Club Minutes: Enterprise Farmers Club, 1937

Farmers' Convention Committee .... 1937.

J.E. Muncaster, Sr. presided over the Committee meeting at the Insurance office on the afternoon of Jan. 19, 1937. Other than the officers, only Edward Snowden and Mahlon Kirk were present. The officers consented to serve again: J . E.Muncaster, Sr., Pres.

W. W.Moore , Vice-Pres.

R.H.Miller, Jr., Sec.

As usual the fourth Saturday was chosen, or the 267th, with the meeting at Sherwood. The secretary was instructed to send notices to the members of the three Clubs, reminding them that each one is expected to provide for six persons. The assessment was set at $.50 a number. Mrs. Cissel does not wish to serve as head of the ladies' Committee. It was decidedto ask Mrs. Boyd and Miss Claire Hutton to act together, with F.S.Gilpin for the men. ( Mrs. R.H.Miller,Jr. and W.H.GilS. P. Stablerpin served on the respective committees. )

The following tentative program was set up, with the officers of course empowered to make substitutions.

Mr. Applin, Mark Milk Administrator, onsome phase of his work,

Nathan L. Smith - Program of State Roads Commission

Paul Walker - County Tax Survey

Adjourned sine die,

T. W. miller

R. B. Farquhar.

RESOLUTION. RESOLUTION.

WHEREAS, - the costs of all governments - National, State, County, and Municipal , have increased recently far beyond all previous bounds, until our National debt is nearly thirty billions of dollar, and our Montg. County debt, sixteen millions, and, -- eighteen

WHEREAS, - at the same time all incomes have been greatly reduced, taxes greatly increased, and new sources oftaxation eagerly sought for by the politicians, to support mounting expenditures, -much of this to support one out of every sixth person in the United States, from some public treasury,- and,--

WHEREAS, -many of the old methods, practices, and results , of partisan politics, as applied to city and county units, are not representative, augment and create inefficiency, are often wasteful, extravagant, and antiquated, and not for the best interests of all the people., - and,

THEREFORE, it being manifest that something must be done to keep expenditures within present and prospective incomes, with due regard for the ability of our citizenship to pay the excessive costs in taxes, -or the County and this County will become bankrupt, and the people impoverished, - and, -

WHEREAS, to stave off these dire consequences in other places, it has been found advisable and expedient , for the preservation of society,and the perpetuation of our cherished institutions, - to adopt new methods, and measures, to meet the ever changing conditions, - and HENCE, -- 440 cities inthe U.S. in 1933 , had adopted the city manager form of government, six counties have followed suit, 40 counties in 16 staes were considering its adoption, and numerous legislatures were discussing enabling legislation, to permit the change from old methods, found to be outworn, - and, --

WHEREAS, 90 % of the cities in the U. States , having manager forms of government, held strictly non-partison elections, disregarding old parties. and National partisanship,--and, --

FOR THE ABOVE REASONS, many such cities , turned deficits into surpleses with excess cash in banks, and reduced bond issues, or eliminated them all together, - -

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, - that a committee of two be appointed by this Convention, to make a study of the manager system as applied to county, governments, --- said committee to report with its recommendations, to this Convention one year hence, to the end that Montg.County may keep abreast of the trend of the times, keep its citizens informed of any practices elsewhere found beneficial, - and thus be enabled to adopt such improvements in methods, as may seem advisable, to increase efficiency, reduce expenditures, and eliminate expensive and unnecessary partisanship, in the administration of County affairs.

1st

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON COUNTY MANAGER SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT.

Presented at Farmer's Convention, Sandy Spring, MD.

February 27, 1937

Considerable progress was made and substantial gains are reported for the year 1935 by the Minicipal Year Book in modernizing the administrative affairs of cities and counties throughout the country. There were a few set-backs.

In New York State the greatest progress was made. After twenty years of study, agitation and hard work by the citizens and business men striving for non-partisan local governments, the dam of tradition and intertia was finally broken and the current finally cleared for moderinization of county government. The 1935 legislature passed an act providing two optional forms of county government within constitutional limitations. Plan A provides for the election of a County President, for a four year term, with veto power and complete authority and supervision over the general departments, with appointive power corresponding to a strong Mayor. Plan B provides for a County Board, which in turn appoints a County Manager to a four year term, based on merit and experience, without regard to residence. He is clothed with unusual administrative powers under the County Board and is only removable for malfeasance. Under either plan the County Board is a policy determining one end and is not allowed to interfere with administrative matters, request appointees, nor ask for removals. All officers without constitutional status become appointive and three functional deparments are established, namely, directors of finance, of public works, and of public welfare. The Chief Executive must prepare a budget under strict budgetary procedure. Either form may be adopted by a simple majority of the citizens of any county outside New York City. Submission of either plan may be accomplished by a majority vote of the County Board or a petition sighend by the voters of New York State about a year ago. Such authority was given to Montgomery County by the State Legislature twentytwo years ago.

