Evening star., 1939-02-19
Reorganization Obiectives

A' NoSo AAoe WduG tuc question
OF local suffrage confused with local
government reorganization in a way
that would jeopardize the possible
economies and increased efficiency
he believes will result from such
reorganization.
1t would be helpful, however, if
the objective of municipal govern
ment reorganization should be
clearly understood by everybody. Is
the sole objective the creation of a
model Federal bureau, charged with
ehcient municipal government ad-
mlnistration, entirely regardless of
Its erect upon the aspirations of the
people OF the District to greater par
tlclpatlon in their national and local
governments, even if that effect be
destructive? Or is it the creation of
new form of municipal government,
seeking to develop, along with a more
efficient administrative machine,
greater degree of participation by the
local taxpayers in their national and
local governments?
II it is the first, the people of the
District naturally want to be sure
that they are not surrendering the
small amount of indirect participa-
ton they now enjoy Through rigid
residential requirements of civilian
commissioners and through service
on citizens boards) in order to gain
an efficiently organized bureau in
charge Of District affairs.
IT it is the second, then the people
OF the District hope that the new
organic act, which is fundamental
in the proposed setup, will clearly
state the degree of participation
that they are to enjoy and make it
as effective as the exclusive legisla-
ton" clause of the Constitution will
permit.
Or if only impotent participation
In their municipal as we'll as their
national government is possible with
out amendment of the Constitution,
then that the need of such amend
ment be noted in the new organic act.
And If it appears that no WORTH
while participation in the municipal
government is possible without a
modification by the Supreme Court of
the decisions in such cases as Van
RySWick vs. Roach, then that the
need OF such new test case be noted
IN the new organic act
In other words, the people of the
District need and desire preparation
OF legislation based on the Griffen-
hagen report that will retain, instead
OF eliminating, citizens uncompen-
sated boards, like the Board of Educa-
ton and the Board of Trustees of the
Public Library, unless this legislation
assures distinctly to Washingtonians
greater and more effective partici-
patton in their municipal government
than Is. given by this fragment of
local representation in our un-Amer-
lcan governmental system, now pos
sessed. And the same need and de-
sire apply to the retention of the
provision that only bona fde Wash
ingtonians shall be appointed as
civilian Commissioners. or as the Of
hclals in reorganization to whom the
present executive, legislation propos-
ing and regulation making powers of
the Commissioners are given. It
should be noted that the pro-
posal was made and vigorously
pushed in 1915 to deprive the Board
OF Education and the Library trustees
OF all administrative power and that
the proposal was, after public hear
ing, unanimously rejected by the
House District Committee at a time
when Representative Ben johnson
was chairman Of the committee.
In deciding whether the participa-
ton in their municipal government
by the people Of the District given in
reorganization is more practically ef-
fective than the fragment of partici-
patton now possessed, the proposal
on this point in our new organic
act must be minutely analyzed to
ascertain whether a Constitutional
amendment will not be necessary to
give 1t validity, or whether, to avoid
its voiding, the courts decision in
Van Ryswick VS.. Roach (MacA and
M, II DC. I'D must not be reversed
or radically modified by the Supreme
Court.
The Griffenhagen recommends
tions, as 1t has been said before, can
be utilized by Congress In such a way
that existing citizen participation in
the municipal government is lost:
or they can be utilized as the instru-
ment for increasing such participa-
ton and to improve efficiency and
effect economies. The decision is
left, very properly, to Congress. It is
not criticizing the Grif1enhagen re-
port to express the hope that Con-
1