close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

Manager government in Albemarle County, Virginia

код для вставкиСкачать
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master.
UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
T h e quality of this reproduction is d e p en d en t upon the quality o f the
c o p y submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted.
Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize
materials (e.g.,
maps,
drawings,
charts) are reproduced
by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
ProQuest Information and Learning
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
NOTE TO USERS
This reproduction is the best copy available.
i
UMI'
(
j
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
MANAGER GOVERNMENT
in
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
Edward Overman, B. S.
A Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Faculty
of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
June, 1940
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: D P14358
UMI8
UMI Microform DP14358
Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
I
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
MANAGER GOVERNMENT
in
ALBEMARLE COUNTY VIRGINIA
i>y
EDWARD OVERMAN, B. S.
REPORT OF THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
SERIES B, NUMBER 6
Printed and Mimeographed
in the
United States of America
"by the
DIVISION OF PUBLICATIONS
of the
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
University, Virginia MCXL
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ip***"'
EDITORIAL FOREWORD
The Bureau of Public Administration, in collaboration with
the Virginia Council on Public Administration, is happy to present
at this time the complete text of a survey of the managerial form
of county government in Albemarle County prepared by Mr. Edward
Overman in candidacy for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Political Science at the University of Virginia. This report is
published under the sponsorship of the Virginia Commission on
County Government,
•This study is essentially a fact-finding survey designed to
ascertain the relavant facts relating to the adoption and the
operation of the Executive Form of Government in Albemarle County
set up in conformity with the Optional Forms of County Government
Act passed by the General Assembly of 1932. It should be pointed
out, however, that the report expresses the views of Mr. Overman
and not those of the Commission., •
This survey is the first of two being prepared by Mr. Overman
in an attempt to appraise the applicability of the manager
principle, so common in the governments of our cities, to county
government in the Commonwealth. It should be of great value to
students of county government as a source of information on what
has happened in Albemarle since the Executive Form became effective
in 193^*
This study is significant for a number of reasons. It is
the first case study made of a county-manager government in
Virginia and because of its technical excellence and straightforward
presentation should serve as a stimulus for further case studies
of counties and municipalities alike. Again, it represents a
healthy atmosphere of collaboration between the academic researcher
and governmental circles in Virginia and it is the hope of the
Council on Public Administration and the Bureau that these relation­
ships, will truly "promote and facilitate collaboration among the
planning and advisory agencies of the State and local governments,
the colleges and universities, and other educational and research
institutions for the scientific study of public administration
and for the effective public education in the field of governmental
affairs."
Raymond Uhl, Acting Director
Bureau of Public Administration
University, Virginia.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
FOREWORD
Mr, Overman and the Bureau of Public Administration of the
University of Virginia have rendered a valuable public service by
■the preparation and publication of this "case history" of Albemarle
County government. It portrays to the citizens and officials of
other Virginia counties a complete picture of the adoption and
the first six years of the operation of the County Executive form
..of government in a Virginia county, I am not familiar -with the
clash of personalities incident to'the adoption of the new government
in Albemarle, I have, however, followed with keenest interest
the improvements and economies effected by the new form of county
government in Albemarle. It is the story of democratically
responsible, efficient local self-government reducing tax rates
while at the same time expanding such public services as public
education, public health, and public welfare. It is also the
story of a Virginia county which has restored "home rule" to
its people by adopting one of the optional forms of county government
made available by the Byrd amendment to the Constitution in 1928
and the 1932 Act of the General Assembly. Students of government
in all parts of the United States have praised these achievements.
It is gratifying to know that Mr. Overman is now working on a
similar study of the operation of. the County Manager type of county
government in Henrico County. Albemarle and Henrico counties have
furnished nearly seven years of actual experience by Virginia
counties with modern forms of county government and efficient county
"home rule". The effectiveness of these modern forms of county
government is no longer an academic question or a theoretical
subject on which to speculate. The actual successful experience
of these two
Virginia counties is now available to the citizens
of the other 96 Virginia counties,
Raymond B. Pinchbeck, Chairman
Virginia Commission on County Government
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
EREFACE
The following study is intended to he a "case study", that is,
an examination of the manner in -which a particular form of county
government and the principles upon which it is based have worked
ij> practice in a particular county in Virginia. The form of
government is the county executive form, which, with the county
Manager form, was created hy the Virginia General Assembly in .1932,
The County involved is Albemarle County, the first county in the
State to adopt one of the new forms. Henrico adopted the county
manager form just after the change in Albemarle County. A case
study of Henrico's experience with the county manager form is now
in progress and.will follow the same general plan of this study.
It is hoped that the two studies, in reviewing Virginia's experience
-with "manager" governments for counties, will shed some light on
the general problem of county government reorganization.
The scope of the study herewith presented has been restricted
primarily to a consideration of the manager technique as applied
to county government from the point of view of over-all management.
The details of administration in connection with the various
county functions are discussed only as they relate to this new
technique as a method of over-all management. However, these
predetermined limitations have not been strictly adhered to,
especially in the chapter on the department of public health*
The author would like to take this opportunity to set forth
.some of the prejudices and assumptions which could not help but
effect his thinking. In the first place, it is believed that local
government fosters participation in government by citizens and
thereby serves as a valuable school for citizen training in self
government and democratic processes. Therefore, Virginia counties
as self governing units of government are desirable for the
maintenance of democratic Institutions. Consequently, for those
who believe it best to abolish county government entirely this
study is based upon false assumptions. In the second place, it
is felt that the old system of county government in Virginia is
wholly inadequate and in need of complete overhauling to make it
more in harmony with present day conditions. Improvement in
county governmejnt in Virginia is a field which offers wide
opportunities for political leaders in the State to render a real
public service. Lest the discussion of Albemarle's "old order"
and its campaign of 1933 to adopt the new form seem to be colored
with partisan resentment of the "powers that be" in Virginia, the
author would like to acknowledge his preference for the party
which Virginians are fond of tracing back to the work of Thomas
Jefferson. Furthermore, the author's father and father's father
claimed the same heritage — the latter being of the "unreconstructed"
variety.
Most of the first part of this study, which relates t o the
political set-up prior to 193^ said the campaign of 1935 , de#ls with
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
political opinions and personalities. It should he emphasized that this
part of the study is based largely upon personal interviews— hearsay if
you will— -and therefore is "accurate" only to the extent that this method
of procedure permits accuracy. In the latter part of the study, which
deals with administrative aspects of the County’s government, while the
author has there too freely expressed opinions hased upon observations
and interviews, an attempt has heen made to marshal as much documentary
material as possible.
To convey acknowledgments to all those for whose aid and guidance
the author is indebted would unreasonably lengthen this preface. Dr.
Rowland Egger brought to the author’s attention the possibilities for
research in the field of county government. Dr. George W. Spicer and
Dr. Raymond Uhl have helped in innumerable ways. Dr. E, L. Fox and Mr.
Vincent Shea read the manuscript and made many valuable suggestions.
Many state and county officials courteously and patiently endured the
author’s questions and enquiries and made available indispensable
informationo In this connection Mr. Henry Haden, Miss Frances Southall,
Mr. Claude Graham and Dr. R. D. Hollowell especially should be mentioned.
County citizens too numerous to list gave assistance. The author is
particularly indebted to Mr, Mercer Garnett. The interest and ■assistance
of Mr. James Stepp, Miss Elizabeth Jackson, Miss Anne Norris, and' others
who refrain from assuming any credit, are gratefully acknowledged.
The author alone is responsible for all the errors and shortcomings
which this study may contain.
E , S , 0«
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
I
II
III
IF
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XL
INTRODUCTION— Historical Background, Land and
......
People
1
POLITICAL BACKGROUND--The Political Milieu, The Old
Order, The Board of Supervisors, Popularly Elected
County Officers
........
7
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933— Introduction, The Political
Climate, Origin of the Reform Movement, The Reformers,
Organization of the Citizens League, A Political
Rally on Court Day, The Opposition, Campaing Issues,
Election Results, Organizing the County Executive
Government
19
COUNTY POLITICAL LEADERSHIP- -Relationship Between
....
County Executive and Board of Supervisors
b2
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATIVE
COORDINATION........ ........................ .
k-7
FISCAL MANAGEMENT— Introduction, Over-All Fiscal
Management in the County Executive Form of Government,
Preparation of the Budget, Action on the Proposed
Budget hy the Board of Supervisors, Scope and Form
of the Budget, Budget Execution and Budgetary Control,
Schools and County Budgeting, Control over County
Revenues, Auditing
....
53
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT— Legal Barriers, State Super­
vision of Local Personnel, Conclusion
.......
77
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE— Introduction, 'Political
Attaches’, Machine Subsidies— "Slush Funds", Results
Achieved, Tax Assessing, County Government Accounting,
Custody of County Funds, Centralized Purchasing, Debt
Administration, Tax Rates ........................
87
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION— The School Controversy,
School Administration, School Finances
.......
105
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE— Introduction, Local
and State Relations, Organization of the Department of
Public Welfare, Functions of the Local Welfare
Office ,y.
........... ............ ...,. ,f........ 113
DEPARTMENT ;0F PUBLIC HEALTH-rState Centralization '
Versus Local Self-government, Health Department Func­
tions, Communicable Disease Control, Venereal Disease
Control, Tuberculosis Control, Maternity and Child
Hygiene, Infant and Preschool-Hygiene, School Hygiene,
Sanitation^ Conclusion
....
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
125
Chapter
XII
XIII
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT— Introduction
Organization and Functions of the Sheriff’s
Office, Financing the Sheriff’s Office,
Criminal Records, The County Jail, Conclusion ....
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY OFFICERS, GENERAL
CONCLUSIONS--Introduction, Changes in the Status
of the County Clerk's Office, General Conclusions,
Political Considerations, Administrative Considera­
tions
...I..
......
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OB’ TABLES
Table
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Page
6
Population and Land Characteristics ...................
Election Statistics
.............. ............... ..
16
Citizens Active in Campaign for Adoption of
County Executive Form of Government
........
23
Votes Cast by Precincts in the Election on the
Adoption of the County Executive Form of Government ...
44
Expense Account of the Citizens League in the Campaign
to Adopt the County Executive Form of Government ....
42
Comparison of Budget Becommendations with Actual
Appropriations .........
39
Statement of Income— Actual and Estimated..........
64
Statement of Expenditures Compared with Appropriations .
65
Actual Expenditures and Actual Beceipts Compared
with Estimated Expenditures and Estimated Beceipts ....
66
67
Statement of Fund Surpluses and Deficits .........
Personnel Data
.....
8l
Cost of Finance Offices Under Old and New F o r m s .....
88
Cost of Personal Services in Finance Offices
......
89
Percentage of Delinquencies
...............
90
Percentage of Taxes Collected .........................
91
Summary Statement of County Debt ....................,■..
98
Betirement of Long Term Debts through Sinking Funds ....
100
102
Assessed Values ...........
Summary Statement of Eevenue .......
103
...........
104
• Summary Statement of Expenditures
School Expenditures and Bevenues
....
112
Virginia Public Assistance Funds, 1937 •• ......
120
Virginia Public Assistance Funds, 1938 ...............
121
Balance Sheet of District Home ...........
122
Population of District Home .........
123
Summary Statement of District Home Operations ..........
123
Beceipts and Expenditures of Joint Health Department ..,
129
Population— Births and Deaths ........
130
Communicable Diseases— Cases and Deaths .........
131
Communicable Disease Beporting ......................
132.
Home Visits in Communicable Disease Control......... 133
Tuberculosis Control
.......
136
Maternity and Child Hygiene
......
138
School Hygiene ......
l4o
Expenses and Bevenues of Sheriff's Office
........
143
Criminal Offenses
..................... .......
145
Operation of County Jail
.......
146
Beceipts and Expenditures of Commonwealth's Attorney ..,
151
Beceipts and Expenditures of Clerk's O f f i c e ........
152
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Historical Background
It is difficult to -write of the history of Albemarle County and at the
same time be as brief as the purposes of this study demand* So many dis­
tinguished names are associated with the history of the County that the
temptation to'wander away from the county aspects of the careers associated
with these names is very difficult to suppress* Since, however, one discovers
in the present-something resembling the old spirit and attitude toward govern- ,
ment and politics, which has been handed down from generation to generation,
a brief description of the County's past should be worth while.
On January 2, l l k k , Thomas Nelson, Deputy Secretary of the Colony of
Virginia, issued a commission of the peace to Joshua Fry, Peter Jefferson,
William Cabell, Joseph Thompson, Allen Howard and Thomas Bellew. These men
met the following year, in February, 17^5, and held the first court for the
newly established County of Albemarle, 1
When the County was originally organized, practically all ofthe land was
covered with forest. The first Settlers, however, did not meet with the
resistance of hostile Indians, who by this time had been driven beyond the
Blue Ridge Mountains. "Many of these newcomers were younger sons of the
magnates of the eastern counties, some graduates of European universities and
still more of William and Mary. A very fair university club could have been
organized in the County within a decade of its organization. The reason for
this was not far to seek. It was .the first 'mountain resort' opened up in
America, the frontiers of every other county being unsafe to any but armed men,
while here, owing to the advent of the Valley movement, the Indians had not
only crossed the Blue Ridge but were now on the farther side of the Valley.
No similar area in America was ever more easily colonized." 2
In his autobiography Jefferson writes: "In 1769, * became a member of
the legislature by the choice of the county in which I live, and so continued
until it was closed by the Revolution."3 In 1775 he was a delegate from the
County to the Continental Congress which met in Philadelphia. Here he drew
up the original draft of the famous Declaration of Independence. When
Jefferson became President of the United States, he appointed his personal
secretary, Meriwether Lewis, to head an expedition to explore the great
Northwest Territory. Lewis negotiated with William Clark and succeeded in
1. B.P. Barringer, "A Brief History of Albemarle County," University of
Virginia Record, Extension Series, VII, no. 2 (1922), 9-T?«
2. Ibid., p. 12.
_
3. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. by A. E. Berg, (Washington, D.C.:
The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1907), 1,
Reproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 2
INTRODUCTION
securing him as a partner in the adventure. Previously, George Rogers
Clark had "been sent out by Jefferson, then Governor of Virginia, to fight
the Indians in the west. Lewis and the Clark brothers were from famous
Albemarle County families.
Last among the list of things for which Jefferson wished to be
remembered is the establishment of the University of Virginia. His
spirit is kept alive at this institution, and, indeed, throughout the
whole County. The presence of a great University in the County has been
beneficial from many points of view, economic, cultural and political.
University professors have taken an active part in civic affairs. As we
shall see later, the presence of a medical school and the University
Hospital has'been of inestimable value to the community.
Although Jefferson is the most famous of the County's sons, other
great names in American history are closely interwoven with the history
of the County. This.study is concerned primarily with the government and
politics of the County, and it is to this that attention must be given.
As in the State as a whole, participation in the government of the
County and holding county offices is a tradition in many families. Fre­
quently, particular offices become associated with particular families.
The County's second clerk held that office for the incredibly long period
of 66 years — from 17^9 to 1815.^ Often a man becomes so identified
with an office that his reelection is taken for granted and no opposition
ever develops against him. This tradition for office holding by a relative­
ly small circle of men coming from the best families of the County has
had both good and bad effects. On the one hand, it has meant that re­
latively few people take an active part in county politics and govern­
ment, Many people accept as a matter of course the fact that a certain
group of men will run the government. Interest in local elections is not
very great because people feel that a certain candidate will invariably
be elected. Qn the other hand, government by the best families has meant
that corruption in public office has not been a problem. The ills of
county government have grown out of inaction and neglect more than positive
corruption.
Since Albemarle County, like moBt of the State, is predominatly Demo­
cratic, success in the Democratic Primary is equivalent to election. The
selection of the men who are to run in the primaries with any chance of
success has largely been made by a relatively small group of 'ins' or
prominent citizens. Once a man is elected to an office he seldom has to
give it up unless he himself decides to do so. So long as he enjoys party
backing by being on good terms with the other county officers and leaders,
he has nothing to fear in the way of rival candidates. More frequently
than not, men give up an office because of old age, poor health, or to
run for an office higher than the one they hold already. Even if a man
bucks the machine and is elected, almost invariably he will soon realize
that both from the point of view of personal gain and in order to do a
good job with his new duties, he will have to cooperate with the machine.
if. F. Johnson, Memorials of Virginia Clerks, 23~.
'with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
INTRODUCTION
Page 3
In other words, the only reasonable thing to do seems to he to become a
member of the ’courthouse ring'. It"is significant'that two prominent
local judges express themselves as being in favor of ’machine government'..
By this they mean that county officers must cooperate and be on friendly
terms with one another or else petty squabbles and bickering among them­
selves will result in poor government. :What they have stated as being
desirable from their own experience can be readily seen when one considers
that the important county officers have been elected by the people, and
consequently they have been in effect answerable to nobody but- themselves
and the very vague ’public conscience’. If a citizen goes to the County
Treasurer with a complaint about his taxes and is referred by him to the
Commissioner of the Revenue, who in turn refers him back to the Treasurer,
and this process is continued in many instances and. over a period of time,
the citizen may conclude that there is no hope of having his case consider­
ed. An attitude of 'passing the buck' can very easily grow up. In more
academic terms this situation is described as irresponsible government and
government without unified administrative management. But even though
county officers may cooperate under machine government to shirk respon­
sibility as well as share it, there are many who think.that the situation
is far worse where there is no machine.
Those who view human nature unfavorably will contend that some type
of machine is inevitable and necessary in any form of governmental or­
ganization. People are too busy with other things to be bothered with
participation in local government. Others may view human nature in a more
favorable light and contend that widespread participation in local govern­
ment is not an empty ideal impossible of achievement in practice. In a
rough way, these two different attitudes correspond to the alignment bet­
ween the existing office holders and the courthouse rings who defend the
old order in county government, and the students of government, the re­
formers and interested citizens.
Land and People
When the County was first organized in 17^5, it included all or parts
of the present counties of Buckingham, Appomattox, Campbell, Amherst,
Nelson and Fluvanna. In the early eighteenth century, transportation
facilities were such that epeople living much more than a day's journey
from the courthouse complained of "diverse inconveniences of distance".
Consequently, the size of the County was reduced. The present size of
the County was determined by the rule generally applied in creating new
counties. The rule followed was to make the county seat within convenient
traveling distance of as many people as possible. Albemarle County at
the present time has an area of 7^+2 square miles. Thus, Albemarle is one
of the larger counties in Virginia.' The average area of all the counties
in Virginia is 1+01.2 square miles.