Monroe County, in which Rochester is located, with 424,000 population, adopted the Manager Form and it went into effect in January 1936. Nassau County has taken steps to modernize its government structure and Westchester where scores of citizens, without regard to politics, haves been working on this problem for years. The new Charter is now being prepared, will likelybe approved by the LEgislature, now in session, and this Fall the people in all probability will be called upon for a referendum vote in November on the adoption of the Charter.

Some significant facts are reported by the New York Times are that, - 70,000 words of data and information have been circulated among the citizenship, and 70 different groups in the County, such as political clubs of both parties, Chambers of Commerce, Women's Clubs, and Citizenship Associations are actively participating in the drives for reform. It is considered vitally necessary for citizens to become posted on all these problems so that they can express through their vote an intelligent decision as to whether the Charter will correct the situation, which has become intolerable. Lines are being formed and without respect to national political parties, partial reformists and complete reformists are battling with the problems.

- 2 -

In Michigan the citizens undaunted by defeat of the County Home Rule Bill in 1934 persuaded the Legislature to resubmit the Bill in 1936.

Lastyear we find 444 City Managers, to which 13 more cities were added, making a total of 457 cities, with Counsel-Managers. To the seven counties with strictly Counsel-Manager forms last year one county was added, making eight, namely Monroe County with the City of Rochester. The above thirteen cities to modernize were scattered through eight states without regard to geographical location. Fourteen cities and five counties defeated proposals and four cities held Referenda to approve the plan and voted to continue it. Proposals to abandon this non-partisan Councel-Manager form were voted on as follows: In 1931 thirteen cities voted and two abandoned; in 1932 fourteen voted and noneabandoned; in 1933 fifteen voted and two abandoned; in 1934 twelve voted and two abandoned. Only twenty-one cities have abandoned the plan in the last twenty-six years, while 457 now operate under it.

STATE

Active interest in the Counsel-Manager plan was widespread in 1935 from Washington to Maine, citizens were studying reorganization and reform and Legislatures in nearly every state then in session were flooded with plans to bring cities and counties more in line with modern needs of administration. More than one in every five cities of over 100,000 population now operate under this Form or over 14% of the total population of the country. Of 93 cities of over 100,000 population, 19 1/2% are so managed and of smaller cities of 1,000 or more of which there are 6,230 in the United States 64%, in 39 states are now clothed with Enabling Legislation. This it is manifest shows remarkable progress toward needed re-adjustment.

In Chicago interest in the plan has become so active and so many civic groups are studying proposals and advocating the plan that according to the New York Times, the Assistant Superintendent of Schools issued and edictagainst an essay contest in the Public Schools on the subject of a City Manager Form of Government. This edict was held HAILED as an evidence that the politicians in Chicago are alarmed by the headway which the City Manager plan is making.

Among the many advocates TESTIMONIALS of the reorganization and reform in city and county governments may be mentioned a few of the following: From the Manager of Davidson County in North Caroline, where they had issued $300,000 road bonds maturing in 1955, at an interest rate of 5%. They took $100,000 from a sinking fund and reissued $200,000 of bonds at 3 1/2%, The greatest benefit is stated to accrue from centralized control under one office in expert hands whereby costs in every department of the county have been reduced to the minimum. I

In Arlington County Virginia the budget has been decreased and the county has gone forward with real service to its citizens without curtailment in the general benefits. Various departments under control of the County Board have been coordinated into A more co-operative system and overlapping of government agencies has been eliminated.

A-2 ***

COUNTY IS URGED TO PAY ITS BONDS

Montgomery Government Cost Highest in State, Economsit Says.

Special Dispatch to The Star. KENSINGTON, Md., February 25.- Administration costs in Montgomery County are the highest in the State, amounting to about $1.98 per capita, William Paul Walker, economist of the University of Maryland, told the Kensington Chamber of Commerce last night Analyzing the fiscal status of the county, Walker recommended: That the county begin paying its bonds "right now." That a reassessment of real and personal property be made at once and a system of continuous assessment be established. Two Taxing Areas. That all incorporated towns and special taxing areas be consolidated into one unit. That the county be divided into two taxing areas, with one rate for rural and another for the suburban section. Walker said the financial problems confronting Montgomery were "very serious and might prove consequential unless attacked correctly." Under the continuing assessment proposal advanced by Walker the county would constantly have at its disposal the services of two or three assessors who would keep values "in line." Declaring county bonds consitiute a too-heavy drain on the treasury, Walker stated the county now pays about $180 for every $100 bond issued. Oppose Tax Diversion. A reolustion opposing diversion of motor vehicle revenues and any additional special levies on motorists was adopted after Allen H. Constance, counselor of the American Automobile Club of Maryland, spoke on Gov. Nice's diversion proposals. Following his talk a motion picture showing highwya problems was presented. The chamber indorsed the application of the county C. of C. Health Committee for a free health survey by the American Public Health Association. The action was taken at the request of Dr. V. L. Ellicott, county health officer.

[?]OLDS BILL [?] BY GROUP