Evening star., 1950-09-05
Fairfax Election Set
Nov. 7 on Three Forms
0fLocaI Government
By james BirchfieId

A referendum giving Fairfax
County voters the choice of three
forms of local government today
was set for November 7 by Judge
Paul Brown in Circuit Court.
At a special hearing at Fairfax
Courthouse, Judge Brown consid-
cred two requests: One by the
Board of Supervisors giving voters
the choice of a county manager
form, a county executive system
or retention of the present method.
The other was by petition of about
2,100 voters asking for a choice
between the present and county
manager forms only.
The supervisors had requested
a "joint ballot" which carried out
one of the recommendations of a
special local government study
commission of 81 members.
In ordering the joint ballot
Judge Brown said this was the
only course for him to follow.
Opposition From One Source.
Edward Prichard, attorney for
the petitioners said his group did
not wish to oppose the resolu-
ton of the supervisors which was
adopted only last week. He said
he wished to point out that the
citizens petition, which was pre-
sented the court May S, asked
only for a vote on the county
manager form.
The only opposition to the joint
ballot came from Edward Glib
bons. who said it seemed improper
to include the question requested
by the supervisors on the same
ballot.
Mr.. Gibbons pointed out that
the supervisors had been asked a
year ago to request a referendum
on government reform. They failed
to do so at that time. he said.
Consultation Asked.
In ordering the referendum,
Judge Brown requested attorneys
for the petitioners to consult with
the commemorative attorney in
drawing up the order for the spe-
cial referendum.
Mrs. Edward Macy, president of
the Fairfax County League of
Women Voters, said the commits
sion report represented a major
victory for good government.
Executive Plan Favored.
The 21-man study commission
recommended that the voters be
given wider choice than that
asked by the citizens in their
petition. The report unanimously
favored government reform, but
the county execu-
tive plan over the county manager
plan. The two plans differ in the
method in which supervisors are
elected and the powers given the
county administrator.
Meanwhile, Manning GaSch,
county insurance man. expressed
disappointment over the commits
sion's recommendation.
Mr.. Gasch last April 5 suggest
ed to the board that a special
commission be named to study all
possible government reforms open
for Fairfax County.
1t was charged by county man
ager supporters that the COM
mission was hand picked and
would recommend no changes in
the government.
FavOrs Legislation.
In his statement, Mr.. Gasch
said he felt the commission had
not made a thorough study. He
said he believed the county could
obtain a better government plan
by means of special legislation by
the General Assembly. He added
that while he believed some re-
form might be beneficial, he was
not in favor of either the man
ager or executive forms.
In it's report, prepared by a
committee headed by David Law
renee, Washington news columnist,
the commission regretted the fact
that Fairfax County could not
write it's own charter form of gov
ernment as Montgomery County,
Md, has done.
, It reported, however, that of the
whole package" reform plan open
to the county, the executive plan
seemed best to meet the county's
problem.