The total population of the County has varied relatively little in
the last four decades. Its population of 26,981 in 1930 gave it a density
of about 36.3 persons per square mile. This population figure is consider­
ably above the average population of all the counties in the State. The
average for all the counties in the state was 17,188.9 in 1930.5
5. Population figures and other data in this section are taken primarily
• from: Report of Virginia State Planning Board, (March 31, 1955), I, passi
R eproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page:14-
INTRODUCTION
Unlike Arlington and Henrico Counties— the other two Virginia counties
which have adopted improved forms of county government— which are predominate­
ly urhah, Albemarle County is almost wholly rural in character/ The only
incorporated city located within its borders is the City of Charlottesville,
which in 1930 had a population of 15,245. The county seat is located in
Charlottesville, which makes it almost at the center of the County. The
courthouse was moved from Scottsville to Charlottesville in 1762 . The City
annexed parts of the county territory in 1916 and.again in 1938 .
Over half of the population of the County is classified as rural
farm, and over half of the gainful workers are engaged in agriculture.
However,, the. total amount of land devoted to farming is steadily declining.
In 1931 there were only 762 wage earners in both Albemarle County and the
City of Charlottesville. This figure is considerably lower than Bimilar
figures for the urban areas of Henrico-Richmond and Arlington-Alexandria,
which had 3,6,199 and 1,378 respectively. In addition to forestry, the only
other commercial undertaking of any importance in the County has been soap­
stone mining. Charlottesville has no large industries which would serve to
attract large numbers of county residents to work there and thereby serve
to create a large' class of commuters. Retail trade is the City's primary
commercial pursuit. In fact, there are more full-time employees working
in retail trade than in manufacturing industries. The University of Vir­
ginia is said to be the City's largest "industry."
The casual visitor is impressed by the amount of land that is apparent­
ly put to no use at all. Much of the land that is put to use is misused.
The Virginia State Planning Board estimates that over 47,000 acres, or
9.9$ of all the land, largely in farms, is marginal or submarginal in charac­
ter.
Over a third of the rural population lives in areas designated as
problem areas. Perhaps serious soil erosion conditions, yhich alBO character­
ize over a third of the County's area, are the chief factor causing problem
conditions.
Table J shows the acreage of the principal crops of the County. This
table reveals that the larger portion of improved farm land is devoted to
hay and sorgums and to orchards, wheat, and oats.
A large majority of the people of Albemarle County are of English
descent. Very few are foreign born or of foreign or mixed parentage. There
are 6,232 negroes in the County— 23.1 per cent of the total population. Cen­
sus figures indicate that illiteracy is still an important problem in the
County. Among the white people 10 years old or over, 11.4 per cent, or
2,342 were reported as illiterate in 1930. In the same age group there
were 1,027 illiterate negroes--or 22 per cent of this age and color group.
Social stratification ranges between two extremes; from the class of
people living on large country estates and able to afford membership in the
exclusive Farmington Country Club, to people living a hand to mouth existence
in the mountain hollows. Naturally, much of the cultural life of the County
centers around Charlottesville and the University of Virginia. As will
be later explained, officers and professors of the University have had an
important part in improving the government of the County. Incidentally, it
Reproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
INTRODUCTION
it is interesting to observe in this connection that campaigns to improve
county government have teen successful or more nearly successful in
counties which have within their borders a college or university. These
counties are: Henrico, with the University of Richmond; Albemarle, with
the University of Virginia and Hanover, with Bandolph-Macon College.
In summary. Albemarle County is perhaps in a much better position
than many Virginia counties in that it has an adequate population and area
with sufficient wealth to form the basis of an efficient government. One
objection that has been raised to the county manager and county executive
forms of government is that they are not suitable for smaller counties
which are unable to support a government as elaborate as they are. This,
objection could not be raised in Albemarle County.
R eproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
■-5o
CD
o
Q .
C
o
CD
Q .
■o
CD
TABLE I
C
/)
(J
)
o'
3
O
POPULATION AND LAND CHARACTERISTICS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
o
o
1880
■O
0
1
3
*
Total population
Altemarle
Charlottesville
1890
1900
26,788
5,591
28,475
6,449
1910
1920
1930
29,871
6,765
26,005
10,688
26,981
15,245
386,491
388,941
346,035
364,758
1935
CD
Number acres in farm land
424,424
572,498
396,624"
Acres of Improved land in
farms
244,395
220,650
249,409
226,830
215,880
176,751
163,935
2,099
1,911
2,636
2,7*41
3,165
2,527
3,197
202
195
150
l4l
125
137
114
3.
CD
-5
CD
■o
-5
O
C
Q .
a
o
o
■-5O
Total number of farms
Average number of acres per
farm
o
CD
Q .
ACREAGE OF PRINCIPAL CROPS 1934
■o
CD
C
<f)/)
Tobacco
Cotton
C o m harvested for grain
C o m for other purposes
Irish potatoes
Sweet potatoes
Wheat
Oats
Rye
* From United States Census Reports.
2
0
20 .‘44
780
479
149
6,787
1,531
475
Barley
Hay and Sorgums
Soybeans
Cowpeas
Orchards
Farm vetetable gardens
number reported
278
24,256
1,791
1,900
16,777
2,961
CHAPTER II
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
The Political Milieu
There are a few simple facts about politics in Virginia which one
must take into account before considering good and bad forms of local
government, consolidation versus the status quo, administrative re­
organization, and the like. These facts are common knowledge to those
who have had any part in getting out the vote in county elections, who
have run for public office, or who have taken the trouble to prod around
behind the' scenory. When reading textbooks and studying political
parties, one discovers that the county and city party organizations are
basic units in the party structure. When local government is actually
observed in operation, it becomes apparent why, on this level, the basic
ties between a party and its support among the people are cemented. The
reason these local units are basic is, of course, because it is on this
plane that party loyalties are made and nourished. Here patronage,
nepotism, favor-granting, being easy with the public and similar practices,
as well as conscientious public service, pay dividends in the form of
ballots cast the 'right' way.
The typical county in Virginia has five major officers who are
popularly elected— the Clerk, Treasurer, Commissioner of the Revenue,
Commonwealth’s Attorney and Sheriff. Supervisors varying in number
according to the number of magisterial districts are also elected in
every county. In order to be elected to one of these five, major offices
a candidate must get a majority vote in hisfavor. In other words, he
has to do something to convince thatpart of the people that he is
preferable to someone else who may be opposing him. In the typical
Virginia county, where there is. a successful party machine, candidates
are frequently elected to office without opposition. Once in office
a man discovers and utilizes Innumerable ways of strengthening his
support. Taken as a group these five county officers, if they'work 1 '
together, can control enough votes to swing an election their way. By
cooperating with each other in the day to day activities of running the
county government, they will be able to build up a following that will
make extensive pre-election cmapaigning largely unnecessary. In this
way the mystical courthouse ring comes into existence.
The above description, however,
leavesout ah important person. In
nearly every county the Judge of the Circuit Court has considerable
influence in local party councils, primarily because he appoints a
number of county officers. That is, he is one of the chief patronage
distributors. Jury Commissioners, Commissioners in Chancery, Surveyors,
Electoral Boards, Welfare Boards, Tax Assessors are all appointed by the
Circuit Court Judge. In addition and for practical reasons most important,
the Circuit Court Judge is given the power to fill vacancies which.occur
in most of the county offices. Finally, every county has its quota of
lawyers who parctice there and find it to be good policy to stand in well
with the Judge and the county officers generally.
There is no intention here to cast aspersions on county officers.
R eproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
\
Page 8
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
As the Virginia Commission on County Government has pointed out, "It may
he true that there is in some of the counties of the State a group of
elective officeholders who pool their.political influence for the purpose
of making sure their election, that none of them is responsible to any
superior officer, and that their influence and power are out of all pro­
portion to their numbers. This condition, however, does not involve any
conspiracy to prey upon the citizens of the county. It is the natural and
inevitable outgrowth of the present system of county government. Many
of the members of these so-called ’rings’ are drawn from the ranks of our
leading citizens who desiro and strive for the best interests of their
respective counties." ^
By courthouse ring, then, is meant the county officers and their
friends. They operate a successful machine when they can control enough
votos to swing an election their way. By being able to determine who can
win, they more or less determine who can run for office with any degree
of success. Consequently, a man who runs for office does not have much
of a chance of being successful in a county unless he has the support or
at least acquiescence of that county's courthouse ring. Therefore,
candidates for the state legislature and other state officers draw their
support largely from the local courthouse rings. At the risk of putting
too much emphasis on the courthouse ring, it may bo pointed out that it
has important connections with the activities of the General Assembly and
the State party machine. Naturally, legislators who draw their support
primarily from their local courthouse rings will be reluctant to do
anything contrary to the interests of these rings.
With reference to the relation between the local courthouse rings
and the State party machine the following searching passage written by
Dr. E. L. Fox could hardly be improved upon for its political insight.
Why does not the democratic party in Virginia, that has so much
to gain by promoting a form of local self-government that will
root the people in their local institutions, definitely and without
equivication declare itself on a public question of this character
and then set out to realize its platform? The thesis to which the
speaker has come is this: The heads of the democratic party in
Virginia need the support of their court house groups to insure
their continued control of the state electorate. The court house
groups have made it clear that the adoption of either of the new
forms of county governmeno would jeopardize their control of much
of the patronage. Whatever uhe personal views of important state
political leaders, tliex-efore, they do not care to risk a revolution
in the ranks. And so, county government reform lags in Virginia
at the present time because county political groups do not wish to
have their patronage disturbed and so are not giving the local voters
that political leadership to which they are accustomed in other
matters, while tho state political leaders are not willing to press
1. Report on Progress in County Government, County Consolidation and the
Fee System in Virginia and other States, House Document No. 9, February,
193b. p. 5.
R eproduced with permission o fth e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
P O L IT IC A L BACKGROUND
even a good cause against their unwilling lieutenants.,.
«j Page
p
The Old Order in Albemarle County
A look at Albemarle County prior to the reorganization of its
local government in May, 1933 should serve to show that the above general
propositions concerning the political alignments on the question of county
reform are, in general, true, and also that particular counties will vary
considerably from any such general description.
The Board of Supervisors
Since the Board of Supervisors was, prior to 193^, theoretically the
governing body of the County, it might be well to give it first consider­
ation.3 Before the County Executive form of government was established
in Albemarle County in 193^ members of the Board of Supervisors were
elected one from each of the six magisterial districts into which-,the
County was divided. That is, each member's constituency for election
purposes was his own magisterial district. Naturally, the Supervisor
from each district was expected to look out for the interests of his own
district in much the same way as United States Congressmen are expected
to look out for their own states and constituencies. The supervisors
served four year terms, all of them being elected at the same time, in
November of odd numbered years--1919, 1925, 1927, etc. Just after the
county executive form was voted on and approved on May 2, 1933; the
members of the Board of Supervisors then serving were voted on at a
special election, held November 8 , 1933; in accordance with the provisions
of the Optional Forms Act. ^
The men who were members of the Board of Supervisors when the Optional
Forms Act was voted on in May, 1933, all of whom were reelected at the
special election in November of the same year, were men whom county folks
would speak of as among the best and ablest in the County. As a whole,
the Board fo Supervisors- supported the adoption of the new form of
government. However, one individual member opposed its adoption and it
was doubtful how some of the other members stood on the issue. Mr.
Purcell McCue, a prominent orchardist, had been a Supervisor since 1919In the August Primary of 1919 he defeated Mr. Harris 173 to 1^3• -Since
that time he has been nominated and elected without opposition. His
election to the Board of Supervisors is taken for granted. He took an
active part in organizing the Citizens League and worked tirelessly for
the adoption of the county executive form of government. He waB the
2. From a paper read by Dr. Fox at the eleventh annual meeting of the
Virginia Social Science Association held at V. P. I. and Radford
State Teachers' College, May 7 and 8 , 1937, published in Bulletin
of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute, V. 30, No. 8 , June, 1937.
pp. 32-38.
3. See diagrams pp. \ 0 -h 9 for a comparison of old and new forms of
government.
.
if. Virginia Acts of Assembly,- Ch. 368 , Sec. 2773-n 2 (c).
!
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 10
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
most active member of the board in the campaign. Ho is still a member of
the Board of Supervisors from the Samuel Miller District. Recently, he
was chosen as a Vice President of the League of Virginia Counties. Mr. J.
M. Fray had served as a member of the Board of Supervisors since 1908, and
is still a member. During much of this relatively long period he has been
Chairman' of the Board of Supervisors. In the Democratic Primary in August,
1919> Mr. Watts ran a close race with him but Mr. Fray won 2 k l to 213.
Again in the 1927; 1931 and 1935 Democratic primaries he won, encountering
no opposition in the last two. In most of the elections he has been un­
opposed. In the campaign of 1933 he came out in favor of the adoption of
the County Executive Form but did not work very actively.in supporting its
adoption. Mr. W. H. Langhome was the only member of the Board of Super­
visors in 1933 who actively opposed the adoption of the new form of
government. He was the brother of the famous Conservative member of the
British Parliament, Lady Astor. Before he was elected to the Board of
Supervisors in 1927 he served in the Virginia House of Delegates for
several years. During the campaign of 1933 he was convalescent in the
Blue Ridge Sanitorium and had to restrict his opposition to letter
writing. He is reported as having said that the reason he opposed the
new-form was that he did not want to do anything which would injure his
friend Stuart Hamm, who was County Treasurer. After the new form was
adopted,, some members of the Citizens League wanted to put a candidate in
the field and attempt to.defeat Mr. Langhorne. This was not done for fear
that it would cause opposition to develop against the other candidates who
had supported the new form. He won in both primaries and elections with­
out opposition. Dr. L. G. Roberts was elected to the Board of Supervisors
after the new form went into effect. He was elected in November 1935;
succeeding Mr. O'Neal. He was unopposed in both the primary and the
election. Mr. O'Neal had been a member of the Board of Supervisors
from 192^ to 1935. Prior to his election, Dr. Roberts opposed the
adoption of the County Executive Form but is now one of its supporters.
Dr. Roberts had been a very strong opponent of former Superintendent
of Schools, Mr. A. L. Bennett, and probably would have supported the new
form if he had thought if would aid in getting rid of Mr. Bennett. As
we shall see later, Dr. Roberts led the movement which succeeded in prevent­
ing the reappointment of Mr. Bennett. The other two members of the Board
of Supervisors in 1933 were Mr. P. H. Gentry, who had been a member since
1923; and Mr. E. J. Ballard, who had been a member since 1931* Both of
these men are Supervisors at the present time.
The general position of the Board of Supervisors in the County prior
to 1933 was similar to that of other Virginia counties as described by the
Virginia Commission on County Government in its 1931 report to the General
Assembly. The report,reads: "Many persons regard the board of supervisors
as the governing head of the county. This is true, however, only in a
limited sense. The direct jurisdiction and powers of the board are restricted
in the main to such activities as the construction and the maintenance of
roads and bridges, the supervision of public property, the care of the poor
and the determination of the tax: levy. The board has little direct control
over the affairs of the county as a whole. It functions side by side
with numerous officers who are elected in the same manner as the members '
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
Page 11
of the hoard."5
Until July 1, 1932, the Board of Supervisors in Albemarle County was
responsible for the care and maintenance of the secondary roads. In
accordance with an act of the General Assembly, approved March 10, 1928,
Mr. Seth Burnley had been appointed County Manager (more correctly County
Road Manager). His authority was restricted to the construction and
maintenance of roads and bridges, and he had no general administrative
authority over the whole county government. In 1952 the State Highway
Commission took over the construction and maintenance of the secondary
roads, and there was no longer any reason for having a county road
manager. Mr. Burnley later became City Manager of Charlottesville.Control over the county school system and school funds was far'
removed from the Board of Supervisors. The Judge of the Circuit Court
appointed a School Trustee Electoral Board consisting of three members
who served terms of four years. This board.in turn appointed a Boai’d
of School Trustees. ‘The Board of School Trustees in turn appointed’the
Superintendent of Schools. As indicated previously, this round-about
method of appointing school superintendents was designed to assure the
filling of these positions by deserving Democrats. Only Democrats are
appointed by the General Assembly to be Judges of the Circuit Courts. By
giving him wide appointing powers the possibility of Republicans being
in control of the schools, or other offices in localities where their
strength is sufficient to elect men, is avoided. By constitutional
provision the Board,of School Trustees is given general supervision of
the county schools.
The constitution also provides that the Board:of
Supervisors, "shall provide for the levy and collection of.... local
school taxes."7 Thus, in practice, the school board, the Division
Superintendent being an ex officio member, decided how much money was
needed to run the schools; the Board of Supervisors levied a tax
sufficient to raise this amount, and then the school board through the
superintendent spent the money as it chose, independent of the Board
of Supervisors.
Mr. A. L. Bennett, now Superintendent of Schools for the town of
Covington and Alleghany County, was superintendent in Albemarle County
from 1920 to 1937* During this relatively long stay in the County, he
had made a number of enemies as well as many friends. In running the
schools he was practically as free from responsibility to the Board of
Supervisors as the other popularly elected county officers were. At
least, the method of appointing the superintendent and the administration
of school finances, described above, had this effect. A former
Connonwealth's Attorney for the**County relates how, during his term of
office, the Superintendent of Schools was put on the stand and cross
examined courtroom fashion in order to get information from him which
he thought he should have given the Board of Supervisors as a matter of
course. As will be explained later, the problem of controlling the
5. Report of the Commission o n .County Government to the General Assembly
of Virginia, Senate Document No. 5 , (1931), P* 9*
6 . Constitution of Virginia, Article IX, Sec. 133
7* Ibid. Sec. 136 .
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
■Jjp"'1"
Page 12
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
superintendent in the expenditure of school funds later led to the select­
ion of another Superintendent of Schools.
Mr. Bennett supported the movement for the adoption of the county
executive form of government. In fact, it was he who,made the original
motion at a meeting of county citizens that a Citizens League he organized.
No doubt Mr. Bennett felt that his reappointment would he as safe in the
hands of a school hoard appointed directly hy the Board of Supervisors as
under the old system. Indeed, in view of the fact that he was no longer
held in high esteem hy the courthouse ring, and, most important of all,
hy the Circuit Court Judge, to whom indirectly he owed his appointment,
there was reason to helieve that a change in the method of appointment
might he to his-advantage. Also, Mr. Bennett seems to have entertained
hopes that the schools would he given more funds if the new form of
government was established.
In summary, in 1933 and before, the Board of Supervisors in Albemarle
County represented a body- formally the governing and policy forming body
of the whole County but which in substance actually exercised no such
function. State centralization was rapidly progressing along several
lines - in education, public health, public welfare and other local
functions. Perhaps the primary reason why the Board of Supervisors
could not assume its proper role as governing body of the County responsible
to the people was the fact that there existed in the County five county
officers who were also popularly elected and who performed important
administrative functions. It is to these officers and their position
in the old system that we now turn.
