Arlington’s county attorney is warning leaders to think carefully about the pros and cons of any potential governance changes.
Also, to become a city — an option sought by some advocates of changing the local governance structure — Arlington would have to wait until at least 2032, County Attorney Ryan Samuel told County Board members on Tuesday.
Although it did not offer any recommendations, the county attorney’s presentation suggested that moving to any other form of county government allowed in Virginia could hold both seen and hidden dangers. The county manager plan grants Arlington numerous powers that other localities do not have, “and they potentially would be lost if we go through a transition to an entirely different county form,” Samuel said.
Rather than killing off the county manager plan of government that Arlington has operated under since 1932, the community could seek specific changes to its governance from the General Assembly, Samuel said.
“The easiest way to go is legislative amendment,” Samuel, who was appointed county attorney late last year, said in delivering a 33-page report to Board members.
Arlington is the only jurisdiction in the commonwealth to have adopted the county manager plan of government, which currently requires a five-member elected board with a chair chosen annually from members.
A move to certain alternate governance forms, like the urban executive employed in Fairfax County, also would mean a loss of an elected treasurer and commissioner of revenue. In several Virginia forms of government, including the one used by Fairfax, responsibilities of those two offices are handled by staff.
Another option sought by some — becoming a city — wouldn’t be possible until 2032 owing to a current state moratorium on annexing any more cities, Samuel said.
Board members had seen a draft of the report before it was made public, but said more time was needed before making extensive comments based on its findings.
Board member Julius “JD” Spain, Sr., said he wanted to “take much-needed time during the month of August to digest all of this.”
From there, “onward to the next stage,” said Spain, who with colleague Susan Cunningham is taking the lead on possible changes to the county’s governance structure.
Board member Maureen Coffey had a similar reaction. She praised the report as “very neutral — unbiased and impartial.”
“I hope everyone will read it and think about it,” Coffey said.
At the July 21 meeting, County Board Clerk Mason Kushnir said a contractor has been selected to vet options and present them to Board members.
Negotiations are ongoing on the contract, said Kushnir, who did not detail the recipient.
Under the current timetable, county officials are expecting a preliminary report back by the end of October and a final report by the end of November.
In December, Board members will determine next steps, which may include empanelment of a community task force to look at potential changes, including:
- Expanding the five-member Board to seven or more members
- Electing the Board chair separately
- Ending the process of electing at least one Board member every year
- Moving some or all seats to districts rather than the current at-large elections
The schedule for considering potential governance changes has already slipped several times.
Last December, Board members pushed the process off until this summer in order to deal with the county budget and capital improvement plan. Then, in June, Board members again delayed the timetable, setting December as their target date for the next phase of the process.
Arlington has been governed by a five-member, at-large County Board since 1932. The body replaced the three-member, district-based Board of Supervisors that had governed the community since 1870.
