our population is increasing at a rate of 27,000 people each month.
We have been fortunate in recent years that no epidemic has descended upon us such as the influenza that swept our country following World War I. If this should occur, particularly in view of our swollen population, California would be confronted with a disastrous situation.
Recognizing the need for adequate hospital facilities, the Federal Government has initiated a national program for the construction of hospitals. Each dollar of federal money must be matched to the extent of $2 by the local communities. The government has allocated approximately $2,000,000 per year to California for the next five years. I recommend that the State participate in this program by assuming one-half of the required local contribution.
We have the machinery through which to work in carrying out such a program. I refer to the Hospital Distract Act, enacted by you in 1945, under which 15 community hospital districts have been formed, with many others in some stage of development at the present time. These 15 districts are distributed from Del Norte to Riverside, and from San Luis Obispo to Inyo Counties.
I believe this federal program will be expanded and that eventually every California community, with state and federal assistance, can have a hospital if it really wants one. When these funds have been exhausted, I believe our State should be willing to appropriate more money on the same basis until our objective of a good hospital within an hour of every resident is achieved.
It is not sufficient, however, to have medical services, hospitals, clinics and laboratories—no matter how expert or modern and no matter how conveniently located—unless the people have economic access to them, not as charity but as something for which they have willingly and individually paid.
The very fact that great strides have been made in medicine means that medical and hospital care are becoming increasingly expensive. The cost of hospitalization in California, according to a recent publication, is the highest in the nation—$12.84 per day on the average. This is only part of the cost of a serous illness, but it is clearly beyond the ability of working people to pay.
When serious illness or injury strikes the home of the average Californian, the impact on the family finances results either in exhaustion of savings, heavy debt for the future, or a resort o public charity.
Through normal channels of business, we have applied the familiar principle of insurance to protect our home and our property, but no adequate means exists for insuring the most precious thing in life—the health of our family. This principle must be applied to the health of our people, and because there is no reasonable prospect of such insurance becoming available in any other way, the State should provide a system for making it available by encompassing all the working people of California.
If everyone could now obtain adequate insurance at rates within his means to protect himself and his family against the heavy expense of illness or nonindustrial accident, just as he insures his home against fire or his automobile against theft, I would not make this proposal. Attempts, however, to apply the insurance principle to health have failed, and will fail, because plans to accomplish this do no operate within a sufficiently large field to really average the risk and spread the cost. Without some action on the part of Sate Government to broaden these plans by enlarging the field of contribution, no progress can be made commensurate with the urgency and scope of the problem.
I am not unmindful of the discussion this will again provoke, because the memory of the controversy engendered by my similar proposals two years ago is still fresh in my mind. But certain other things also remain in my mind—first, that there was not refutation of the need for spreading the cost of medical and hospital care through some prepayment plan, and, secondly, that there was no alternative program offered to accomplish the desired results. These facts alone justify resubmission of the question.
I have previously submitted two separate proposals, one for a comprehensive system of prepaid medical care, and the other for a more limited system of hospital and laboratory insurance. I have never claimed to the precise answer to this question. I have always been ready, however, to discuss methods for accomplishing the desired result, because I believe that if all who recognize the need for improving the public health by reducing the cost of medical care will honestly search for the answer, a way will be found. I am sure it can be done without injuring anyone, and at the same time that it will relive millions of our people from the spectre of bankruptcy and indigency which are the present-day results of the cost of illness.
Ranking in importance with the health and safety of our people is the education of our children. California should not be satisfied with any educational standards but the best. The best should be made available to every child whether he lives in the city or the country, and whether he lives in a rich or a poor school district. We still have 1,019 one-room schools and 440 two-room schools, most of them in poor districts and unable to furnish adequate standards of education.
By the equalization of school funds, the consolidation of districts, and state financial assistance in the construction of school buildings, these poorer districts can be placed on a firm foundation. I therefore renew my recommendation of last year the funds be made available to impoverished school districts for the purpose.
Among the 1,500,000 children of school age in our State, 32,000 stand in need of specialized attention in order to overcome mental backwardness. I have studied the report of our interim committee on this subject, and I favor its proposal that the State provide a substantial part of the cost of this special education.
To train these retarded children to be self supporting is not only an investment in citizenship. It will be an actual saving in dollars, because otherwise many of them eventually would be dependent upon the State for support.
Looking forward to the growth and development of California as a western empire with twice its present population, we must use our best foresight in making sure that the natural resources with which we have been so abundantly blessed are carefully conserved and intelligently used.
Until recent years we did little to conserve our timber supply beyond maintaining a fire suppression program. Fire, insects, blights, and bad cutting practices have denuded millions of acres, and our consumption of lumber exceeds replenishment by a half billion board feet yearly. If we take practical measures now, we can harvest timber from our 16,000,000 acres of forest lands much as we harvest agricultural crops, and thus maintain a permanent source of construction and packaging material. California uses almost a billion board feet of lumber each year to package its agricultural products alone.
We should make provision for acquiring additional portions of idle cut-over lands that once were our most productive forests, and for stepping up our blister rust control program in order to protect the valuable remaining stands of sugar pine trees in our State.