Popularly Elected County Officers
Prior to the adoption of the county executive form of government in
1933, Albemarle County's government was in accordance with the provisions
of Article 711 of the Virginia.Constitution. The provisions of this
article required the election in each county of a Sheriff, a Commonwealth's
Attorney, a Commissioner of the Revenue, a Treasurer and a County Clerk,
This method of choosing important county officers naturally attracted men
who were good vote getters. As we have pointed out previously, the bonhommie and pride in ancestry of the County's first one hundred families
have been indispensable requirements for office holding throughout the
County's history. But experience seems to indicate that under modern
conditions the qualities which make a man successful in winning primaries
and elections do not always make him a good treasurer or commissioner
of the revenue. Government, and especially local government, is today
somowhat like business. Attention to details and technical abilities
are as necessary as honesty. Selecting county officers by appointment,
unless accompanied by an effective merit system, may not produce the
best results, but it may militate against the use of official prerogatives
for personal or partisan purposes. The operation of the tax assessing •
and collecting offices under the old and new forms of government in
Albemarle County seems to substantiate this statement.
8. Infra, Chapter X.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 13
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
In commenting on the frequency with which local candidates ran un­
opposed, and the relative lack of interest in primaries, and especially
in the elections, as revealed hy the small number of votes cast, the
Charlottesville Daily Progress took the position that this was a sure
sign that the County enjoyed the services of able and efficient officers?
There are many county citizens, however, who take exception to.this ■
conclusion and state instead that the relative lack of interest on the
part of the electorate permitted, and even encouraged, the election of
inferior county officers.
The defect of .the old system of county government said to be most
serious was the unsystematic, wasteful and generally unsatisfactory
handling of-county finances. The administration of the tax assessing
and collecting offices in Albemarle County prior to 193k reveal very
vividly the truth of this criticism.
Mr. G. Stuart Hamm served as treasurer from 1919 until the new form
of government was put' into operation,in January, 193^. He was quite
successful in both the primaries andythe elections. He won in the
Democratic Primary of 1919 with 1068 votes to U36 for Mr. Jackson Beal
and 18k for Mr. Wingfield. In the 1923 primary his opponent was able to
poll only 88 votes. In the election of this same year he received 1515
votes to 323 for his opponent. Hereafter he was elected to office without
opposition.
Mr. Hamm ia described as a very likeable and thoroughly honest man;
but some of his friends, as well as his enemies, are of the opinion that
he was unsuited to perform the duties of a county treasurer. He chose
as his deputies and assistants many of his own relatives. Although he
was making a salary of between $U,000 and $ 6,500 it is said that it was
necessary that he employ his relatives in order to make a living. The
difficulty was that he signed the notes of too many persons and favored
his friends by not returning their taxes as delinquent. In addition, his
deputies were inefficient and uneconomical in administering the office.
The impression that he spent most of his time keeping in good standing with
his friends and supporters became widespread. The fact that he allowed
a lawyer who had been disbarred and found guilty of stealing court records
to frequent his office did much toward damaging his reputation among■
informed citizens.
Under the old form of government, the treasurer was the person most
likoly to become leader of the courthouse ring because it was his office
which could grant the most favors to the people. Mr. Hamm was generally
recogni zed as the leader of the courthouse ring when the campaign to adopt
the County Executive Form began. However, he could scarcely afford to pay
the cost of such leadership. After the office of treasurer was abolished
under the new form of government and he was left without a job, his property
was sold to pay his debts.
This leadership also cost the County dearly.
9. Editorial, August 5> 1931> 'P*
At one time taxes which
col* 1*
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page I*1'
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
Mb. Hamm had failed to collect and which had become delinquent reached
such a staggering sum that state officials became disturbed. Data will
be given in chapter eight which clearly indicate that the,Treasurer's
office was being run none too efficiently. It will be Been that from
192k to 1950 very meager amounts were collected in delinquent taxes. In
1929 , when state officials became disturbed, other county officers,
particularly the Commonwealth's Attorney, instituted a more vigorous tax
collecting campaign. In 193k, the first year of the operation of the
County Executive Form, delinquent tax collections Jumped from kb to 55
thousand dollars.
The administration of the office of the Commissioner of the Revenue
was not as poor as that of the Treasurer's office but here too, conditions
left much to be desired.
The Garth family is one of the most prominent in'the County and is
famous for its fine horses. The family ran the office of Commissioner
of the Revenue by tradition. Mr. B. Gates Garth held this office from
1920 until he died. His son, Mr. J. F, Garth, who had been employed in
the office for many years before his father died, was appointed by the
Judge of the Circuit Court to fill out the unexpired term. In the 1931
Democratic Primary, Mr. J. F. Garth won easily with 1225 votes to 59**for his opponent. In the election he had no opposition. When the
County Executive Form was adopted, he was offered a Job in his old
office at $200 per month and he accepted it. He held this position
until recently when he resigned. As to be expected both Mr. Hamm and
Mr. Garth were very much opposed to the adoption of the county executive
form of government since it meant that their offices would be abolished.
In 1933 and earlier, Albemarle County suffered the same fate as
other Virginia counties with respect to police protection and crime
detection. In 1928 the situation in Virginia was described as
follows:
There is ample evidence that the criminal aspect of the sheriff's
work is of secondary importance in the eyes of most of the incumbents
of the sheriff's office. The rather extensive range of his other
duties naturally serves to divert his attention from the police
function. The practical operation of the fee system is to direct
the sheriff's attention chiefly to the management of the county Jail,
from the operation of which he receives the larger part of his
compensation.1®
Many counties in Virginia still have virtually no police protection
except that furnished by the state police force.
Mr. J. Mason Smith, the present sheriff, has held that office since
1925. In both primaries and elections he has encountered little
opposition. When the campaign for adopting the county executive form of
10. New York Bureau of Municipal Research, County Government in Virginia,
(1928 ), p. 51.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
POLITICAL BACKGROUND
Page 15
government started in 1933j Mr. Smith, himself did not come out strongly for
either side. The fact however, that his deputies were active against the
change left little doubt as to which side he favored. True to the tradition
for Keeping offices in the same family, the Sheriff's son has been a
deputy for many years and now that the Sheriff is becoming rather advanced
in years, he has assumed a large part of the burden of running the office,
Mr. ¥. 0. Fife has been Commonwealth's Attorney since 1931 • He was
reelected in 1935 without opposition. He comes from one of the older and
more prominent county families— Fifeville got its name from the family. In
1933 Mr. Fife stumped the County against the adoption of the new form ofgovernment.
Mr. W, L. Maupin served as County Clerk from 1919 until 193^* He
resigned in 1936 and his wife, who had been working in the office for a
number of years, was appointed by the Circuit Court Judge to succeed him.
Mr. Maupin was one of the most popular men in the County and a phrase
often used to describe his personality is, "everybody liked him". In 1933
he was not in favor of the new form of government. Although he made no
public speeches against it, he was active as a sort of behind the scenes
director of the opposition.
This concludes a brief description of the position of the various
county offices and the men who occupied them in 1933> before the County
Executive Form of government went into operation. In summary, two out-*
standing characteristics of county politics in Albemarle County have been
long tenure of office and the association of particular offices with
particular families. The number of votes cast in both primaries and
elections has been relatively small. The usual pattern has been the nomina­
tion and election of men to office term after term without any serious
opposition. As vacancies occured, the Judge of the Circuit Court would
appoint men with the desired party or factional affiliation, usually with
due consideration for the tradition of keeping an office within a single
family. It will be seen in the following chapter, that many county citizens
began viewing this method of governing the county by a "closed corporation"
with disfavor. Under these conditions they felt, it was hardly the whole
truth to say, that the people elected men to office who carried out the
general wishes of the community. The very small number of votes cast and
the lack of any strong opposition to courthouse ring candidates seem to
indicate that the dynamics of county politics and government were inherent
more in the personal relations between the members of the courthouse ring
than in the election processes. In more crude terms the system is described
as, "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" or "You help me and I'll
help you". "The county officers could go fox hunting six days a week if
they want to, they have enough deputies to do their work." This remark
by an opponent of the old regime sums up an attitude which was being
expressed by more and more people in 1933 and. before.
with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE II
COUNTY ELECTION STATISTICS*
1919
Primary
Treasurer
Treasurer
1
,, ^36
J. R. Wingfield.......... ,, if&
(No opposition)
Commissioner of Revenue
District No. 1
Commissioner of Revenue
District No. 1
District No. 2
District N o . 2
B . Gates Garth....
(No opposition)
(No opposition)
Commonwealth's Attorney
R . 1. W .
..
Commonwealth*s Attorney
R. T. W. Duke.........
Sheriff
Sheriff
1(^1
Clerk of Court
W. L. Maupin............
Primary
Clerk of Court
(No opposition)
1923
Election
Treasurer
G . S . Hamm..
.....
IV 72
E. M. Rea.................. '88
Treasurer
G. S. Haram.
E. M. Rea........
CoTnmissioner of Revenue
District Ho. 1 '
G . Omohundro....................
(Ho opposition)
District No. 2
B. Gates Garth.............. 95°
C, E. Wilhoit.............. °73
Commissioner of Revenue
District No. 1
G . Omohundro
........
*1750
Sandridge...... ............... .
District No. 2
B. Gates Garth.........
1^°5
Commonwealth1s Attorney
R. T. V. make..................
(No opposition)
Sheriff
J *. M* Smith••«•••••»•••••••••***
(No opposition)
Commonwealth1s Attorney
R. T. W. Duke,.................. 1159
Wingfield..................
888
Sheriff
c
J. M. Smith..................... i858
......... 1515
323
* See note at end of this table.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE Il(cont'd.)
1927
Election
Primary
Treasurer
G. S. Hamm...................
(No opposition)
Commissioner of Revenue
B. Gates Garth.,......... 1296
S. S. Teel.,..............1089
Treasurer
G. S, Hamm....... .
Commonwealth’s Attorney
Lemuel F . Smith
.... 1666
G. E. Walker........
462
Frank Dawson........
194
Commonwealth1s Attorney
Lemuel F . Smith.........
Sheriff
J. M. Smith
........ 1761
C. M. Bailey............ 6ll
Sheriff
J. M. Smith....
Clerk of Court
W. L. Maupin.
Clerk of Court
W. L. Maupin...
Commissioner of Revenue
B . Gates Garth.
....
(No opposition)
Primary
1221
Election
Treasurer
G . Stuart Hamm.
(No opposition)
Treasurer
G. Stuart Hamm,............. 1696
(No opposition)
Commissioner of Eevenue
J. Fendel Garth.......... 1223
Thraves.................. . 394
Commissioner of Revenue
J, Fendel Garth............ 1682
(No opposition)
Commonwealth’s Attorney
W. 0. Fife...... ..1224
A. S. Bolling............ 376
Commonwealth’s Attorney
W, 0. Fife.,..,
(No opposition)
Sheriff
J. Mason Smith...............
(No opposition)
Sheriff
J. Mason Smith,
D> P. Ray.... .
Primary
19?5
Election
Commonwealth's Attorney
W. 0. Fife...................
(No opposition)
Commonwealth’s Attorney
W. 0. Fife....
(No opposition)
Sheriff
J. Mason Smith...............
(No opposition)
Sheriff
J . M^pnn Smf th,............. 1158
(No opposition)
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE Il(cont'd.)
1935(cont'd.)
P rimary ____________________________ Election
Clerk of Court
W. L. Maupin.... ......... ....
(No opposition)
Clerk of Court
W. L. Maupin....
(No opposition)
Primary
1939
Election
Commonwealth1s Attorney
E. V. Walker.............. 1008
860
Paxson...... .’
• Commonwealth's Attorney
E. V. Walker........
H. B. Goodloe............
Sheriff
J. M. Smith.,.................
(No opposition)
. 9*tl
175
Sheriff
J. M. Smith.................. .1066
(No opposition)
Supervisors
J. M. Fray............
L. G. Roberts.........
P. H. Gentry..........
C. P. McCue............
H. A. Harris..........
E. J. Ballard......... .
E. L-. Sandridge.......
* Figures in this table are from Election Abstracts on file in the Clerk's
office. Since the Clerk is required to keep these records for only one
year they are not complete for the earlier years. The above data have
been checked against accounts of elections and primaries appearing in the
Charlottesville Daily Progress and figures for some years are taken from
this source.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER III
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
Introduction
The discussion so far concerning the historical background•of the
County, the physical setting in which its government operates, the nature
and importance of the courthouse ring and the operation of the old order
has been more or less introductory to the main object of this stud,y.
For many years now, advocates of county reform in Virginia have been
asking why, in the seven years the Optional Forms Act has been on the
statute books, only two Virginia counties have taken advantage of it. "Why
was it adopted in Albemarle County and later defeated in every other
county in which it was voted on except Henrico County? An attenpt will be
made to throw some light on this question by tracing in detail the politi­
cal campaign which resulted in the.adoption of the County Executive Form
in Albemarle County, Following this discussion the administrative organiza­
tion and operation of the new form will be taken up with a view to evalua­
ting the results which have been achieved.
The Political Climate
It has been shown In the preceding chapter that a farily well organized
and successful political machine existed in the County in 1933* Treasurer
Hamm, Commissioner of the Revenue Garth, Commonwealth's Attorney Fife,
Sheriff Smith and County Clerk Maupin were invariably successful in the
primaries and elections. No substantial opposition to them ever appeared
In the form of strong rival candidates. The County enjoyed such peace,
politically speaking, that in the election in November, 1931, of the
six supervisors and four other county officers who stood for reelection,
only one,Sheriff Smith, encountered any opposition. Mr. Smith overwhelmed
his opponent by winning 1415 to 263 . What is more important, all the in­
cumbents won easily in the 1931 primary, except Mr. Abell who was defeated
for a place on the Board of Supervisors. The other supervisors had no
opposition at all. Mr. Hamm and Mr. Smith likewise had no opposition.
Mr. Fife and Mr. Garth won easily, the count being 1224 to 376 and 1223
to 394 respectively.
People generally seemed to be satisfied with their county government.
There existed no widespread or organized opposition to the men running
the government. Mr. Stuart Hamm was something of a leader of the court­
house ring. He was a good friend of most of the lawyers around the
courthouse. There were men close to and inside the courthouse ring who
saw and regretted the inefficiency with which county finances were being
handled. It is to the credit of these more farsighted men that, when the
amount of uncollected taxes became so large in 1927 and 1928, they took
steps to have them collected. In fairness it must be said that as a whole
the county officers wanted sincerely to render honest and efficient
public service. They were part of a bad system for which they were not,
individually responsible. Nothing like out and out graft or gross in­
efficiency would have been tolerated by them for long. But it is also
true that the county executive form never would have been voted on in 1933
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 20____________________________________________ .THE CAMPAIGN OF 1955
if the courthouse ring had been depended upon for the initiative in bringing
about its adoption. Furthermore, if the courthouse ring had worked together
and had fought the adoption of the new form wholeheartedly, it is doubtful
whether it would have been adopted. That it was adopted is not an indication
that the courthouse ring was defeated but rather that it suffered division
in its own house. This will become clearer when the campaign is described
in detail.
Origin of the Reform Movement
In August and November, 1953; Albemarle and Greene Counties and the City
of Charlottesville voted on delegates to the state legislature. Early in
January of that year, a group of county citizens began holding meetings with
a view to laying down certain principles to which they wanted local candidates
to adhere. The original objectives of the group may be seen in a set of
resolutions which were drawn up and endorsed by them at their second meeting
on January 13.
I. We believe in reducing the burden of taxation as fas as
possible by economies both in state and local governments.
II.
We are opposed to any increase in taxation of the people
of the state but believe in relieving real estate and tangible
personal property of some of the unjust burden of taxation and
transfer a necessary amount of tax to other sources or through
other channels to the people.
III. Whereas as local school funds are inadequate to provide ade­
quate school terms in many localities, we believe the state should
furnish a larger sum toward paying the teachers' salaries than is
being done at the present time.
IV.
We believe that much money can be saved in the operation
of local governments by legislation being enacted to permit the
board of supervisors and city councils to set the salaries of
local officials and the total costs of assistants to local offi­
cials or the total costs of each local office.
V, We are in favor of each county in the State receiving a pro­
per share of monies from the State for highway purposes, and that
such laws be passed as will permit part of such monies to be used
by counties having bond issues, in first paying the interest on
the bonds, and if any funds remain, to place them in the sinking
fund for the retirement of these bonds.
VI. We have noted with alarm the mounting criminal costs that
are monopolizing the funds of the State. We believe that laws
should be enacted reducing these costs to a reasonable amount,^
At the second meeting of this group of citizens, Mr. A. L. Bennett,
Superintendent of Schools, moved that a citizens league be organized. The
motion was approved and the name, Citizens League, was adopted.
1. C. M. Garnett, Minutes of the Citizens League, 1933.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
._ ______
Page 21
Dr. George. W. Spicer received and accepted a rather unexpected invita­
tion to talk about county government at this second meeting. At that
time Dr. Spicer was Chairman of the Virginia Commission on County Govern­
ment, a resident of the County and Professor of Political Science at the
University of Virginia. He has described the nature of this meeting in
an article written by him for the National Municipal Beview.
The meeting was originally called to effect a countywide
organization of citizens with a view to backing local legislative,
candidates who would support, a platform of tax reduction and state
aid. The writer told his audience that he sympathized with their
desire for tax relief, but felt "we should start at home"; that
there was little hope for relief at the hands of the state un­
til the local governmental house had been set in order; that
the most immediate and most promising opportunity for substantial
relief from the present county tax burden lay in the adoption
of one of the optional forms of county government by the voters
of the county. The two forms were briefly explained.2
Thus, the credit for bringing to the attention of Albemarle County
citizens the desirability of adopting an improved form of county govern­
ment must go to Dr. Spicer. ' Such an idea appealed especially to men
who were familiar with the unsatisfactory state of county affairs. Dr-.
Spicer had been a member of the Commission on County Government since it
was first appointed by Governor Pollard. As a member of this commission
he was in a position to see, as few others could, how wasteful and out
of date county government in Virginia was. Also, he was thoroughly
cognizant of the extent and kind of opposition which any attempt to adopt
one of the optional forms must.overcome. Although he had participated-in
the formulation and drafting of the Optional Forms Act, he was far from
viewing it as a cure-all or panacea. During the campaign he acted as
a brake in slowing down any of his colleagues who might be inclined to
make extravagant claims for the proposed new form or make erroneous state­
ments as to how it was intended to operate. It was at his suggestion
that as between the county manager and county executive forms the
Citizens League chose to campaign, for the adoption of the latter. He. and
the other members of the Commission on County Government were anxious to
have one county in the state try adopting one of the new forms of govern­
ment and see how it worked in practice.
The Reformers
It is Important to know what type of people would be interested most
in improving county government; what in general their economic position
and their attitude toward government is. As has been pointed out above,
the members of the Citizens League were citizens who were accustomed to
taking an active part in county affairs and politics in general. They
wanted reductions in the taxes on real estate and tangible personal property,
2. G. W. Spicer, "Albemarle County, Virginia, Adopts the Executive Plan,"
National Municipal Review, Vol. XXII, p. 333•
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 22
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1953
Many of them were relatively large holders of this class of property. To
get relief they would have to look to their own county government rather
than to the State since this class of property was segregated for local taxa­
tion exclusively. In the second place, they wanted better schools and more
JLocal control over them by the Board of Supervisors. They felt that the
Board of Supervisors should be given authority to control the compensation
of'local officers» The unsatisfactory fee system as a method of compensa­
ting county officials, the inefficient handling of county finances by
officers who hired inefficient personnel to do the work, and the like, did
not appeal very strongly to a group of successful business and professional
men. The opponents of the Citizens League accused its members of being
disappointed office seekers, and there probably were a few personal enemies
of the courthouse ring among its membership. However, personal grievances
and the desire to hold office were not the dominant forces behind the
reform movement.
