The 2026 General Assembly session could bring another political tug-of-war between some County Board members and a state legislator representing the local community.
The past two years saw debate over the appropriate sequence of events in tackling any major change to Arlington’s governance structure.
Some County Board members have been skeptical of legislation to enable changes to the size of the Board and the separate election of a chair. They argue that this shouldn’t take place until after a community engagement process on possible changes.
Board members set that process in motion on Oct. 21, announcing plans to convene a working group on governance that would begin deliberations no later than February. They gave no firm indication of their views on legislation likely to be considered in the 2026 General Assembly session, which begins on Jan. 14.
Earlier this year, legislation that would give Arlington the power to make substantial changes to its form of governance passed the General Assembly but was vetoed by Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R). Del. Patrick Hope (D-1), who patroned the legislation in the 2025 session, is expected to return with a new bill for 2026 if he wins re-election on Nov. 4.
Hope says passing change-of-government legislation would be his second-highest priority of the 2026 session. It would, he said, give Arlington “all powers other localities already have.”
Whether Board members will support the effort, or again oppose it, remains to be seen.
Board members released their draft 2026 General Assembly priorities package on Oct. 21. The document offers just a single sentence discussing change-of-government issues, with its meaning open to interpretation.
“Ensure any changes to Arlington’s form of government are made at the discretion of the County Board and County residents,” the document says.
The Board’s Oct. 21 public hearing on its draft 2026 legislative priorities brought out two speakers — Allan Gajadhar and Dave Schutz — representing the Arlington County Civic Federation on the topic.
The Civic Federation is the prime proponent of governance changes, and its representatives affirmed that support at the hearing.
“One of the hallmarks of a well-run organization is the ability to look at itself and adapt and change and grow,” said Gajadhar, a former Civic Federation president.
Schutz, who leads the Civic Federation’s form-of-government subcommittee, said he hoped Board members would actively lobby for Hope’s enabling legislation in the coming 60-day session.
“Arlington today has 10 times the residents of the semi-rural county for which our current form of government was crafted in the 1930s,” he said, asking for a “change in perspective” from past opposition.
After the speakers had their say, Board Chair Takis Karantonis said issues would be considered in the coming weeks before a final legislative package was adopted.
“We’re not talking tonight,” Karantonis said.
County Board members are slated to adopt the 2026 legislative-priorities list, with or without changes, on Nov. 15. Adoption will come two days after Board members hold a work session with the county’s five-member legislative delegation.
Any eventual governance changes would represent the most major alteration in county operating procedures since the Depression, and only the second major change since the 1870s.
After winning approval from Richmond, Arlington switched its governance structure in 1932 — changing from the existing three-member, district-based Board of Supervisors to a five-member, at-large County Board with the chair’s position rotating annually among members.
Critics of the structure believe it is in need of updating with more Board members, a separately elected chair and, potentially, a move back to district-based elections. The relationship between the Board and county manager also might be a topic of study, along with whether to make ranked-choice voting for County Board permanent.
Similar structural changes could be made for the School Board.
At the public hearing, Gajadhar said seeking consideration of alternatives should not be considered an attack on current county governance.
“This community is well-run, it is well-represented,” he said.
While there was no direct response on the issue at the Oct. 21 public hearing, there had been discussion earlier in the day when Karantonis announced plans for the governance working group.
Each of the five Board members had a different take, ranging from outright enthusiasm to caution to concern about potential side effects.
The biggest Board proponent of moving forward with changes appears to be JD Spain, Sr., with declining amounts of enthusiasm from Matt de Ferranti, Karantonis, Susan Cunningham and Maureen Coffey.
So far, a group that may have the most at stake governance-change matter — the Arlington County Democratic Committee — has kept a public silence.
Democrats have maintained County Board dominance and, with a few exceptions, a total monopoly since the early 1980s. That could potentially be imperiled by a larger Board elected in multi-member or district-based elections.
Another key player could be Sen. Barbara Favola (D-40), whose views could play a major role in any bill’s chances in the upper house of the legislature. Favola voted in support of Hope’s 2025 bill, but having earlier sat on the County Board, she might be amenable to that body’s desire to wait until a community consensus emerges on governance.
