Evening star., 1952-04-15

35Deparfment
Heads Support
Robinson Plan
Commissioners Find
One Dissenter in
Reorganization Quiz


Reorganization Quiz
Thirty-six department heads of
the District Government have re-
ported to the Commissioners that
they favor The Robinson plan for
reorganizat4ofko of the District Gov
ernment over that put forth by
the Budget Bureau.
The results were announced yes
terday by the Commissioners.
The one dissenting department
head was John r. Searles, jr., ex-
ecutive director of the Redevelop-
ment Land Agency. He told the
Commissioners, in a report they
had requested, that he favors the
basic approach of the Budget
Bureau reorganization plan.
He said municipal governments
headed by single strong execu-
tive have "fared far better than
those headed by a commission
form, and that the commission
form has been unsuccessful in
many cities"
Mr.. Searles pointed out that
his views are not those of the
Redevelopment Agency.
Another deparement head, who
favors the Robinson plan, said he
had conferred with II of his top
executives and that nine of them
favor the Robinson plan and the
other two the Budget Bureau plan.
Veteran officials Views.
Another official said, in his re-
port. II have served under the
commission form of government
for So years and see no reason for
any radical change in our present
form. I believe that the Com
missioners should be allowed to
reorganize the government in ac-
cordance with their plans as sub
mitted."
Another one declared: "I favor
the Commissioners plan of re-
organization because Cd it is
more efficient; (2) it is less sus-
ceptible to corruption; 90 it is
more economical; (4) it provides
department heads with a closer
working relationship at the policy
making level, which, in turn, tends
to promote harmony, efficiency
and economy"
"The separation of administra-
tive responsibility and policy
making power between a city
manager and the council would
not result in improvement of the
District government" another de-
partment head said. Each coun-
Gil member appointed for business
or professional qualifications, and
from different geographical Sec
tions Of the city, would naturally
be Influenced in their policy de-
cisions by their special group in
terest."
Pilkerton's Views.
Comment along the same line
was made by Arthur r. Pilkerton,
District auditor, who allowed his
name to be used. He said:
"My contacts with city and
State officials Of at least a dozen
cities, where the council-manager
form of government is in control,
have indicated to me that the
present commission form Of gov
eminent in the District of Colum-
bia is to be envied. The single |
executive head idea is not prac-
tical in the District. It places too |
much uncontrolled responsibility in |
one individual.
mo one can possibly possess the
ability or qualifications necessary
to run or begin to give direct
supervision over all the 70 depart
ments and agencies of the District
Government and the impact of
Federal agencies participating in
District matters. A councilman
representing a particular area
would have a greater interest in
the district from which he is ap-
pointed than in the city as a i
whole. The Commissioners have
a common interest in the Dis
trict.
Bureaus Plan INFESTED.
The Budget Bureaus plan is
untried and unteSted, another de-
partment reported. One Of the
projects in the bureau plan
would have a police board COM
posed of the superintendent of the
National Capital Parks, the ar
chitect of the Capitol and one
civilian not connected with the
District Government. This would
give the Park Police and the Cap
itol Police representation on the
board, but the biggest police force
in Washington, the Metropolitan
Police, would not be represented
on the board.
Another department head said
he did not believe qualified men
would be attracted to the proposed
city council. The pressure on a
single man, II a city manager is
put in, would be greater than on
the commission. He said there
would also be the inherent danger
of the single administrator being
M becoming a Zeal0t mr. a crusader |