The Optional Forms Act liras 'made to order' for the situation in Albe­
marle County. With its provisions in operation the financial offices of
the County, (the offices of the Treasurer and the Commissioner of the
Revenue) could be consolidated and brought under the control of the Board
of Supervisors, This held out a hope that the most objectionable parts of
the old system could be got rid of. It was these two offices which needed
improvement most.
In the accompanying table an attempt has been made to list informa­
tion about some of the most promlnont and active participants in the re­
form movement. This table may to some extent illustrate what the Secre­
tary of the Citizens League meant when he explained that their policy
was to go into each district and select the 'best' people to direct the
campaign. With the 'best' people on their side they could not lose. The
Citizens League had little difficulty in convincing the more prominent
farmers, merchants and business men that their cause was worthy. As indica­
ted previously, the members of the Board of Supervisors, except Mr. Langhome, either supported the change or at least refrained from actively
opposing it. Without a single exception, the members of the School Board
supported the change. The candidates for the General Assembly, who were
to be voted on a few months after the County Executive Form was decided on,
assumed the attitude that this question was something for the people to
decide, and they did not feel that it was their duty to come out definitely
in support of either side. They wanted to see which way the wind was going
to blow before charting their course,
Mr, Bernard Chamberlain, one of the candidates for the state legisla­
ture, took a stand which was, on the whole, against adoption of the new
form and in defense of the existing county officers. On February 17, he sent
a statement to the executive committee of the Citizens League the general
thesis of which was that county expenditures were being substantially de­
creased, the county fee officers were not being paid excessive salaries and
they were faithfully and economically performing their duties. His state­
ment reads in part:
.
I approve in theory the adoption of this form of government in
this county, but a close study of present conditions has caused me
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE I I I
CITIZENS ACTIVE IN THE CAMPAIGN IN ALBEMARLE
COUNTY FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE FORM
OF GOVERNMENT
C. Purcell McCue
Orchardist
Board of Supervisors
Chairman of Citizens League
Contributed to Campaign Fund
C, M. Garnett
Dairyman, Farmer
Chairman School Board
Secretary-Treasurer of Citizens
League, Organizer for the League
J. B. Kegley
Farmer
Active in Chamber of
Commerce
Directed Campaign in Charlottes­
ville District, Attended op­
position meetings, asked ques­
tions, etc.
E.' M, Wayland
Designer and Manufactur­
er of Farm Machinery
Directed Cangpaign in Samuel Miller
District, Made several speeches
Directed Campaign in White Hall
District
S. P. Nottingham
E. Nelson Beck
Directed Campaign in Scottsville
District
Prominent Businessman
Mrs. Nelson Beck
Prominent in County
and City Clubs and
Charitable Organiza­
tions
V. E. Mundy
Prominent Businessman
John Morris
Prominent Businessman
and landowner
Active participant in meetings and
Discussions of Citizens League
Director Campaign in Rivanna
District
Former Mayor of
Charlotte sville
Made speeches in support of new
form of government
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABES H I (cont'd)
Hollis Binehart
Bank Director and
Businessman
On Board of Supervisors
1919-1923
Spoke in support of
new form of government
G. W.- Spicer
Professor at University
of Virginia
Chairman of Virginia
Commission on County
Government
Made some 20 speeches at
different places, Acted
as "technical advisor"
to League
Wilbur Nelson
Professor at University
of Virginia
Former State Geologist
Active in Clubs, Kivanis,
etc.
Made speeches in support
of new form, Attended
opponent's meetings
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1935
Page 25
to have some reservations ahout adopting it immediately. Some
confusion would result necessarily in making the change from
the present organization to the new organization, and the point
is respectfully suggested that such confusion in the first
county to adopt thiB form might prejudice the whole reform
movement in the eyes of the 193^ General Assembly. It might
he found best to give patient Btudy to the proposed applica­
tion of this form to this county with a view toward seeking
any amendments found to he necessary in the next General
Assembly before actual adoption of the plan. It might be
well also to make a further study as to the constitutionality
of the act creating the new’form of government...The old form
should not be scrapped if the new form’s growing pains are
going to be at the taxpayer’s cost. Under the present system
the county as a whole is in an enviable financial condition
and all departments have cut expenses,to come within the limits
of anticipated receipts.
In this statement Mr. Chamberlain went on to defend each county officexas to salary received and work performed. He pointed out that the
Commissioner of Revenue in Albemarle County had to handle relatively more
property valuation than similar officers in other counties and that his
expense allowances had been reduced. With reference to the Clerk he said:
"He works frequently at night and. has no definite annual vacation, and never
takes more than an occasional day or two for vacation." The Commonwealth’s
Attorney, he said, had to pay office expenses out of his own compensation
whereas in other counties they were given expense allowances. Continuing
his statement with respect to the Treasurer he said: "It should be noted
that the Treasurer, like the other officers mentioned herein, although
having 9 to 5 office hours, actually observes no definite office hours, and
as a matter of fact in 1932 the Treasurer was away from his office only 6
full days during the year, two of these being on official business, and his
auditor and chief deputy was away for a vacation of only 7 or.8 days."
On March 31 and 22, the Daily Progress featured extensive articles by
Mr. Chamberlain which expressed much the same convictions as the state­
ments referred to above. Two interesting statements contained in the
newspaper articles may be reproduced with profit. He wrote: "It is my
personal conclusion that although some expected and harmless nepotism
exists in the present County government there is no graft and no considera­
ble waste in having too great a number of officials." ... "The people of
Albemarle County can view with pardonable pride the financial condition
of their County at the present time, when many counties in this state and
in other states are unable to balance their budgets even with increased
taxes...Regardless of the form of government under which this County
operates it appears that positions of authority may be safely entrusted
to its citizens,"
These extensive quotations are not presented primarily to show that
Mr. Chamberlain may have been incorrect in some of his conclusions and
predictions. The actual operation of the new form has considerably lessen­
ed the force of his statements. But hindsight is always better than fore-
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 26
. T P CAMPAIGN OF 1933
sight. The primary object was to illustrate the general position a lawyer
and a candidate for the state legislature might be expected to take and the
type of opposition which comes from this source.
Organization of the Citizens League
On January 18, 1953# the Executive Committee of the Citizens League met
in the county courthouse to perfect their organization and begin the campaign
for adoption of the County Executive Form of Government. Mr. McCue had been
elected Chairman of the League and Mr. Garnett, who had' served on the School
Board for years, had been elected to serve as Secretary and Treasurer. A
committee was appointed for each magisterial district to direct the cam­
paign in its district. The chairman of these district committees, along
with the more active members, acted as leaders in their districts and ser­
ved on the executive committee of the whole League. A series of meetings
was arranged. Those were held in the school buildings throughout the
County. Eight meetings were planned to be held at regular intervals in
different schools.
The task faced by the Citizens League was one of educating the voters
as to the merits of the proposed County Executive Form of goverhment. The
average citizen of the County knew little about the way the existing county
government worked and even less about the way the new form was intended to
work. One of the great difficulties encountered in counties which attempt
to adopt one of the optional forms of government is to find men who really
understand the new forms and are capable of explaining them to other people.
Not only the people at large, but also those who take a more active part
in county affairs and hold positions of leadership are too often unfamiliar
with the new forms provided for in the Optional Forms Act of 1932. The fact
that University and College professors can fill this need Is perhaps the
reason why county reform has been most successful in counties where there
is a large educational center. It is essential to the success of campaigns
to adopt one of the optional forms that there be available men capable of
understanding the contents and purposes of the Optional Forms Act and able
to defend it against many absurd denunciations which are invariably made.
There were no existing organizations which could direct the movement in
Albemarle County comparable to the way in which Chambers of Commerce have
led reform movements in American cities. Furthermore, the local press was
among the opposition. The method of holding meetings in the school houses
throughout the County had to be relied upon. This required competent
speakers. As will be explained later, the men who would ordinarily stump
the County on political issues either were on the other side of the fence
or adhered to a hands-off policy
Dr. *Spicer made some 20 speeches in aB
many different parts of the County. Professor W, A. Nelson made several
speeches and was very effective. Messrs. Wayland, Morris, McCue, Bhinehart and Garnett also helped with the speech making. At its meetings the
Citizens League made it a practice to throw the meeting open for questions
and discussion after its speakers had finished. The members of the
audience were encouraged to ask questions. The Citizens League invited
speakers of the opposition to attend their meetings and participate in the
discussions, Tho League would detail certain members to attend meetings
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 27
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
ty their opponents and they would insist on the right to ask questions.
This type of inquisitiveness on the part of audiences at political meet­
ings is not at all in keeping with old fashioned American oratorical
methods and can he-quite disturbing to "old school" orators when persisted
in. The fact that the speakers of the opposition were very reluctant to
submit to the embarrassment of answering questions intended to take them
to task for some of their statements did not help their cause in the eyes
of the audiences. Frequently, the wives of some of the leaders in the
reform movement, who enjoyed considerable prominence in their own right
by reason of their activities in local clubs and welfare and educational
work, took an active part in the meetings and asked questions.
The Citizens League had no difficulty in securing the necessary num­
ber of signatures for its petition to hold a special election. The date
of the election was set for May 2, 1933*
A Political Bally on Court Day
In the latter part of March and the first part of April, Interest
in the movement seemed to be waning, Mr. Chamberlain’s defense of the
existing regime had been published in the Daily Progress on March 21 and
22. This paper had declared in an editorial that, "A new and revolution­
ary change in government might or might not result in a vast improvement."?
None of the county officers who were known to be strongly opposed to the
change, came out openly and vigorously against it. The opposition seemed
to be waiting for the reform spirit to die out and then when voting time
came they would depend upon their machine to deliver the vote as it always
had.
The strategists of the Citizens League put their heads together and
made preparations for a general meeting which was to be held at the
courthouse on April 22. A b one of these stragetists explained, he ad­
vised his colleagues to get out their supporters and bring them to town
by the truckload. What mattered now was who had the most supporters
present, and which side could shout and applaud the loudest. It is just
as important, he explained, to discredit and shout down your opponents
as it is to clap for and applaud your supporters. This line of attack
seems to have been very effective« Beginning with the courthouse meeting
on April 22, the more dignified educational and forum atmosphere gave
way to the old time type of political campaign which was far more excit­
ing. When both opponents and supporters of the change met face to face
in the courthouse, the real battle began.
Commonwealth’s Attorney Fife and Mr. George Walker, an attorney in
Charlottesville, made speeches in opposition to the proposed change.
Mr. Wayland spoke in support of the change and then, as the Daily Progress
reports it: "Mr. Wayland started the verbal fireworks by declaring at
the close of his address that he had urged the public prosecutor to take
no part in this election and by expressing astonishment that he is to
3. March
2k, 1933> p.
'V,
col. 2.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 28
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
stump the: cdttnty in hehalf of one set of citizens as against another."^- Con­
tinuing the newspaper report: "Mr. Fife, speaking with some intensity,
immediately rose to answer that he considered it his duty to inform the people
of Albemarle what they are voting for and to point out to the voters the
difficulties existing in the law."5 Mr. Nelson Beck and Mrs. Virginia Beck
put Mr. George E, Walker on the spot. They said that in previous conversa­
tions with Mr. Walker he had expressed his sympathy with the reform movement
and had said that he was willing to stump the County in support of the
change. This Mr. Walker denied. He contended that he had merely expressed
his interest in the question as a whole. Things were beginning to move along
swiftly and the general excitement was increasing.
Mr. John Morris, who had been asked by some of the leaders of the Citizens
League, to attend had come in late and had taken a seat in the back of the
room. He had not intended to say anything. But Mr. Morris is a man who
believes in calling a spade a spade and in speaking his mind regardless of
the consequences. He admits that he sometimes 'flies off the handle' and
that he did so on this occasion.
When Mr. Fife said things about the government ofthe city of which Mr,
Morris had been mayor and which he did not like, and when Walker denied
making overtures to campaign for the Citizens League, Mr. Morris left his
back seat, made his way through the audience to the brass rail, demanded the
right to speak and proceeded to speak his mind. As Mr. Morris describes
the affair, he soon had the whole audience on his side. Before he had
finished, Mr. Fife slipped out a side door amid boos and hisses from the
audience; Mr. Walker slumped down into his chair unable to reply. As we
shall see later, Mr. Walker made a good object of attack for a speaker
who has no scruples against what politicians call 'dragging in persalities.'
Such a vehement and emotional display did not appeal to Dr. Spicer at all,
who now says he wished he could have been swallowed up by the floor, Mr.
Morris contends that it is all right to talk in theoretical terms and ex­
plain principles, but if you know county folks as he does you will follow
a more effective course. His method was to picture the poor farmer working
hard from sunup to sundown able to make only a bare living; his wife
slaving over the washboard to make ends meet; all this while at their
expense a few officers draw fat salaries and at the same time have their
families holding jobs and have a string of deputies to do the work. So
when the county officers throw a spoonful of mud on the reformers by brand­
ing them as academicians and advocates of dictatorship and oligrachy,
there is mud which can be thrown back by the bucketful.
This detailed, and perhaps, unnecessarily personal description has been
presented only because it seems to be true that this element in reform
campaigns is an important ingredient of local politics and one which must
be taken into account. In every county where one of the optional forms
has been voted on there has been much of this darker side of politics in
evidence. Perhaps it was this kind of politics that the present Chairman
4. April 22, 1933, p. 1, col. 5.
5. Ibid.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF
1953
Page 29
of the Virginia Commission on County Government, Dean Pinchbeck, had in
mind when he expressed the hope that "the present optional forms of
county manager and county executive government he so completely x-evised,
in cooperation with the officials and citizens of...Virginia ...counties
that they will he overwhelmingly adopted 'hy the citizens of those coun­
ties without hitter struggle and under the leadership of the county offi­
cials themselves.
The Opposition
In an article previously referred ,to, Dr. Spicer described the nature
of the opposition in the following terms:
The office holders of the county, excepting the hoard of
supervisors and the school officials, were solidly against the
new plan and fought it desperately. The Commonwealth's Attor­
ney of the county stumped the county against the plan. It was
difficult to find a lawyer around the courthouse who was not
of the opposition. The chairman of the Democratic Committee
of the county worked actively against the new plan.7
Many laymen, and many lawyers themselves, frequently ask why the
legal profession is as a whole so conservative in politics. It is not
difficult to discover why the average lawyer is conservative or anti­
reformist in so far as county government is concerned.
Imagine that Mr. X has been a Circuit Court Judge or a State Senator
for the past 8 or 10 years. Before holding this office he was Common­
wealth's Attorney for a few years and then went to the state legislature
for several terms. He has a son who pleases him hy deciding to study
law. Let us assume that the son has no liking for city life or did not
happen to he among the few in his class who made Dean's List and Law
Review. He was not offered a position hy a New York corporation after
graduating. Since his family has lived in the County for many years,
he has many local friends and relatives. One of these friends, perhaps
related to him, takes him into his law office to get him started. As far
hack as he can remember, he has heard his father talk about grooming
so and so for the primary and how he won the election. The county officers
become his close acquaintances. He meets them in the Clerk's office,
in the court room, at party meetings and at many other places. Perhaps
they send him clients. Soon he has a fairly large practice and decides
that he can hear the expense of a campaign for a seat in the state legis­
lature, His friends sound out the supervisors, other county officers,
members of the school hoard and other people prominent in county affairs
to see if they will support him in the primary. If many of these people,
especially the county officers, will not support him he will not have
much chance of being successful. To advance politically he must have the
6. A Cooperative Program for Improved County Government in Virginia. Paper
read before the meeting of the League of Virginia Counties, Dec. I,- 1938.
7. G. W. Spicer, o£. cit., 333.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 30
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
the support and cooperation of the county officers. Consequently, when a
movement gets under way to abolish offices, or to make elective offices
appointive, naturally our hypothetical lawyer will help those whose offices
are threatened and who are in a position to help him. Ordinarily he will
not align himself with any group that distubes the existing political setup
by campaigning for the adoption of one of the optional forms of government.
He usually concludes that it is in his best interest to maintain the status
quo, and because he takes this position becomes what is called a conservative.
This imaginary case may serve to illustrate why the lawyers as a whole,
certainly, at least, in Albemarle County, have opposed the adoption of im­
proved systems of county government. '
One of the local lawyers who opposed the reform movement in Albemarle
County, but who was by no means typical of the other local lawyers, was Mr.
George E. Walker. He was referred to above in connection with the court­
house meeting of April 21. This extraordinary man connected with one of
the most widely known families in the County seems to have been continually
getting into trouble. The story of his part in the Citizens League's
campaign of 1933 runs like this: Sometime before any of the county officers
came out openly against the proposed change, Mr. Walker approached leaders
in the Citizens League and offered them his services. The Citizens League
would not meet his termB, being unwilling to pay him for campaigning on
their side. Later he and the county officers who came out in opposition to
the proposed change struck a bargain and he agreed to stump the County on
their side. The amount frequently mentioned as his compensation is $300,
but there is, of course, no proof that this was the sum, or, Indeed, that
he was paid at all. Even more extravagant rumors are current, for instance,
that a state association of local officers paid him $800 to fight the re­
form movement. Then something of the comic enters into the story. After
Mr. John Morris'devastating speech at the courthouse meeting Mr. Walker
was so thoroughly discredited that those who had hired him decided that ho
was more of a liability than an asset, They decided to break their alliance
with him. But Mr, Walker was not to be gotten rid of so easily. As the
story goes, he went on and made the speeches he had agreed to make and took
his stenographer along with him to taken them down in shorthand so that
he would have proof that he had fulfilled his part of the bargain. How
much of this story is true only Mr. Walker and a few others know. The
important thing is that people thought it was true. His affiliation with
the opposition did them great harm and added to the 'turn the rascals out'
psychology which reform movements tend to create.
Enough has already been said about the county officers to indicate that
not all of them, or all of the members of the courthouse ring, actively
opposed the adoption of the county executive form. If the new form was
adopted, it meant that Mr. Hamm and Mr, Garth would lose their positions or
would have to accept a job at a reduced salary, Naturally these two officers
vigorously opposed the proposed change. Most of the speakers for the Citizens
League insisted that their campaign was not directed .against the men who
were holding county officers, but rather that they were fighting to get rid
of an antiquated system. In fact, Mr. Hamm and Mr. Garth were approached by
leaders of the Citizens League in the early part of-the campaign and were told
that they could be given jobs under the new system if it was adopted. Mr.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 31
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1935
Fife's position as Commonwealth’s Attorney was not affected hy the new
form, except that he faced the possibility of a reduction in his salary
at the hands of the Board of Supervisors. The same was true with respect
to the Sheriff’s office. It was somewhat against the wishes of the other
county officers that Mr. Hamm, Mr. Garth and Mr. Fife actively opposed
the adoption of the county executive form. Those who lost their jobs ■
because of its adoption, it was contended, could be given other, jobs.
