Evening star., 1944-10-20
Letters to The Star
MIR. Griffenhagen Defends Plan
For District Government

For District Government
To the Editor Of The Star:
May I supplement the statements in
a letter written to you by Wilbur s.
Finch some days ago in which he refers
to statement by 10 v. Morgan to the
effect that, after study of the plan
(meaning the plan advanced by Grit
fenhagen g. Associates for the modern
ization Of the District of Columbia
municipal government) and its opera
tionS in the few localities where 1t
had been adopted that it was not
only impracticable and cumbersome,
but resulted in substantial increase In
the cost of government?
OF course, this statement is absurd
on the face of 1t. No plan proposed
by the firm of which I am a member
for the government of the District of
Columbia ever was proposed by us or
any one else for any other community.
1t was a plan worked out after care
full study OF every element, aspect
lumbia government by staff of special
lists in municipal problems, and it
was designed to flt the unique require
ments of the local situation. Mr.. Nor
gan and his colleagues might better
have considered the proposals that
were put forward in our report, and the
provisions of the legislation that was
drafted to incorporate those proposals
on their merits as appealing to logic
and common sense and as conforming
to the principles of good organization.
This would have made 1t unnecessary
to write to various parts of the country
to find some one who could question the
effectiveness of other proposals made
under different conditions by the same
authors.
We have no one system or one pet
scheme or plan for either government
or business organization. Where we
have been called in for advice on prob
lens OF municipal organization in the
course Of 33 years of our active mu-
nlclpal practice We have tried to fit
our suggestions to local requirements
and conditions. There must have been
some merit in these suggestions or our
reputation could not have endured so
long a strain.
Proposed Simplification.
1t may interest those who have the
civic welfare and safety of the COM
munity at heart at this time to review
briefly our suggestions with respect to
the District government. In essence
they We're that the functions of some
IS so-called District agencies. some
35 agencies of the Federal Government
involved in local affairs and some so
committees Of assorted types and kinds
be brought together into a much smaller
number OF operating departments 1--WE
suggested II but further consultations
could have reduced the number. each
TO have its functions defined in a
clean-cut way and each to be under a
single managing officer. We could not
avoid making the suggestion that all
OF these department heads report to a
single individual, who would be the
executive head of the whole set-up.
and not to several individuals which
would divide authority and RESPONSE
bility. This seemed to us to be lust
plain common sense,
The general principles of good or
ganization behind these proposals were
simply those that are found almost
invariably to exist in a successful busi-
ness or industrial enterprise. There is
nothing new or mysterious about them.
The mystery is rather why any one
should delay the application of such
tried and proved principles to the Dis
trict government. 1t is hard to see
why Mr.. Morgan or any one else seri-
ously could characterize such a process
OF simplification as ''impracticable and
cumbersome" and likely to result in
substantial increase in the cost of
government" There is some analogy.
OF course, between the plan as outlined
and the general pattern of what is
commonly called the city manager plan.
1t Is interesting to note that in very,
very few cases where the city manager
plan has been adopted, has it later
been discarded.
1t Is heartening to know that some
citizens like Mr. Finch are not letting
the subject die. Surely the capital
city OF the world should have the
soundest and most effective organiza-
ton structure that those responsible
for its affairs can devise
r q GRJEFENII AcuNr