Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1961-10-05
Time for Review


As Montgomery County enters its 18th year
under councilmanager form of government it
might be helpful for the two major citizens organiza-
tons - the Civic Federation and the Allied Civic
Group = and the political organizations to take stock
OF our present setup and see whether any major
changes In the contys basic structure desirable
In 1948, Montgomery became the first Maryland
county to adopt charter and abolish the old county
commissioner form Of government Since then the
population has more than doubled - from $4,000 to
approximately 100000 This tremendous increase has
brought with 1t new and more complex problems
along with the need for new look at our present
methods of solving them
This is not to say that the countys charter is in
adequate. No one can deny that Montgomery has
made great strides In meeting the demands of its
residents for better services and that the county has
achieved nationwide recognition for its excellent gov
srnnental operations.
What we are saying, however, Is that conditions
here have changed drastcally from what they were
IN 1913; that no matter how well the charter has
worked there is always room for Improvement and
that there Is reason to believe the administration by
an appointed manager of an area which is growing
more urbanized almost daily may not be the last
word in governmental efficiency
For example, in Baltimore County, which has
experienced similar population explosion the voters
also have adopted charter, but with a significant
change from the Montgomery document - an elected
county executive instead of an appointed county
manager.
And in Prince Georges County, where citizens
are striving to bring their into the 10th century,
the Civic Federation there is recommending adoption
OF charter with an elected county executive
Elsewhere, students of municipal government
appear more and more to be favoring an elected
county executive over appointed county manager
as the best possible method of coping with the prob
lens of urbanized counties.
One of the reasons they cite for their preference
Is the desirabity of cenrazing responsibility for the
administration of government in one man who is di-
rectly responsible to the voters.
The county executive, as in Baltimore County,
is the idea man." He proposes programs and pro-
cedlires to the county council which can oyerrle his
proposals. But In turn, he veto laws passed by
the council.
This Is identical to the Federal Government con-
cept of an elected President and his relationship to
an elected Congress.
Proponents Of an elected county executive also
point out that under councilmanager setup gov
ernmental authority is diffused among five or seven
council members. Further, they say an appointed
manager may easily become subserent to the council
because he faces the constant threat of dismissal if
he proposes programs which would antagonize the
council
BY contrast, they claim an elected county exectl-
tive would not hesitate to propose bold new ideas and
fight for their approval by the counci because if the
council rejected his proposals, he could take them d.
rectly to the voters.
Such setup would seem, on the face of it. to pro-
vide the checks and balances which are lacking in
the Montgomery councimanager form of govern
ment Here the only check the councils proposed
laws is the council itself, with the manager restricted
almost solely to carrying out the councils directves