Besides, some of the county officers saw clearly that there was no good
reason why the Treasurer and the Commissioner of the Revenue should be
popularly elected. They saw that some of the most intelligent and most
respected people in the County were for the change, and realized that
they were right in arguing that the County’s finances should be handled
in a more businesslike manner. Judge Lemuel Smith, who had weathered many
a political -battle in the County, would not permit his name to be associa­
ted with either side. However, it was generally known that he was in
favor of the change. Certainly, today, he would be ono of the last men
in the County to deny that it was one of the greatest changes and improve­
ments made in the government of the County for many years. Sheriff Smith
did not take an active part in the campaign but that he did not approve
of the change is evidenced by the fact that his deputies distributed hand­
bills for the opposition. As pointed out previously, Clerk Maupin, one
of the most popular men in the County, was known to be opposed to a change
in government.
In summary, then, the lineup was those among the courthouse group
whose offices were directly affected versus the reformers. At the close
of the campaign the Daily Progress summed up the alignments as follows:
"True the campaing has been active and bitter; the alignment has become
clear and unmistakable— the ’Outs' against the 'Ins'; the new against the
old. "8
Campaign Issues
From the beginning the Citizens League emphasized the contention
that it was attacking a system and not particular men; But human frailty
is such that 'personalities' are usually injocted into the ordinary politi­
cal campaign. It must be said, however, that the campaign in Albemarle
County never reached the degree of bitterness and intensity which characteri­
zed the campaigns in Henrico and Chesterfield Counties. The 'personality'
side of the Albemarle campaign has already been treated. Attention will
be focused upon the more impersonal discusBion of issues in this: section,
and arguments for and against the change in government on principles will
be taken up. It will be remembered that the only men who campaigned for
the opposition in the form of making speeches were Mr. W. 0. Fife and Mr.
G. E. Walker. Consequently, the arguments of the opposition on principles
will have to be restricted largely to the writings and utterances of these
two men. The position of Mr. Bernard Chamberlain has already been des­
cribed. Early in April, 1933; the Citizens League issued a four page
leaflet containing an article written by Dr. Spicer. The existing chaotic
conditions in the government of the county were described. The nature of
$. Editorial, May 1, 1933; p.
col. 1.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 32
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1953
the county executive form of government and its advantages over the old form
were explained. The abolition of the fee system was said to he desirable
for two primary reasons. In the first place, it would tend to make the
county officers perform their duties more faithfully. In the second place,
the County would save money since the fees collected would be diverted from
the pockets of the officeholders to the county treasury.
Economy in government was advanced as an important reason for changing to the county executive
form. It was estimated that over twelve thousand dollars per year would be
saved as a result of the consolidation of the County’s financial affairs
under the direction of the County Executive. If the change was not made,
the argument went, the County would be governed more and more from Richmond
and the citizens would have less and less'direct control over their local.
government. Highway construction and maintenance had already been placed
under state control and it looked as if control over the schools would also
be taken over by the State unless county government were improved.9
In answer to this article by Dr. Spicer a pamphlet was written by Mr.
Walker and distributed by the opposition. The theme of Mr. Walker's pamphlet
was that under the County Executive Form there would be more officers and
the cost of government would be higher than under the old system. To
illustrate the arguments advanced by the opponents of the change this pamphlet
will be quoted from at some length.
One might be inclined to believe that after so many futile experiments of the Hoover administration, resulting from political aspirations, we would be immune from others. Nevertheless, and notwithstanding this experience, an element ip Albemarle County is
asking that a most dangerous experiment be tried at this time. If,
for one moment, one thinks that this form of government will relieve
the present need for economy, let the thought be dispelled. In the
"County Executive Form," of government there is no limiit beyond which
the Board of Supervisors cannot go in creating new positions, clerical
or otherwise, nor in the amount of salaries.
\
j
,|
|
\
j
j
|
\
J
J
j
\
1
.
|
j
;
■
j
I
i
i
Let’s review briefly a pamphlet issued by the Albemarle Citizens
League, signed Geo. W. Spicer, at the request of Mr. McCue, its chair­
man. He states that the present form of government represents a
picture of extreme confusion, and that the proposed form of govern­
ment is almost a complete "cure .all". There is not on office-holder,
or salary eliminated, except one or two minor offices hereinafter
noted, and the school trustees electoral.board, which has heretofore
appointed the School Board. All the work to be done is simply
transferred to other departments with the power to increase the num­
ber in those departments.
Let’s look at the record. The Governor will still have the
power under the constitution and general laws passed in pursuance
thereof to appoint the same number of officers. The Judge of the
9. G. W. Spicer, An Important Issue before the Voters of Albemarle County,
1933> (A four page leaflet printed and distributed under the auspices of
the Albemarle Citizens League.)
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
Page 33
Circuit Court will still have the same power to do like­
wise, except one or two minor appointees referred to herein­
after .
One might he fooled to "believe hy looking at tho unique
chart prepared hy Professor Spicer, making a comparison be­
tween the present organization and the proposed organiza­
tion, that the latter eliminates officers and salaries hy
the score. Such is not a fact. The article and chart is
nothing more nor less than an effort of puerile political
mendicancy and demagoguery.
As a commendation it is stated that (l) it was drafted
hy the Virginia Commission on County Government and (2) it
was approved hy an overwhelming majority of the General
Assemhly, As to the first it can he well said that the pro­
posed organization is thoroughly inoculated with pedagogic
theories, and as to the second, it is generally believed
that for some years prior to 1932 the General Assembly ex­
hausted all human ingenuity to increase office holders and
salaried employees.
The "big play" though is against the office of the
treasurer and commissioner of revenue. Why these particular
offices should he solocted is not disclosed. We now know
that their salaries are fixed hy the General Assemhly,
through its duly authorized representatives, and have been
reduced.
Well, what is this change going to cost with reference
to the elimination of these offices. No one knows, nor can
anyone tell you. There is an immense amount of work to ho
done in both. I repeat: What is the change going to cost?
Professor Spicer says that the chief executive would
doubtless also serve as director of the Department of Finance.
With all due respect, tho duties of both offices are such
that it would not ho humanely possible for any one man to
perform them. Again Professor Spicer deals in futuro. He
says .that this man of such ability and genius (a wizard to
he found) would probably he allowed $k ,500 for his salary,
a full timo assistant, $2,000; five other assistants
$5,000 and $500 for office expenses. Thus a saving of
$12,000. One would like to know is Professor Spicer has
information as to what is going to he done, which he has
not disclosed to the taxpayers.-1-0
10. G. E. Walker, Executive Form of County Government for Albemarle
County, Reasons Why You Should Vote Against It, April l6, 1933•
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
Page 'Jk
The opponents of the county executive form had copies of the provisions
of the Optional Forms Act dealing with this form of government printed with
a statement by Mr. George E. Walker on the first page. This statement reads
in part as follows:
The Chief Executive can be selected from Chicago or any distant
city. He can assume the work of assessing your property for taxes.
What would he know about local conditions. Do you want your property
assessed by one with city inflated ideas?
Has any advocate of this new system been able to show how much
in dollars and cents the citizens will save by making the change?
If you vote for this form of government you are putting your­
selves in the clutches of an octopus whose tentacles run in all
directions, and you and your children, and children's children, will
be squeezed forever, and you will never get rid of it.
You are offered a wild horse to ride, and where you may be taken;
no one knows. Kill this movement, men and women of Albemarle County,
in its inception, by your ballot.11
In answer to Mr. Walker's denunciation of the proposed change in govern­
ment, Mr. J. B. Wingfield prepared a statement which he sent to the editor
of the Daily Progress. He and his colleagues in the Citizens League had
expected the paper to publish it, just as the paper had previously published
Mr. Walker's statements. At the .end of the reprints of Mr. Wingfield's
statement this sentence occurs: "To avoid any criticism from the opposition
to the executive form of County government I have offered this to the Daily
Progress and they have refused publication on account of its length."l^
The difficulty was that the Daily Progress was probably not as interested
in publicizing this side of the issue.
The following quotations will present some of the arguments advanced
by Mr. Wingfield in support of the adoption of the new foxm of government.
It will be well for every taxpayer to take note of those
who are leading the fight against the adoption of the Executive
Form of County Government. Trace them back and see if they are
an office holder or subordinate of an office holder, or one wish­
ing some favor, or support from one or more of our office holders.
11. G. E. Walker, Wamingl Stop: Study: and Learn Before Casting Your Vote on
May 2nd. 1933. p. 1.
12. This sentence was attached as a P.S. at the end of the reprints of a
letter sent by Mr. Wingfield to the Editor of the Daily Progress, April
15, 1933.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
Page 35
Why are some attorneys in Charlottesville taking such
an active interest in the affairs of Albemarle County,
spreading misinformation, spending time and money trying to
keep in force an extravagant form of government over which
there is little local control?
Are they bidding for support for some political office
or seeking other emoluments?
The taxpayers know that each supervisor is a taxpayer
and any added expense is a burden on him as on all others. It
will be to the supervisors' personal interest to cut exhorbitant salaries and expense accounts and allow only reasonable
amounts as reasonable compensations for services rendered and
not vast amounts to be disbursed for political patronage.
The executive form of county government will be a good
thing for Albemarle. It will give our Supervisors an
opportunity to set reasonable salaries and reasonable expen­
ses for our different officers and therefore save money that
can be applied to our hard pressed schools, to interest and
sinking fund of our bonded debt, or reduce our tax levy in
these hard times.
It will put our school system under the control of
the people by having the school board appointed by the
Board of Supervisors and removable at their pleasure. If
the school board does not carry out the principles as laid
down by our Supervisors, they can be changed and a board
put in that will heed the Supervisor's voice. The Board
of Supervisors are elected by the people and are responsive
to the will of the people.
Get the facts and vote for the Executive Form of
County Government that our farms may not be confiscated by
taxation to support an uneconomic and extravagant form of
government.
Let us clean house at home and then we can make a
stronger appeal for the State to set its house in order. ^ 3
Commonwealth's Attorney Fife prepared a statement which was sent to
to the editor of the Baily Progress and which was reprinted and distributed
throughout the County. He spoke of the fee system as a method of compensa­
ting county officers in the following terms:
13. Ibid
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
36
THE CAMPAIGN OF
1933
To summarize— six magistrates, six deputy sheriffs, and the
person designated in place of the County Surveyor, a minimum of 13
persons, at present costing the County nothing, are placed on
salaries at the expense of the County.
To this list of 13 persons will apparently he added the Sheriff,
Clerk, and Commonwealth’s Attorney, and last, hut not least, the
newly-created officer, the County Executive. Thus, we will have 17
additional salaried officials and employees. It has hy no means
heen overlooked that the Act provides that fees shall he abolished
as a method of compensation— they are not to he truly abolished— and
theoretically at least, the fees are still to he collected and turn­
ed into the County.^
It is apparent that much of the materiel contained in the statements of
Mr. Fife and Mr. Walker is misleading. The situation with respect to fee
officers' compensation is especially confused in Mr. Fife's statement. The
13 officers which he referred to cost the County nothing only in the sense
that they were not on the County's payroll. They were paid through the
collection of fees from the county citizens.
Mr. Walker's tactics were attempts to create fear in the minds of the
citizens. His reference to the county executive form as a "dangerous experi­
ment" 15 ■comparable to the "many futile experiments of the Hoover Administra­
t i o n " ^ was not such a strong statement after all in the light of measures
which have heen called dangerous experiments of the New Deal. But hy attach­
ing the label 'Hoover' to 'county reform' the statement probably served its
purpose when read hy the voters, predominantly Democratic, and, like so many
people at that time, wondering why Mr. Hoover had not gotten the country
out of the depression.
These partial exhibits of the literature distributed hy the opposition
clearly show the need of having available someone capable of going beneath
vague phrases and revealing a truer picture of the facts. As stated pre­
viously, Dr. Spicer filled this role very ably. In fact, he even corrected
his own colleagues on points at public meetings when it may have been some­
what embarrassing. In many of his speeches Commonyealth’s Attorney Fife
expressed the fear that the new form of government would be declared un­
constitutional and therefore its adoption by the County would lead to con­
fusion. Naturally people would attach considerable authoritativeness to an
opinion on a legal problem rendered by the County's public prosecutor. How­
ever, Dr. Spicer had participated in drafting the act and consequently could
speak with.equal authoritativeness on this question. Even lay citizens
1^. W. 0. Fife, Can the County Carry the Costs? Reprints of a statement sent
to the editor of the Daily Progress.
15. G. E. Walker, loc. cit.
16. Ibid.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
Page 37
would sometime sense the unfairness with which the opposition would imply
that the County would have to hear increased "burdens hy placing certain
officers on a salary hasis.
The supporters of the County Executive Form were not altogether
Simon-pure in their choice of methods. They did not fail to capitalize
on the popular dislike for ’bureaucracy' and ’office holders'. While
some of the reformers insisted that their efforts were directed toward
the abolition of an out of date system and not against particular office
holders, some of them frequently pointed out that it was the present
office holders who were determined to perpetuate this system, A news item
from the Daily Progress reporting a speech hy Mr. Wayland illustrates
this point:
"I know of no man or woman connected with this move­
ment who expects to get one cent of money or advantage that
all of us wont get out of it as taxpayers,"
He (Mr. Wayland) said that the office holders of the county
were divided into two classes. First, those who cannot hope
for private gain in the administration of county affairs, such
as the supervisors, and second, those "whose' only hope of pri­
vate gain is through holding office." 17
Mr. John Morris was reported hy the Daily Progress as having made •
the following statement:
"Furthermore," declared Mr. Morris, "under the present
system there is a temptation to officeholders to he easy
!
with the public in order to better their chances for re'
election. That temptation whould be removed and the affairs
of the county handled on a businesslike basis." Asserted he
had no axe to grind in the affiar. "Who sponsored this new
form? Purcell McCue, Ed Wayiand, Merc. Garnett--none of them
seeking for office." He charged that both County Treasurer
i•
Stuart Hamm and Commissioner of the Revenue Garth were opposing
the movement because it would either mean a reduction in salary "
or abolition of their offices and that they were "using their
high offices as a means of defeating it."l°
On the day before the election both sides held mass meetings in
Charlottesville. The Citizens League group held their meeting in the
City Armory beginning at 10:Q0 A.M. About 300 people attended and interest
was apparent everywhere, According to the Daily Progress, Mrs. Lucy
Granger created considerable excitement by trying to get the floor to
ask Mr. Morris questions duririg this speech. "She kept Hollis Binehart
and Magistrate E. M. Way land busy answering certain of them. "19 This '
17. May 1, 1933/ P. 1,. col. 8.
18. April 28 , 1933, p. 1, col. 5.
19. May 1, 1933* P* 1; col. 8.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 3&
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1933
meeting "broke up at noon and the audience went en masse to the courthouse,
one block away, where Mr. Fife and Mr. Walker were scheduled to speak.
Mr. Walker was busy with a chancery suit being heard by Judge Dabney
and Mr. Fife was the only speaker. The Daily Progress gives the following
report of Mr. Fife's speech:
Mr. Fife opened his speech in the humid courtroom by saying
that it was his personal opinion that the plan has "some good features
and some excellent supporters" and by deploring the injection of
personalities into the campaign.,
He said that "it seemed a little out of the way" for the friends
of the new'form to draw on Charlottesville as any shining example of
what could be accomplished in the county executive system since the
municipal ainking fund had been reduced by over $200,000 and because
a number
of new and expensive offices had been created.20
Election Eesuits
The results of the balloting on May 2, 1933, showed an almost two to
one victory for the County Executive Form. This surpassed the fondest hopes
of most of the leaders of the Citizens League. In only 8 of the 2b pre­
cincts were there more voteB against than for the new form. The opposition
was strongest in the Stony Point Precinct where the count was L8 for and
108 against. This precinct was Mr. Hamm's home precinct and apparently his
influence was strong there.21
Many explanations for this success may be advanced. In the most
general terms, the observer is tempted to say that the outcome was attri­
butable fundamentally to the progressive spirit which pervades the community,
which although it may remain dormant for years on end, will recongize and
reward aggressive and intelligent leadership. The Citizens League did have
among its leader^ and active members some of the most capable and
intelligent people in the County. The reform movement was well planned and
well organized. On the other hand, the opposition probably overestimated
their own strength. The members of the courthouse ring split among them-'
selves on the issue. The association of Mr. G. E. Walker, who was not
very well liked in the County, with the opposition probably did them great
harm.
Organizing the County Executive Government
After the new form of government had been approved by the county voters,
the members of the Board of Supervisors were voted on at the following
November election and all of them were reelected. The Board of Supervisors
began looking for a county executive. The Optional Forms Act provides that
the county executive need not be a resident of the county at the time of
20. Ibid.
•
21. The results of the balloting are given in a table at the end of this
chapter.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1953
Page .39
appointment.22 There is little doubt that only local men were considered
seriously.. To bring in a stranger from outside the County would be
quite objectionable to the leaders of the local machine and contrary to
local political traditions.
Early in November the Board of Supervisors offered the position of
county executive to Mr, Burnley, former county road manager and at; that
time City Manager of Charlottesville. He was offered a salary of. $5,000
a year. The City Council raised the City Manager’s salary and on
December 1 Mr. Burnley sent the Board of Supervisors a letter declining
their offer. Mr. Henry Haden, Charlottesville’s Auditor and Collector,
was the next man mentioned for the position. He was strongly recommended
for the position by Mr. John Morris, who as former Mayor of the City
had appointed Mr. Haden. On December 9 the Board of Supervisors met
and appointed Mr. Haden County Executive.
Mr. Haden was 37 years old and was b o m in the County at Crozet,
His father was a merchant there. He attended the public schools in the
County and Eandolph-Macon Academy at Bedford. After attending William
and Mary, he taught school for two years in Prince William and Albemarle
Counties. During the World Weir he was employed by the Du Pont Company
at Hopewell, Virginia. His next position was with the Haley, Chisholm
and Morris Corporation. Mr. John Morris was the third member of this
partnership and relates that Mr. Haden went with him to West Virginia
and proved his worth as an employee of the corporation,
Charlottesville inaugurated a commission form of government in 1922.
Mr. John Morris became one of the first commissioners and was chosen
to serve as Mayor. Mr. Haden was appointed City Auditor and Purchasing
Agent for the new government. In 1926 he assumed the duties of City
Collector also. In addition he served as Cleric of the City Council.