A service to the 18,000 small owners of timber lands in our State comparable to the work of our farm advisers should also be provided. Such a service, performed by forestry advisers, would assist these small owners, whose timber lands are adjacent to their farms, in substituting sustained-yield methods for wasteful practices.
It is also time that the State assumed its proper place of leadership in realizing maximum values from our opportunities for outdoor recreation. I renew my recommendation for creating in the Department of Natural Resources a Division of Recreation to coordinate the activities of the various state agencies which have an interest in this field and to serve our cities and counties in developing a more effective use of our mountain parks and our beaches. It is my belief that our state parks are of no grater value than the use that is made of them. That greater use by our people should be encouraged and made possible. This is becoming increasingly important as our cities continue to grow and their congestion increases.
In terms of the essentials of life, the agricultural lands of California constitute our greatest natural resource. For the fourth successive year, we have surpassed every other State in dollar volume of crops.
The day has arrived, however, when California must make more effective use of research and its results in meeting the increasing competition of other regions. Our farmers are faced with higher costs than most in getting their crops to the consumer, because of our distance from the great markets of the eastern states.
This factor can be offset, not only by keeping abreast of every new production method, but also by constantly improving handling, processing and marketing techniques to bring about delivery to the ultimate consumer of the full nutritional and taste values of our agricultural products.
The report of the Agricultural Research Commission created by you a year ago confirms the need for an accelerated program, and I recommend an appropriation of $1,500,000 for this purpose during the coming year. As in the past, this research should be made by our university, and in order to assist the university, the Agricultural Research Commission should be made permanent and given the responsibility of keeping the university constantly informed of the practical, every-day research needs of California farmers.
The future of agriculture, and to a great extent the future of all California, depend upon the manner in which we conserve, distribute and use our supply of water. The ingenuity of our farmers and water conservationists has developed the vast amount of water now in use throughout the state. Most future water conservation projects, however, will be beyond the jurisdiction and resources of local regions. They are large public projects that call for federal, state and local cooperation.
Although a great deal of work has been done by our State Division of Water Resources and other public agencies, it is time that we bring our State Water Plan up to date, and determine what kind of management would best serve the orderly growth and development of our State.
This matter has not heretofore been dealt with comprehensively. Public opinion has been divided, and in many instances conclusions have been based on emotion rather than on fact. To continue in this way would inevitably retard the development of California, because the federal appropriations that we obtain will depend largely upon a united front being presented by us in the Congress.
We must begin now to clarify our thinking on this subject and organize our efforts. For this purpose I recommend that the Water Resources Act of 1945 be amended to empower the State Water Resources Board, within its appropriations, to initiate water surveys upon its own motion, and to report to the Legislature and the Governor upon the comprehensive and orderly development of our water resources.
Every war has its aftermath of hatred, discrimination and persecution. World War II is no exception. Even now, as people of good will strive to prepare a world order based upon justice and fair dealing, we find race hatred disturbing world peace. Here in free America, fanatics are already at work to divide us by preaching that doctrine. I am sure cosmopolitan California does not condone such practices, and I also feel certain that in rejecting Proposition No. 11, at the recent election, our people intended only to withhold their approval from a measure thy considered unworkable. I believe they would like to eliminate discrimination so far as is humanly possible.
Two years ago, I recommended the establishment of a Commission on Political and Economic Equality. A bill for this purpose failed of passage because there were on the one hand, those who were unwilling to take any action, and on the other hand, those who insisted on doing more. The commission which I then proposed, and which I again recommend, would not be an administrative agency. It would make no regulations and enforce no laws. It would investigate, study, and report conditions as they find them to the Legislature and the Governor for action. This would be extremely helpful because at the present time, I have no means and I am sure you have none, of obtaining objective information on this subject.
In its transition form wartime production to a peacetime economy, our Nation is passing through an inevitable period of inflation and similar economic difficulty, and this has tended to aggravate differences between management and labor an multiply the number of work stoppages.
Under the National Labor Relations Act and the decisions of the Supreme Court, the Federal Government has jurisdiction over most labor disputes, and it is my belief that the major effort of the State should be to promote free collective bargaining and the avoidance of a war of legislation between management and labor. Such a state policy paid dividends during the war, and I am of the opinion it will do so now.
We can contribute additionally to industrial peace in our State by making our services more readily available as mediator and conciliator in local labor disputes. Unfortunately, we are not able to do so under our present statutes.
Section 65 of our Labor Code provides that the State can mediate only when all parties to a dispute so request. I know that many people have wondered why the State does not use its good offices in this regard, and I recommend that Section 65 be amended to permit us to do so upon the request of any party to the dispute.
I trust that this Legislature will create a commission to coordinate on a state-wide basis the celebration that will be held in California during our next four centennial years. This will make our rich past live again, and it will accentuate the greatness of our hopes for the future.
In a real sense, however, this session can do more than merely arrange the ceremonies with which we shall honor these anniversaries. In a spirit of humility and trust in Divine Providence it can prepare the solid groundwork of a more lasting monument, one that will be as great and as broad as California itself—an exemplification of what a people can do to create for themselves the social, economic and spiritual conditions that make for better living. I ask nothing more than to work with you in such a spirit and toward such a goal.