Evening star., 1942-08-23
Arlington Will File
Reply 10 Falls Church
|5uit for Fairfax Area
| Petition Summarizing
| Objections Seen Move
For Own Protection

the town Of Falls Church will be
filed in court this week by Airing
ton County, which has been given
permission to intervene in the pend
ing suit.
A petition summarizing the coun-
tvs objections has been prepared by
Commemorative Attorney Lawrence
w. Douglas of Arlington and signed
by Chairman Edmund D. Campbell
of the County Board. Other men,
bers of the board gave thSir ap-
proyal at meeting yesterday.
,Faf ffaxffspty gsasos rp9q1tIng
.s Some observers saw in Arlington's
action an effort to safeguard It's own
i1steres+s In the event that cnauty
4 etporated ~ q f11glG4H,
1le s1& eey 1egl 31d6 L.
M GeEefA1 sem-
'bfy by Senator william d. Medley
and Delegate Charles R. Fenwick,
both Of that county. No Virginia
county can annex territory.
Should the voters of Arlington
some day decide in a referendum to
become city, fewer difficulties
would be expected If Arlington tried
to annex Falls Church than if it
became first-class municipality by
means Of the annexation.
Groupds Cited.
The reasons cited yesterday, how
ever, included the following:
Sewage disposal-Arlington has a
contract with the town of Falls
Church for disposal of sewage
through the county's treatment
plant from within the existing bor-
ders of Falls Church and not from
any territory row outside of that
town. The county's plant, already
at capacity. is not able to handle
the sewage from larger area. Also
the area in Fairfax County, which
the town seeks to annex, will be
served by new sewage trunk line
which Fairfax County is now build
ing along Trips Run and Holmes
Run.
Water supply-Arlington obtains
its water through the Federal Gov
ernment from the Districts water
supply, and from reservoirs now be-
ing erected with Federal funds
whereas Falls Church obtains its
supply from ground wells. In 1886
an agreement between the county
and Falls Church was entered into
whereby an emergency connection
was made so that either jurisdiction
could draw on the supply of the
other in the event Of failure. Since
then the demands of Falls Church
have increased and purchases have
been made from the county at COM
mercial rates. The increase rose
from 100000 gallons in January
1941, to 5,500,000 gallons in July
1912.
Protection Cost Shared.
Fire protection-The town is now
without fire protection except one
company partly on volunteer basis
the building for which is located or
the boundary line with Arlington
County and for which Arlington
pays the rent. The four paid mem.
bers of the fire department are paic
three e-fourths by the county and one.
fourth by the town. The fire station
is in a section of the town remote
from that proposed to be annexed
General objections-The annexa.
ton case is not "a normal situation
usually found in annexation pro.
ceedings in Virginia" Prior to 1893:
a part Of Falls Church lay in Airing.
ton County and part in Fairfa,
County. In 1882 residents of tn.
Arlington County side of the towr
had petitioned the Circuit Court tt
preclude that area from the town
The Circuit Court entered such al
order in June, 1884 and the Supreme
Court Of Appeals affirmed the deci
sion in the following year. Since th'
county was not empowered to annex
territory. this legal action on the
part of some town residents repres
ented, in effect, their efforts TO avail
themselves of superior facilities
which Arlington offered.
Area Develops as Unit
It also Is contended that the Arl'
ington- Alexandria, Fairfax area !!
developing as a cohesive, unified
municipal unit, having common
problems and enjoying common
benefits and facilities. Annexation
Of portion Of this territory by Fall
Church would retard this type o.
development. 1t Is argued.
It Il charged that the town u max