He was referred to as the Council’s right hand man and won the reputation
of being very efficient in the discharge of his multiple duties. In an
editorial the Daily Progress spoke of him as a genius for furthering
economy and efficiency and referred to him as a practical man.25 Under
his direction several major improvements in the accounting system of
the City had been made. Therefore, Mr. Haden assumed the duties of
County Executive with considerable experience in municipal finance, in
purchasing and accounting. It was just this type of experience that
was needed by the County since Mr. Haden was to be Director of the
Department of Finance, which was to take over the county tax assessing
and tax collecting functions. Also, his clerkship to the City Council,
no doubt, acquainted him with the role he would have to play as chief
administrative officer of the Counts*- appointed by the Board of Super­
visors and responsible to it.
On the morning of January 1, 193^> the day the new form of govern­
ment was supposed to go into effect, the Board of Supervisors held a .
22. Virginia Acts of Assembly, Chapter 368 , Sec. 2773-n 8 , (a). 1932,
23 . December 11, 1933.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
THE CAMPAIGN OF 1.935
Page 1]-C
special meeting in the courthouse to inaugurate the new system. At this
meeting Mr. Garth and Mr. Hamm were offered positions with the County in
their old offices for salaries of $200 per month. Mr. Garth accepted. Mr.
Hamm declined the offer and contended that his office was not abolished by
the new form. Mr. Hamm had been elected in 1931 to hold office from
January 1, 1932 to January 1, 1936. He contended that in making his term
shorter than that prescribed in section 112 of the Virginia Constitution the
Optional Forms Act was unconstitutional. The Board of Supervisors therefore
engaged Mr. Graves, said to be the only local lawyer who did not oppose
the new form, to institute proceedings to oust Mr. Hamm, Incidentally,
one last reference to the Daily Progress,will show how the local press was
lined up politically. An editorial appeared in that paper contending that
Mr. Hamm in contesting the constitutionality of the- act, was courageously
rendering a public service. 2k The fact that he caused the County to spend
a considerable amount of money for lawyer’s fees is by many citizens
not considered a public service. A petition for a writ of mandamus was
filed with the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals to compel Mr. Hamm to hand
over the, books, records, etc., of the treasurer’s office to Mr. Haden. The
Court awarded the writ-on February 26, 193^.25 It was a month and a half
after the date set by the Optional Forms Act that the new form was actually
put into operation.
w . J a n u a r y 5, 193^, p. 4, col. 1.
2$. H. A. Haden v. G. {Stuart Hamm, l6l Va. 93^. (1933).
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE I7*
VOTES CAST BY PRECINCTS IN THE ELECTION IN
ALBEMARLE COUNTY ON THE ADOPTION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE
FORM OF GOVERNMENT MAY 2, 1933 •
For
Against
Scottsville
59
89
Alberene
33
1
Batesville
8l
8
Blackwells
,
8
17
Carter1b Bridge .
13
15
Courthouse
94
57
Covesville
89
0
171
12
Earlysville
44
59
Free Union
20
66
166
10
Howardsville
12
22
Ivy
88
22
KeBWick
32
25
Lindsay
13
25
Milton
15
5
Monticello
92
90
North Garden
82
8
Owensville
59
19
Porters
62
16
Proffit
24
11
Stony Point
48
108
Wingfields
9
Crozet
Hillsboro
White Hall
'
8l
1395
-
4
23
710
* Taken from Election Abstracts on file in the County Clerk's office.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE. V
EXPENSE ACCOUNT OF THE CITIZENS LEAGUE IN CAMPAIGN TO ADOPT
COUNTY EXECUTIVE FOEM OF GOVEENMENT IN ALBEMAELE COUNTY*
Expenditures:
1 loose leaf folder
.10
Paper
.10
14 - 3^ stamps
.42
1.00
Cards
.60
20 - 3^ stamps
4.00
Typing
To Progress
10.00
Envelopes to mail posters
35.82
To Jarman’s for printing
34.30
$ 86.54
Eeceipts:
$ 45.00
Eeceived from J. E, Morris
5.00
Purcell McCue
ti
50.00
n
5.00
W. E. Mundy
J. B. Kegley
12.00
E. M. Wayland .
10.00
S. P. Nottingham
3.00
$130.00
10.00
J. C. Ballard
I. C. Fray
Total Eeceipts
5.00
$145.00
Balance
$ 58.02
* Minutes of Meetings, Albemarle Citizens League.
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER I T
County Political Leadership
As the previous discussion has indicated, there are no deep cleavages
in local politics. The nature of the functions performed by the County
are such that there exist no large questions of policy about which local
candidates and their supporters and opponents get intensely excited.
The campaign for the adoption of the county executive form of government
is the one exception to this statement, at least within recent years.
Once the new form was adopted, so far as the writer can discover, all
opposition died out. More often than otherwise, in the past, the question
that has been raised in local elections has been, who shall run the
government of the county,, rather, than what shall the county government
do. In the past the same officers have.been nominated and elected from
year to year with little opposition. Thus, there never has been much
excitement or interest in local politics even as to who should be elected.
Nevertheless, there has been a shift in local political leadership.
Whereas under the old system the elective officers (other than the county
supervisors), and especially the Treasurer, were likely to be the political
leaders, under the new system political leadership tends to come from the
Board of Supervisors. The election of supervisors by the whole county
rather than by magisterial districts has been partially responsible for
this shift. Then too, the power of dispensing patronage in the form of
jobs, which is at the basis of any political organization's power, has
been transferred to the Board of Supervisors. There has been only one
election of county officers, November, 1935, since the new form went into
operation, so that it is uncertain just what new political alignments
may take place. There seems now to be no opposition to the new form of
government. The County Executive neither takes part in the election
campaigns nor supports one candidate as against another.
Relationship between County Executive and Board of Supervisors
The leadership of the County Executive finds its expression in the
contacts between him and the Board of Supervisors. It is only natural
that six men who are very busy with their own professions and occupations,
and who normally meet only once a month, should rely very heavily on the
initiative and judgment of the County Executive. If the Supervisors are
approached individually and asked for information about the government
of county, almost invariably they will refer the inquirer to Mr. Haden,
the County Executive. One cannot help but be impressed with the attitude
of the Supervisors. They seem to Bay, "we leave all the details and’ actual
management of the government to Mr, Haden. He tells us everything that
happens and we express our approval or disapproval."
A concrete example of the relationship between the Supervisors and.
the County Executive is‘ seen at meetings of the Board of Supervisors. The
County Executive prepares a monthly report which shows in detail all
financial transactions of the government for the last month, how much
money in each fund is unexpended, how tax collections are progressing,
Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Pago kk
COUNTY POLITICAL LEADERSHIP
etc. Also, reports of the work done in the various departments of the
government are submitted to the Board. Each hoard member will have a
typed list of items to be taken up at the meeting and decided upon.
Mr. Haden will have with him all papers, documents and data bearing
upon the subjects to be discussed. If questions of law arise, the
Commonwealth's Attorney or one of his assistants will be on hand to
give legal advice. As the agenda is taken up item by item, .Mr, Haden
discusses what is involved, what is to be decided and usually explains
what course of action seems advisable to him. After views are
exchanged between board members, the consensus of'opinion which results
from the discussion will be framed as a motion and usually unanimously
adopted. There is no appearance of any one man playing a role of
dominance in relation to the others. Since Mr. Haden is in possession
of the facts and first-hand information necessary for making decisions,
naturally his suggestions are usually followed. Once a decision is
reached the execution of it is left to Mr,. Haden,: At every board
meeting a number of special committees will be appointed to investigate
particular matters. Invariably the Chairman will make Mr, Haden a
member of these committees. There is no indication'that; individual
Supervisors interfere in the details of administration or try to
bring pressure to bear on the County Executive between board meetings.
This is a place in the new system where an unwise'attitude on the part
of the Supervisors could do great harm. It is highly desirable that
the Supervisors become interested in and acquainted with the details
of the government of the couijty. At the same time, efficient adminis­
tration requires the recognition of the County Executive as the chief
administrator, the medium of Communication between the Board of Super­
visors and the subordinate staff. There are .several'-reasons, other
than the fact that the Optiopa'l Forms Act makes the County Executive;
the chief administrative officer of the County, which militate against
Supervisors becoming unduly meddlesome in administrative affairs.
Most of the present members ofi 'the Board were also members under the
old system when many of the county functions were directed by officers
who were popularly elected and who were independent of the Board of
Supervisors, Then too, most of ‘the Supervisors live a considerable
distance from the county seat, and therefore are at a disadvantage
as compared with many city councilmen in this respect.
Control over the administration of the government is exercised
by the Board of Supervisors through the use of its power of appoint­
ment and appropriation. The tradition in state and local government
in Virginia for permanency of tenure tends to prevent any abuse of the
removal power in relation to inferior officers. The power of control
which is exercised bjr annual budget appropriations will be considered
later.
Even though the position of the Board of Supervisors has been
considerably strengthened by the adoption of the new form of government,
it is not difficult to visualize it in an even more prominent role
in county affairsk In the first place, the extension of the scope of
the present functions which it has control over — public health,
public welfare^ police protection, etc. --.might take place. In the
second place, the emergence of new problems should be expected which
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
COUNTY POLITICAL LEADERSHIP
Page 1*5
have hitherto been of little concern to the Board of Supervisors.
Such new problems could include improvement in rural housing, prevention
of soil erosion, reforestation and resettlement of marginal population.
The following discussion of the administrative organization and
functioning of the government of the county supports the view that the
County is capable of accepting new responsibilities which might accrue
to it in either of the two ways mentioned above.
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER V
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION
Before going into a detailed description of the operation of the
various county functions, it may he well to compare briefly the structure
of the old and new formB of county government. In general, the old form
may he described hy saying that it was the product of many centuries of
county history. In its essential features the old form had heen in
existence since the beginning of the Commonwealth. Changes were made from
time to time, hut not until 1932 were "Virginia counties given an opportunity
to change their form of county government in order to make them consistent
with conditions of modern life.l
Some idea of changes which the new form of government brought about
may he had hy referring to the charts presented below.
Under the old form the supervisors, were elected one from each magis­
terial district for terms of four years. Under the new form supervisors
are elected hy the county at large, but still each magisterial district
must have a member on the hoard of supervisors who is a qualified voter
of the district. 2 B y providing for the election of supervisors from the
county at large, it was intended that they should view the problems of
the county from the point of view of the county as a whole, and not from
the point of view of particular districts from which they were elected.
The number of elected by the county at large was decreased from five to
three. Formerly the County by countywide vote elected a Sheriff, Com­
missioner of the Revenue, Commonwealth’s Attorney, Treasurer and County
Clerk besides the the six members of the Board of Supervisors., After the
adoption of the county executive form of government the offices of
Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue were consolidated and the rest
of the offices remain elective as before.3 The Commission on County
Government recommended that the Sheriff be made appointive also, but
this recommendation was not followed by the General Assembly.
The
elective offices, however, are not required by the Constitution of Vir­
ginia as they were before 1928. It is within the power of the General ,
Assembly to make them appointive.5 Although there are still three
county officers who are popularly elected, and are consequently somewhat
independent of the Board of Supervisors, the Board’s control over the
administration of these offices has been strengthened by the provision
of the Optional Forms Act of 1932 which empowers the Board of Supervisors
to appoint the subordinate personnel for these offices. 6 Also the Board's
1. Report of the Commission on County Government to
theGeneralAssembly
of Virginia, Senate Document no. 3j (1931)> 33.
2. Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1932), Chapter 368 ,Section2773-n h.
3. Ibid. Section 2773-n 20.
4. Commission on County Government, op. cit., h9.
5. Constitution of Virginia, Article VII, Section 110.
6 . Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1932), Chapter 368 , Section 2773-n 7,
!
i
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
OLD FORM OF GOVERNMENT*
"
GENERAL
j" ASSEMBLY
Judge of
Circuit
Court
VOTERS
Commonvealth1s
Attorney
Clerk
Treasured;
Justices
of the
Peace
Board of
Supervisors
Farm and
Some Demon­
strators
Surveyor
Court
Commiss­
ioners
Commiss­
ioner of
Accounts
Electoral
Board
Registrars
Judges
Clerks
Commissioner
of
Revenue
Sheriff
County
Engineer
State'Tax
Con­
stables
Judge Juv.
& Dom. Eel.
Court
GOVERNOR
Welfare
Board
School
Trustee.
Electoral
Board
Superin­
tendent
School
of Public1 Board
Welfare
Inheritance
Tax
Commissioner
State
Board of
Health
Examiner
of
Records
Comm.Game
& Inland
Fisheries
Warden
Board of
1 Health
Health
[Officer |
Superintendent
of Schools
* F”
/ r i f art ln
Commission on County Government, (December, 1951). Senate Donnm'ent Wo.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
COUNTY EXECUTIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT*
GENERAL
ASSEMBLY
VOTERS
Judge of
Circuit
Court
Judge Juv.
& Dom. Rel.
Court
Common­
wealth’s
Attorney
Clerk
Electoral
Board
GOVERNOR
Board of
Supervisors
Sheriff
! County |
! Executive!
State Tax
Commission
jExaminer
|of Records
Comm. Game i
& Inland 1
Fisheries >
Game
Warden
Registrars
Judgeb
Clerks
Farm and
Home Demon­
strators
Court
Commiss­
ioners
J Commissl ioner of
| Accounts
Superin­
tendent
of Public
Welfare
Director
of Finance
Health
Officer
School
Board
Superin-
* Prepared from chart in Report of Virginia Commission on County Government, (December, 1931), Senate Document No. 5 ,
chart 2 , p. 19 .
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION
Page 50,
power to fix the compensation of county officers has increased its control
over them.
Administrative coordination in the new form of government was to "be
achieved hy the creation of the office of County Executive. The idea was to
set up an officer in the county analogous to the city managers in American
cities and give him general power of direction over all county functions com­
ing within the1'scope of the power of the Board of Supervisors. The Board
of Supervisors directs the administration of the various county offices
through the County Executive and appoints county employees on his recommenda­
tion. The Optional Forms Act declares that the County Executive, "shall
execute and enforce all resolutions and orders of the hoard of county super­
visors and shall see that all laws of the State required to he enforced
through the hoard of county supervisors or some other county officer subject
to the control of the hoard of county supervisors are faithfully executed."7
In performing his functions the County Executive is responsible to the Board
of Supervisors. This responsibility is made effective hy the power of the
Board to appoint the County Executive, fix his salary and remove him at any
time . 8
Functions of the County are grouped into departments as follows: Depart­
ment of Finance under the Director of Finance; Department of Public Welfare
under the Superintendent of Public Welfare; Department of Law Enforcement
under the Sheriff and the Commonwealth’s Attorney; Department of Education
under the Division Superintendent of Schools; Department of Records under
the County Clerk and Department of Health under the County Health Officer.
In addition to these departments, the County may set up a Department of Farm
and Home Demonstration and a Department of Assessments. Albemarle County
has a Department of Farm and Home Demonstration hut has not created a De­
partment of Assessments.
t
Each of these departments will hereafter he considered in detail. It
will he sufficient to point out here that most of the departments named above
are merely a continuation of the corresponding offices under the old system,
with increased control over them hy the Board of Supervisors and a new offi­
cer, the County Executive. Probably the highest degree of integration of re­
lated functions has taken place with respect to county finances." The func­
tions of tax assessing; tax collecting, custody of county funds and county
purchasing have heen consolidated to form the new Department of Finance.
The County Executive also serves as Director of the Department of Finance.
The Department of Farm and Home Demonstration is a department of the County
government in name only. State law prohibits the counties from spending
more than one thousand dollars out of funds raised hy the general levy on
the promotion of agriculture.° The County Agricultural Agent and the Home
Demonstration Agent are selected hy the Board of Supervisors from a list
of elegihles submitted hy the Virginia Agricultural and Mechanical College
and Polytechnic Institute.10 Although tho Optional Forms Act provides that
7.
8.
9.
10.
Ibid. Section 2773-n 9 .
Ibid. Section 2773-n 6 .
Virginia’Code of 1936, Chapter 109,. Section 273^•
Virginia, Acts of Assembly. (1932), Chapter 368 , Section 2773-n 19«
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION
Page 51
these officers shall perform such duties as the Board of Supervisors shall
impose upon them, their work is directed almost wholly from the experi­
ment station at Blacksburg.
A spacious new courthouse (or office building) is now being com­
pleted in Albemarle County which will furnish greatly Improved physical
surroundings for the various administrative departments. At the present
time the offices of different departments are scattered in different
parts of the City. When all county officers can be brought under the
same roof, there should be more opportunity for interdepartmental consulta­
tion and cooperation. The Optional Forms Act takes into account the
fact that administrative reorganization must be a continuing process by
providing that the Board of Supervisors may, "upon recommendation of the
county executive re-assign, trasnfer, or combine any county functions,
activities, or departments."
Certain county offices were abolished when the Optional Forms Act
went into operation. The office of county surveyor in the early history
of the County, when new lands were being opened up and land speculation
was at its height, was probably the most important office in the County.12
This arm of county government, which had long since become atrophied, was
finally abolished in 1933 in Albemarle County. The office of county
coroner, which had outlived its usefulness, was abolished and its functions
transferred to the office of the Commonwealth1s.Attorney, The Super­
intendent of the Poor and overseers of the poor were notoriously ineffi­
cient in coping with public assistance problems. These offices were
abolished in Albemarle County and a more progressive welfare board
created before the Optional Forms Act went into operation in 1933. Con­
stables as law enforcing officers had so outlived their usefulness in
Albemarle County that some magisterial districts did not even elect them
as provided by law. The office has' been abolished and its functions
transferred to office of the Sheriff. Finally, the School Trustee
Electoral Board and the office of inheritance tax commissioner were
abolished,13
The judicial institutions of the County were not greatly affected
by the change in government. As under the old form of government the
election machinery remains under the control of the Circuit Court Judge
who appoints the election officials— the Electoral Board, Registrars,
Judges and Clerks. However, the power to appoint and fill vacancies with
respect to many county offices of a nonjudicial character was taken from
the Judge of the Circuit Court and given to the Board of Supervisors so
that the Judge's 'political' powers have been considerably diminished.
