Evening star., 1955-02-27
By Gene Goodwin
Sfor Stoff Corrsspondsnf

would have the et1ect OF split
ting it into what would amount
to two separate planning agen-
cies.
That has been the basic aim
of bills introduced in the
Maryland Legislature every
two years since 1947 by the
Republicans. The Democratic
majority here has always raj
lied to block any substantial
reform of the 28-year-Oid
agency that was founded by
Democrats and had, until last
summer, been in Democratic
hands.
Now that the Democrats are
once again in control OF the
Montgomery and Prince
Georges delegations, it is likely
that whatever they decide
about the planning commission
COR any other local natter
will have the approval Of the
full Legislature.
What they seem to be de-
Gliding about the planning COM
mission is that Montgomery
should set up its side of the
bi-county commission as it sees
fit and Prince Georges will do
as it pleases about its side.
Brood Chonses Seen
They already have agreed
to increase the commission
from six to eight members and
transfer the power for ap-
pointing all but two Of them
from the Governor TO lhe
Montgomery County Council
and the Prince Georges COM
misSioners. That plan has the
advantage of satisfying CIVIC
demands for local control OF
the agency and at the same
time getting it back under
Democratic control.
The Montgomery legislators
are talking about extending
the jurisdiction of the commits
. sion throughout all of their
county, giving the county
council power to set the tax
rate for the commissions
operating expenses and re-
quiring the four Montgomery
members OF the commission to
serve as a planning advisory
arm Of the county council.
The Prince Georges bloc, at
this juncture, plans to leave
the commission pretty much as
1t Is. with Jurisdiction only
over the urban area. Prince
Georges legislators point out
that they have received no
correspondence or pressure at
all from home to make any
such changes as Montgomery
is proposing. In contrast,
Montgomery legislators are
swamped with planning COM
mission intelligence from their
constituents-many of whom
seem to make q hobby of get
ting together each night to-
argue about the commission.
The effect Of what the two
delegations are now divergent
ly planning would be to create
what would be two separate
planning agencies. whether
they label them as such or not.
The commission, of course,
would still be bi-county in
structure and could still deal
with regional planning matters
as necessary, but its Montgom-
cry arm would be far different
from its Prince Georges arm.
Alarm Over Separation
The present leaders of the
planning commission and its
partisans are inclined to view
with alarm any such exaggera-
tion of differences between
Montgomery and Prince
Georges functions of the
agency. They argue that the
commission was created to
plan the orderly development
of the Washington suburbs
not just in one county, but in
both-and that the regional
concept should be preserved.
They like to ask what things
would be like today in Wash
ington's Maryland suburbs
had it not been for the plan
ming commission and its sister
agency, the Washington SUBJ
urban Sanitary Commission.
Most objective observers would
readily concede that those two
agencies have contributed much
to suburban development, but
the real question u whether