Such nonjudicial offices include the Welfare Board, the School Trustee
Electoral Board, the Board of Equalization, the Board of Health and
tax assessors. It can readily be seen how the transfer of the appointment
of, and more or less control over, these county officers considerably
augmented the general power of direction which the Board of Supervisors
11. Ibid. Section 2773-n 10*
12. Archibald Henderson, "Thomas Walker and the Loyal Company." Proceed­
ings of the American Antiquarian Society (New Series, V, 4l, 1931)•
13. Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1932).Chapter 368 , Section 2773-n 26 .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 52
ADMINISTRATIVE .STRUCTURE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION
was supposed to exercise over the government of the County*
To summarize this section, the adoption of the county executive form
of government in Albemarle County resulted in a marked degree of simplifica­
tion and coordination of its governmental machinery. This was brought about
by the outright abolition of many useless offices, the reduction of elective
offices from five" to three, the consolidation of the County’s finance offi­
ces, the increase of the power of the Board of Supervisors to appoint offi­
cers and fix their salaries and the creation of a new chief administrative
officer for the County, the County Executive, The following chapter will be
devoted to a discussion of the chief tool of management used by the Board
of Supervisors and the County Executive in directing the activities of the
government of the County, that is, the power of appropriation and the power
to exercise control over expenditures.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER VI
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
Introduction
Beginning in 1918, Virginia has had an executive budget system in
operation for the state govornment. Improvement in county fiscal
management came far later. The basic act relative to county budgeting
and fiscal management was passed in I926 .T In most of the Virginia
counties fiscal record keeping and financial planning had been very
slipshod. For example, in his letter of transmittal accompanying the
first report on the comparative cost of local government, the State
Accountant spoke of the county debt situation in the following terms:
"The figures relating to the bonded debts of the counties have been
furnished me by the treasurers. ..1 cannot vouch for the accuracy of
these figures because it has not been possible for me to verify them,
and, in a number of instances, the treasurers have advised me that there
is no record in their respective counties which shows the condition of
the counties' bonded debt, and that, the figures which they have
reported to me have been obtained not from any definite record but from
the best information available."2 This official statement reveals the
laxity with which basic financial records were kept in some of the
counties.
The act of 1926, requiring the boards of supervisors in counties to
draft a budget, was defective in several respects. There was some
uncertainty as to whether or not the road and school budgets should be
combined with or prepared separately from the general county budget. The
law made no provision for the execution of the budget after it had been
adopted. The budget could be laid aside and forgotten. There was no
method of checking up to see that budget provisions were adhered to.
The generally unsatisfactory conditions which prevailed with
respect to county finances were described by the Virginia Commission on
County Government in its first report,5
Some of the most conspicuous weaknesses of county government are
to be found in connection with the administration of finances. In
the first place the counties, with a few notable exceptions, have
no effective system of financial planning. It is true that a
general law passed by the 1926 General Assembly requires the board
of supervisors of each county to prepare a county budget. Obviously
1. Virginia Acts of Assembly. (1926^, Ch. 5^5, Act approved March 26,
1926 .
2. Comparative Cost of Local Government, Statement of Receipts and
Disbursements of the Counties of Virginia, (1925 ), Compiled by Wm. F.
Smyth, p. 6 .
3 . Virginia Commission on County Government, Report to the General
Assembly of Virginia, Senate Document No. 3, (December, 1931), p. 81.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 5^
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
the hoard, cannot do this work itself and the law fails to specify
what official is to prepare the budget for the hoard. In practice,
however, this work has generally devolved upon the county clerk.
The weakness of this law and its operation lieB in the fact that
it is impossible for the clerk or anyone else to prepare a budget'
according to the requirements of the law. The present accounting
system does not furnish the necessary data. The available fiscal
information is most meager, with no effort to classify expenditures
and revenues. Besides, the fee system removes a large part of the
operating expenses of the county from the control of the budget.
There is no uniform accounting system for the counties as such.
The present law merely provides for the establishment of systems
of accounting and bookkeeping for the officials of the counties.
Thus in order to determine the status of the financial affairs of
the average county it is,necessary to search through the records
of the treasurer, the clerk, and the school board. Even such
records as are kept are for the most part incomplete and unreliable
In 1928 the General Assembly included in the general road law
a provision enabling the counties to employ county road managers.
This official was to be the ’’executive and administrative officer of
the county in all matters relating to the public roads and bridges
of the county, and the other public works and business of the county,
except public schools...."5 The county road manager was required to
prepare a tentative budget each year and submit it to the board of
supervisors in accordance with the provisions of the budget law of
1926 as amended and reenacted in 1927* Albemarle County was one of
the few counties which took advantage 'of this act and appointed a
county road manager.
The next major reform in county financial management came in
1932 when a uniform system of accounts was established in the counties
by the Auditor of Public Accounts. This was the same year the Optional
Forms Act was passed. Several improvements have been made from time to
time in methods of accounting in the counties and in the systematic
auditing of the accounts of the county officers.^ Therefore, Virginia
counties are now theoretically maintaining uniform accounting systems
and operating with a systematic budget procedure. Many of the counties
do have efficient and comprehensive centralized budgets. However,
the best results cannot be obtained unless one further step is taken.
That is the establishment of some system of unified over-all administrative
Va. Acts of Assembly, (1926), Chapter 159 5 Section ^3.
5. Ibid.
6 . Recently state auditors have been making detailed audits of the
accounts of certain fee officers with startling results in some cases.
Some believe that the accumulated evidence revealed by these audits
showing the evils of the fee system will lead the next General Assembly
to abolish the remnants of the fee system in Virginia.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 55
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
management, and especially some provision for effective "budget execution
and control over expenditures. It is here that the new form of govern­
ment in Albemarle County has its special advantage and merit over the old
system, as it formerly operated in the County and as it operates in most
other Virginia counties at the present time.
Over-An Fiscal Management in the County Executive Form of Government
The budgets for the years immediately preceding the adoption of
the county executive form in 1933 in Albemarle County were prepared by
the County Hoad Manager. When the state took over the maintenance and
construction of secondary roads in 1932, the office of county road
manager was abolished and the duty of preparing the budget devolved upon
the County Clerk in his capacity as clerk to the board of supervisors.
Beginning in March, 193b the County's financial affairs were conducted
in accordance with the provisions of the Optional Forms Act of 1932.
This act describes-the position of the County Executive with respect
to financial administration in the following terms:'
He shall make monthly reports to the board of supervisors in regard
to matters of administration, and keep the board fully advised as to
the financial condition of the county.
He shall submit to the board of county supervisors a proposed annual
budget, and shall execute the budget as finally adopted.
These and other provisions of the Optional Forms Act, along with
practical requirements, place the County Executive in Albemarle County
in a position in which he is required to perform many and varied financial
functions. As Director of the Department of Finance, he has charge of
the collection and assessment of taxes and the custody of county fiinds.
As chief executive officer of the County, he is required to keep the Board
of Supervisors informed as to the financial condition of the County and
to submit to it an annual proposed budget. Finally, he performs the
functions involved in his position as the County's chief disbursing
officer and comptroller. In other words, with respect to financial
administration, county government in Albemarle County is close to the
'roots' of government where financial functions are still largely
undifferentiated. Consequently, an investigation of the county's staff
agencies concerned with financial administration will not reveal clear
cut lines of organizational structure and fiscal procedure. Also, county
fiscal management is fundamentally affected by the county's position as
an administrative unit of state government. These considerations tend
to make county budgeting a somewhat modified form of what is called an
"executive budget"
Preparation of the Budget
The County's fiscal year extends from July first through June thirtieth.
7.
Virginia, Acts of Assembly,(1932), Ch. 368> Sec. 2773-n.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 56
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
Early in February of each year the County Executive begins assembling
estimates for the proposed budget for the following fiscal year which
begins the next July first. Intelligent planning of future government
expenditures requires the existence of a complete system of accounts
showing in detail all past financial operations. Under the supervision
of the County Executive, the Department of Finance maintains an
accounting system for all county functions, including the schools.
Therefore, the basis information necessary for budget planning is at
hand when the County Executive begins drawing up estimates of future
expenditures and revenues. However, since county government, like
any other kind, is not static and unchanging, records of past operations
furnish only a starting point in budget planning. Additional information
must be assembled in other ways. In a large governmental organization
the collection of budgeting information would be formalized into
research programs, budget hearings, conferences, etc. 'Although less
formal in character, these same activities are essential in county
budgeting and are present in various forms. The County Executive
sends budget estimate forms, to the department heads. On these forms
he has already filled out the appropriations and expenditures of the
department for the previous and the current fiscal year. These
estimates are assembled and the County Executive, through conferences
with department heads and informal negotiations, revises the estimates
in the light of the total needs of the County. The present County
Executive, Mr. H. A. Haden operates on the theory that items in the
proposed budget should be essentially his estimates. Consequently,
he familiarizes himself with the work to be undertaken by the spending
agencies. Here again, there are no formally drawn up work programs
submitted by the department heads. Negotiations and investigations
are continually going on concerning future plans of the departments—
concerning capital outlays, increases in personnel, changes in the
administrative set-up, etc. Such problems are continually being worked
over. For example, the budget which was drawn up for the present
fiscal year was materially affected by proposals to operate the
health department on a county rather than a county-city basis. School
improvements which were needed depended upon the State Department of
Education's making funds available for capital outlays during the
coming fiscal year. The school tax levy would, have to be readjusted
if such funds were not forthcoming. The various ramifications of these
and similar problems could be discussed more fully to show how man^r
different problems arise in budget planning. It is apparent that
if the various county departments worked out these problems independently
of each other and of the Board of Supervisors, merely submitting bare
figures for the Board to approve or reject, two unfortunate consequenoos
would follow. In the first place, the Board of Supervisors would not
have the information available which it should have in order to make
its decisions in approving budget items and fixing the annual tax
levies. In the second place, there would be no one to view the
requests of each particular department in the light of the needs and
resources of the County as a whole. Basically, the theory that the
Board of Supervisors is the policy determining body of the County
elected to represent the people of the County would be weakened
considerably. Its authority would not be commensurate with its
responsibility if it merely approved the final draft of the budget and
i
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
Page 57
fixed the tax rates without being able to revise budget estimates up or
down. The operation of the county executive form of government in
Albemarle County seems to justify the assertions of its proponents that
it would make county government more responsible to the people in that
g
their elected representatives would have more control over county affairs.
The existence of a full time professional administrator, the County
Executive, makes effective and comprehensive control over county finances
by the supervisors a reality. Counties which have not adopted one of
the optional forms of government may give their county clerks or some
other county officer wide powers in budget preparation and control or
expenditures, yet it is doubtful if they can attain the degree of
coordination and responsibility which has been attained in Albemarle
County. At any rate, this increased coordination and control in planning
the County’s budget is an outstanding improvement in the new form of
government in Albemarle County over the old form.
For various reasons the preparation of revenue estimates for the
coming fiscal year is almost exclusively handled by the County Executive.
The County does not operate any business enterprises and consequently^a
class of expenditures which figure largely in some governments' budgets
is not present at all in Albemarle County’b budget. That part of the
County's revenue in the form of fees collected can be predicted as to
future collections only on the basis of past collections. Finally, taxes
on real estate and tangible personal property, the main sources of
county revenues, are collected under his immediate supervision, since
the County Executive is at the same time Director of the Department of
Finance. The preparation of school estimates will be given special
consideration below.9
Action on the Proposed Budget by the Board of Supervisors
After estimates of expenditures and revenues for the coming fiscal
year have been assembled and revised by the County Executive, copies
of the proposed budget are mimeographed and distributed among the
Supervisors. Accompanying each estimate, the County Executive makes
brief comments explaining requests for increases or other changes in
similar estimates for previous years. These comments reveal very clearly
that he is in possession of most of the relevant facts bearing on past
financial transactions and proposed future operations. It is this
information and experience possessed by the County Executive which ma s
the difference between submitting baro figures to the Board of Supervisors for approval and presenting them with a well considered financial
plan for the coming year.
The Supervisors will have received the proposed budget nearly three
months before they finally pass on it. This provides ample time for
them to study it and take up any matters they desire with the County
Executive and other county officers. Special committees will be appoint­
ed to investigate and report on particular problems. Therefore, in .
8 . See Chanter III, Supra, for some of these assertions9. See Pages
Infra.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 58
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
passing on the proposed "budget, the governing body of the County has an
opportunity each year to review the operations of the government for
the past fiscal year and to formulate a program for the coming fiscal
y e a r. What is of primary importance in performing its budgetary
functions^ the Board of Supervisors, subject to the limitations to be
discussed later, has complete responsibility for all county expenditures.
All county activities are included in the budget plan for the coming ■
fiscal year. The Board need not feel under any obligation to a county
school board or to any other county officer to comply with their wishes
in making budget appropriations. Furthermore, since each Supervisor
is elected from the County as a whole there is.no necessity for "pulling
strings" in the interest of one magisterial district as against another.
The extent of change in the County Executive’s estimates in indicated
by table six, below.
After budget estimates covering both revenues and expenditures for
the coming fiscal year have been studied and approved, the Board of
Supervisors is then in a position to perform its primary legislative
function, making the annual tax levy. The answer to the question, to
what extent will future revenues be sufficient to cover future
expenditures, will determine the amount of the annual tax levy.
Experience makes possible the calculation of these two variables—
future expenditures and future revenues--so that the Board may levy a
tax with reasonable certainty that it will be adequate.
Figures
from the county budget for the fiscal year 1937-1938 may be used to
illustrate the method of arriving at the rate to taxation which will
be levied.
Estimated General Fund Expenditures, 1938........... ...... 186,31^.81
Extimated Revenue from Sources other than the Current
Levy, i.e. from State, Delinquents etc
........ 139,227.00
Difference to be Raised by Current General Levy..........
27,087.81
Additional Needed because of Delinquencies................
If,780.20
Total to be Raised hy Current General Levy................
31 >868 .01
In 1938 property subject to local taxation was assessed at an
aggregate of $12,760,129.00. To raise the $31,868.01, arrived at above,
a rate of $.25 pen hundred dollars of assessed values would be levied.
Scope and Form of the Budget
For budgeting and accounting purposes the County maintains twelve
separate funds. The general fund covers most of the service and operat­
ing departments of the County except the Department of Education.
Expenditures for all of the "staff" functions of the government come
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table VI
COMPARISON OF BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS W ITH ACTUAL
APPROPRIATIONS*
1938
Bd. Supervisors
Cy. Executive
Dept. Finance
Bd. Equalization
County Clerk
Circuit Court
Trial Justice Ct.
Comm. Atty.
Policing
Care of Prisoners
Fire Prevention
Poor Relief
Lunacy Commission
Public Health
Agric. Home Ec.
Elections
Bldgs. 85 Grounds
Schools
Grand Total
1939
Bd. Supervisors
Cy. Executive
Dept. Finance
Bd. Equalization
County Clerk
Trial Justice Ct.
Comm. Atty.
Policing
Care of Prisoners
Fire Prevention
Poor Relief
Lunacy Commission
Public Health
Agric. Home Ec.
Elections
Bldgs. & Grounds
Schools
Grand Total
Proposed
Expenditure
95,665
2,950
16,1*95
Amount
Appropriated
Amount of Change
Over
Under
95,665
2,950
16,1+95
1,900
1,900
7,890
8,1+90
2,292
3,1^5
3,810
10 ,51+0
3,820
300
19,881+
700
7,500
3,587
1,680
l+,156
2,292
3; 11+5
3,810
10,51+0
3,820
300
H+,529
700
7,500
3,687
1,680
1+.156
186,311+
216,811
1+03,125
179,759
206,681
386 ,1+1+0
Proposed
Expenditure
600
■,
Amount
Appropriated
65,850
2,950
15,027 '
65,850
2,925
ll+,727
8,710
3,195
l+,l6o
10,195
3,295
8,710
3,195
l+,l6o
10,715
3,295
300
300
2l+,9l3
22,1+73
700
7,500
3,677
1,380
33.626
185,1+78
700
7,500
3,677
1,380
56,707
206 ,311+
223,090
1+08 ;568
221+,060
1+30 ,371+
5,355
100
700
700
7,255
10,130
17,385
Amount of Change
Over
Under
25
300
520
2 ,1+1+0
23,081
23,601
970
3,735
* Date in this table vere taken from. County of Albemarle, Va. Proposed
Budget,(for the fiscal years 1937-38, 1938-39, 1939-1+0 ), Passim.
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 60
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
out of this fund, and, therefore, it is the most important fund from the
point of view of administrative management. On the expenditure side, the
general fund covers expenditures by the Board of Supervisors, County
Executive, Department of Finance, County Clerk, Commonwealth's Attorney,
Circuit Court, Juvenile Court, Sheriff, Department of Public Welfare,
Department of Public Health; also expenditures for fire prevention and
extinction, advancement of agriculture and home economics, elections,
and maintenance of buildings and grounds. On the revenue side, the
following general classes of revenue are paid into the general fund:
current taxes, delinquent taxes, land redemptions, fees and fines,
profits from the board of prisoners, state's share of the department
of finance expenses, county's share of capitation taxes, rent on county
property, interest, revenues from the sale of licenses, alcoholic beverage
profits distributed, dog tax fund transfers, Virginia public assistance
fund overhead allotment and miscellaneous revenues.
All of the above classes of expenditures and revenues connected
with the general fund have two common characteristics. In the first place,
they are all applicable,to the County as a whole and do not relate to
any particular geographic section of the County. In the second place,
the Board of Supervisors has relatively wide discretionary powers in
handling expenditures from this fund.
State grants-in-aid for public welfare and education come to the
County with certain conditions attached to them. Consequently, special
operating funds are maintained to handle revenue and expenditures for
these two functions. The County's contribution to the school fund is
raised by a special school levy which is uniform throughout the Qounty.
The County's part of the expenditures for public welfare is derived from
the general county levy or other general county revenue.
Two special funds applicable to particular sections of the County,
the Woolen Mills Sanitary District Fund and the Crozet Fiiu District
Fund, are maintained primarily to retire bonds. Six sinking funds, one
for each magisterial district, are maintained to retire the old county
road bonds. A special levy is made in each district to retire these
long term bonds.
A dog tax fund is maintained to finance the activities of the county
game warden. Revenue for this special fund is obtained from the sale of
dog ‘licenses.
In summary, the County maintains eight sinking funds for the retire­
ment of bonds. There are
also four operating funds--general fund,
education fund, Virginia public assistance fund and dog tax fund.
10. Information regarding the arrangement and contents of the various
funds may be found in the last county budget, County of Albemarle,
Virginia, Proposed Budget for the Fiscal Year July 1, 1959 to June
30, 19^0, Passim, (35 pages, mimeographed).
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 6l
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
Budget Execution and Budgetary Control
The duties of the Board of Supervisors and the County Executive
in connection with the Budget are By no means completed when the actual
Budget document has been drawn up and approved and the tax rate has Been
determined. The statutory authority for control over expenditures is
contained in the following provisions;11
No money shall Be drawn from the treasury of the county, nor shall
any obligation for the expenditure of money Be incurred, except
in pursuance of the annual appropriation ordinance, or legally
enacted supplement thereto, or subsequent resolution passed By the
board.
.
.
...No money shall Be disbursed or paid out By the county except
upon check signed By the chairman of the Board of county supervisors,
or such other person as may Be designated By the Board and counter­
signed By the director of the department of finance.
The director of finance shall audit all claims against the county
for goods or services; it shall also Be his duty to ascertain that
such claims are in accordance with the purchase orders or contracts
of employment from which same arise; to present such claims to the
Board of county supervisors for approval after such audit; to draw
all checks in settlement of such claims after approval By the Board
of county supervisors; to keep a record of the revenues and
expenditures of the county; to keep such accounts and records of the
affairs of the county as shall Be prescribed By the auditor of
public accounts; and at the end of each month to prepare and submit
to the Board of county supervisors statements showing the progress
and status of the affairs of the county in such form as shall.Be
agreed upon By the auditor of public accounts and the Board of
county supervisors.
The real value of any Budgeting scheme should Be determined By
the effectiveness with which the Budget plan is put into actual practice
and facilitates the management of the government. Obviously, time
and labor expended in collecting estimates and formulating fiscal
plans and policies will Be largely wasted unless measures are taken to
execute these plans and keep expenditures within amounts actually
appropriated. If expenditures are not kept within the limits of
appropriations as contained in the Budget, the tax rate will Be
•inadequate and deficits will occur. The special merit which the new
county executive form of government possesses, as it has operated in
Albemarle County, is the effective exercise of fiscal control over
all county expenditures By the County Executive. This special merit
may Be attributable to factors of personality in addition to legal
provisions. It will Be remembered that Mr. Haden came to the County
with a Background as city auditor and collector, a role apt to place
emphasis on the 'control' and 'execution' espects of Budgeting. As
to legal provisions, it is difficult to imagine the same degree of
11.
V ir g in ia .
A c ts o f A s s e m b ly ,
(1 9 3 2 ),
Ch.
568,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
S ec. 2 7 7 5 -n 1 1 .
Page 62
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
fiscal control "being exercised in other systems of county government
where no single county officer is given "by specific legal enactment a
superior position as an administrator and expressly charged with the
duty of executing the "budget, that is, controlling the expenditures
of other subordinate administrative officers. It is unquestionably
true that budgetary control is far more effective now in Albemarle
County than it was when the County Clerk or the County Road Manager
were responsible for county budgeting.
At the basis of the County Executive’s authority to control
expenditures are certain elementary considerations which flow from the
statutory provisions quoted above. .Although there is no formal
appropriation act passed by the Board of Supervisors, comparable to the
appropriation.acts of the State and Federal governments, the budget as
finally approved by the Board-of Supervisors is considered to have the
force and effect of law. Expenditures must be made in accordance with
the provisions of the budget as. approved. No expenditures may be made
which are not covered by the budget appropriations and appropriations
for particular objects can not;be exceeded. Transfer of funds from
one object of appropriation to another object is made only with the
approval of the Board of Supervisors. The Board passes on transfers
for even the smaller items. Another factor affecting budgetary control
in Albemarle County is the practice of making detailed rather than lump­
sum appropriations. Modern principles of budgeting usually favor lump­
sum appropriations in order that the budget may be more flexible and
more easily adapted to actual administrative problems as they arise.
However, in a small unit of government, such as Albemarle County, detailed
appropriations do not cause much difficulty. The Board of Supervisors,
unlike a state legislature whi'Ch meets only annually or biennially,
meets at least once each month and at times more frequently. Consequently,
few situations arise necessitating changes in the budget which cannot
wait until the next meeting of the Board of Supervisors. The practice
of making detailed rather than lump-sum budget appropriations has been
used Very effectively as a method of control in connection with the
school appropriations.- Once school appropriations are made, it will be
remembered, the Board of Supervisors under the provisions of the
general law has no control over them. However, if the Board of Super­
visors can make school appropriations in sufficient detail in the budget
much the same result is attained since the school officials will find
it inexpedient to disregard the provisions of the budget. Disregarding
budget provisions would be inexpedient because the special school levy
has not been sufficient for school needs and the Board of Supervisors
must make up the difference with appropriations from the general fund.
Naturally therefore, school officials do not wish to risk incurring the
displeasure of the Board of Supervisors by disregarding budget provisions.
Although the preceding considerations may tend to limit the scope of
the County Executive's authority as a comptroller, he still has a wide
range of responsibility in checking on expenditures which do not involve
changes in the budget. Effective budgetary control requires that the
propriety of particular expenditures as well as their "regularity" or
"legality" be passed upon. The County Executive exercises both of
these types of control in Albemarle County. The combination of these
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
Page 65
two functions is an example of the undifferentiated, character of the
duties of officers in small units'of government which in larger units
are performed by separate officers. It is as County Executive that
Mr. Haden exercises the essentially discretionary or executive function
involved in passing on the propriety of expenditures. As Director of
the Department of Finance he exercises the more routine function
involved in passing on the legality of expenditures.
The extent of his power of control with respect to the propriety
of expenditures varies according to the character of the agency making
the expenditure and the object for which the expenditure is intended
to be made. In purchasing supplies--passing on requisitions for
supplies--which is centralized in his office, he has exclusive
discretion as to what is purchased and of what quality and quantity
it shall he. At the other extreme, expenditures in connection with ‘
the Circuit Court must he approved as requested hy the judge of the
court without changes. The degree of discretion exercised hy the
County Executive varies between these two extremes. The discussion
of the operating departments given below will reveal that a consider­
able part of the County's revenue in the form of state grants-in-aid
is earmarked for certain purposes and to some oxtent is removed from
the control of the County Executive.^2 in addition,.statutory
provisions and regulations of state departments determine in large
measure the salaries to he paid county officers. Even with these
limitations there is evidence to indicate that Mr. Haden exercises
considerable control over the operation of the various departments
through his power to.approve expenditures.
There are several administrative techniques which may he employed
in controlling expenditures. One of the most important of these is
the operation of a system of allotments. The County Executive makes
allotments to the spending officers hy quarters. Also, the County
Executive receives monthly reports from the operating departments
reviewing the work done for the past month. However, with his many
other duties, it is doubtful if the County Executive can give these
reports much attention in the way of checking actual accomplishments
against expenditures. A close check is kept on travelling expenses
hy the use of mileage reports.
In actual practice, approval of expenditures hy the Board of
Supervisors, that is, approval after the obligation has been incurred as
against approval hy original appropriation of funds, operates in a
negative way. At its monthly meeting the County Executive will have
all the checks written to pay expenses which have been incurred. He
12. Problems connected with the theory and practice of state grantsin-aid in Virginia are discussed in, Tipton Ray Snavely, Duncan
Clark Hyde and Alvin Blocksom Biscoe'B book, State Grants-in-Aid
in Virginia, (Institute for Research in the Social Sciences,
University of Virginia, Monograph No. 15; 1955) .
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE VII
STATEMENT OF INCOME— ACTUAL AND ESTIMATED, Year ended June 30 , 1938*
GENERAL FUND
Actual
From local sources:
Receipts
Current taxes
29,085.47
Delinquent taxes
4,269.53
Land redemptions
11,249.84
Beer licenses
Slot machine licenses
146.90
Carnival licenses
629.00
Transfer fees
489.60
Trial justice fees
2,551.15
Commonwealth's Attorney's fees
187.50
Sheriff's fees
3,582.02
Cleric's fees
9,361.22
County fines
2,653.50
Interest
1,097.07
City of Charlottesville's share of jail
and courthouse maintenance
2 ,256.88
Board of Prisoners
4,226.65
Miscellaneous
482.56
Total from local sources
72 ,286.89
From the Commonwealth:
Share of A. B. C. Profits
21 ,476.03
Trial justice appropriation
600.00
Capitation taxes returned
2,410.18
Relief appropriation
1 ,030.51
Refund of salaries
1,999.92
One-third expense of director of finance
6,071.47
Total from the Commonwealth 33,588.11
TOTAL REVENUE
105 ,857.00
Non-revenue, sale of property & transfers
2 ,606,69
TOTAL-GENERAL FUND
108 ,463.69
DOG TAX FUND
VIRGINIA PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FUND
CROZET FIRE FUND
SCHOOL OPERATING FUND
WOOLEN MILLS SANITARY IMPROVEMENT FUND
CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
IVY DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
• RIVANNA DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
WHITE HALL DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
SCHOOL DEBT FUND
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION FUND
TOTAL— ALL FUNDS
4,356.24
15,370.79
1,793.83
208,563.52
588.06
35,672.44
12,076.41
26 ,660.18
23,836.33
22,679.54
^12,590.31
*14,134.83
24,845.03
$511 ,631.20
ACTUAL RECEIPTS OVER ESTIMATED RECEIPTS
Estimated
Receipts
27 ,087.81
5 ,250.00
10 ,000.00
100.00
100.00
500.00
2 ,500.00
2 ,100.00
2 ,500.00
9 ,000.00
1 ,000.00
1 ,500.00
1 ,500.00
5 ,500.00
250.00
68 ,887.81
14,500.00
2 ,500.00
1 ,000.00
6 ,152.00
24,152.00
93,039-81
3,275-00
96,3l4.8l
5 ,200.00
14,839.30
208 ,119.26
507.00
21,890.77
8 ,900.00
20,894.34
37,489.00
38 ,817.28
9,763.24
15 ,671.00
$478,406.00
$33 ,225.20
* Figures taken from: County of Albemarle, Virginia, Report on audit of
accounts and records for the year ended June 30,1938.
Exhibit C.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE VIII
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES COMPARED WITH APPROPRIATIONS*
Year ended Juno 50,1958
GENERAL FUND
Expenditures
Board of Supervisors
5,007*96
County Executive’s Office
2,751*5^
Board of Equalization
5,121.94
Department of Finance
15;2l4.45
County Clerk's Office
8,855*57
Circuit Court
2,505*95
Trial Justice Court
5;099*57
Commonwealth's Attorney's Office
4,041-96
Poliding and investigating
11,191*94
Confinement and care of prisoners
2,411.55
Fire prevention and extinction
41.85
Poor relief
4,425.79
Lunacy commissions
608.55
Superintendent of public welfare^s office
8 ,656.15
Public Health
6 ,144.19
Advancement of agriculture and Loin® econ.
5,611,59
Elections
.
1,749*71
Maintenance of buildings and grounds
6,944.17
Miscellaneous operating functions
42,15
Premiums and accrued interest on securities
purchased
4,088.47
Taxes refunded
Transfers to other funds
5,864.70
Total--General Fund
100,55^*17
Appropriations
6,149.00
2,950*00
5>150.00
16,495*00
8,890.00
2,4l6.00
5,145.00
4 ,110.00
10,640.00
5,820.00
500.00
5;550.00
700.00
8,970.00
5,5°7*00
5,156.00
__?;5p7.i 7‘z
100,572.72
4 ,654.65
5 ,580.00
VIRGINIA PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FUND
15,507*64
15,159*50
CR0ZET FIRE FUND
2,417*55
DOG TAX FUND
SCHOOL OPERATING FUND
WOOLEN MILLS SANITARY IMPROVEMENT FUND
CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
IVY DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
219,410.59
214,119*26
494.71
507.00
22,470.62
21,890.77
7,466.02
8,900.00
50,864.67.
20,894.54
SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND ■
28 ,561.51
57 ,489*00
SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
24,525*85
58 ,817.28
9,095*06
9 ,765.24
RIVANNA DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
WHITE HALL DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUND
SCHOOL DEBT FUND
Total all funds
l^ l^ -jfe
$479,755*85
Amount of expenditures under appropriations
$489,145*91
$
9,588.06
* Taken from: County of Albemarle, Virginia^ Report on ^ - d l t of accounts
and records for the year ended June 30, 195° • Exhibit D. ,
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
'
...
TABLE I X
—
BUDGET EXECUTION**
-..
ACTUAL E5CPENDTTUEES AT© ACTUAL RECEIPTS COMPARED WITH
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES AT© ESTIMATED RECEIPTS
INCOME
1958
1957
1936
Actual income
511,631.20
559 ,722.95
513,308.00
Estimated income
478,1*06.00
497,313.14
467,290.97
Amount of actual overestimated income
33,225.20
62,409.81
46,017.03
(Net)
(Net)
(Net)
Appropriations
489,143.91
468,302.59
473,209.97
429,454.19
Expenditures.
479,755-85
561 ,028.13
(Net)
565 ,645.59
(Net)
395,517.56
Amount of estimatedover
actual income
1933
:
EXPENDITURES
Amount of expenditures under appropriations
9,388.06
Amount of expenditures over appropriations
(Net)
92,725*5^*
33,936.63
92,35^.62* ’
(Net)
** From; County of Albemarle, Reports on Aud-its; (Eor the fiscal years 1935 to 1939) , passim. ’
* These excesses of expenditures over "budget appropriations are accounted for hy expenditures
for school construction for which no provision was made in the budgets.
I
3
E
TABLE X
STATEMENT OF FUND SURPLUSES AND DEFICITS
|
'
(
/)'
(/)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY**
o'
3
O
CD
O
O
cq'
1933
1935
1936
1937
1938
General
32,112.33
k 2 ,9 b 5 .k l
64 ,965.45
75 ,728.67
80,481.17
88 ,804.79
Dog tax
4 ,467.82
7,033.79
3,657.33
3 ,815.05
3,437.08
3,138.67
; 12 ,709.97
4 ,632.65
4 ,220.59
10,559-40
12 ,206.76
1,358.97
439.26
329.41
646.33
97 ,210.60
93,65^.47
20 ,186 .61*
S’
l-H
1934
OPERATING FUNDS
o
County school
CD
Virginia public assistance
HI
Crozet Fire
3"
CD
Total
DISTRICT ROAD DEBT FUNDS .
49 ,290.14
54 ,609.85
72,843.37
■90 ,103.12
Charlottesville
53 ,666 .00*
44,4-70.24*
34 ,046 .74*
25 ,413 .23*
18 ,596 .83*
Ivy
2 ,4o 6 :4o
3,536.62
4 ,865.01
4,931.96
2 ,588.09
Rivanna
5,367.59
3 ,63^.65
7,270.67
7,126.31
7,048.85
15,719.60*
20 ,818 .30*
33,^53.05*
36 ,611 .87*
47 ,034 .56*
64,523.24*
94,901.7^*
<
3
CD
■o
O
Q.
C
2o
■O
3^
CT
CD
Q.
Samuel Miller
l-H
T
3
CD
3
in
in
o'
3
553.03
Scottsville
135,227.97* 139,969.96
1^3,579.84*
148,451.87*
152 ,969 .51*
173 ,629 .89*
"White Hall
48,862.64
48,744.83
153,193-45* l6l,859.34*
47,505.51
154,597.26*
44,268.68
164,572.71*
9 ,206 .90*
235,659.5^*
13,724.29*
317,609.10*
31 ,666 .66*
l-H
o
c
22.63
BUILDING FUND —
County School
WOOLEN MILLS SANITARY DISTRICT
IMPROVEMENT FUND
Total all funds
103 ,903 .31*
7 ,500.00
7 ,500.00
53,843.23*
56 ,511 .69*
99 ,749 .49*
7^,253 .89*
1,721.34
126,591.48*
194,948.85*
* Indicates deficits.
**Data taken from: ATbemarle County, Reports on Annual Audit, (193^-1939) •
11.78
105.13
255,516 .16*
Page 68
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
will take each check separately, read out the amount of the check, to
whom it is to he paid and for what purpose. For some items he will
make "brief explanations as to the quantity and quality bought, and
perhaps, for what the purchase is to he used. This will he done rather
rapidly since there will he many checks to he handled. The Supervisors
listen and ask an occasional question, One member may ask the County
Executive if tools for the school work shop which were bought from
Sears Boebuck could not be bought as cheaply from a local dealer.
Another member may remark that in his experience one brand of goods is
superior to another, and so the procedure goes until all checks are
disposed of. The clerk affixes the name of the Chairman of the Board
to the checks mechanically and this part of the Board’s duties are
performed in a few minutes.
Tables seven, eight, nine and ten present data which indicate
some of the problems involved in county budgeting and also show the
results which have been achieved in Albemarle County. Table seven gives
an analysis of income in the various funds, comparing actual income
with estimated income. Naturalljr from the point of view of sound budget­
ing, it is preferable that actual income should exceed estimated income
in order that plans involving expenditures will not be based on false
estimates of the amount of money which will be available. From table
seven it will be seen that estimates of revenues which are paid into
the general fund were around twelve thousand dollars below actual
receipts. For the same fund table eight shows that in 1938 actual
expenditures were around two hundred dollars below budget appropriations.
Consequently, both on the income and expenditure sides of the general
fund conditions were "favorable" and at the end of the year's operations
this fund showed a substantial balance in it. This same situation has
prevailed for several consecutive years and the surplus in the general
fund has increased from $32,112.35 at June 30 , 1955 to $88,8ok.79 iat June
30, 1938 (see table ten). Just the opposite trend has been taking
place in two of the district road debt funds. Table seven indicates
that actual receipts which are paid into the Scottsville District Boad
Debt Fund .and the Samuel Miller District Boad Debt Fund did not amount
to estimated receipts. In other words, the levy for the retirement of
the debts1 in these districts did not raise sufficient funds to meet
debt requirements. This situation has prevailed for several years and
the deficits in these funds have increased in size (as indicated in table
ten). The same thing which is shown in detail in tables seven and eight
for 1938 is shown in summary form in table nine for 1955, 1956 , 1957
and 1958. Actual revenue has consistently exceeded estimates of
revenue. It will be seen that for two of the years covered by this
table the County spent considerably more than had been provided for in
the budgets. These excesses are accounted for by capital outlays for
school construction and do not indicate that in the ordinary operations
of the government the budget was not executed as originally drafted. The
favorable condition of the operating funds is indicated by table ten
which shows that the surplus in operating funds has increased from
$^9,290.Ik at June 30 , 1933 to $95,65k.k7 at June 30 , 1938 .
In summary, control over expenditures seems to be surrounded with
the proper safeguards in the County. The County Executive so far has
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
Page 69
followed the practice of passing on each voucher personally. He
approves the payroll and makes all purchases of supplies. Each month
the Board of Supervisors has the opportunity of reviewing all expenditures.
Mr. Haden operates on the theory that the spending officials in the
County should he "budget conscious" and should exert every effort to
keep within budget appropriations. There has been no necessity to
borrow money to meet current operating expenses.
Schools and County Budgeting
There are probably few localities in Virginia which, at one time
or another, have not had difficulties with the handling of BChool
finances. Controversies over school funds usually create two opposing
camps, the local governing bodies and their supporters, and the school
boards and division superintendents and their supporters. Albemarle
County has had the same difficulties— for a short time after the- new
form of government was adopted and before its adoption. Consequently,
the methods and procedures used in budgeting for the county schools will
be given special attention'in this section.
It has already been pointed out that the act of 1926 requiring the
boards of supervisors of the counties to prepare annual budgets was
defective and not at all clear as to the relation of the school budget
to the general county budget.13 In 1928 the school laws were amended
and codified and a section on the school budget was included.1^ This
section reads as follows:15
It shall be the duty of the division superintendent of schools,
on or before the first day of April of each year, to prepare,
with the advice of the school board, an estimate of the amount of
money which will be needed during the next scholastic year, for
the support of the public schools of the county. These estimates
shall be prepared on forms furnished by the State board of
education, approved by the director of the budget and the
comptroller, and shall set up the amount of money necessary for
overhead charges, for instruction, for operation, for maintenance,
for auxiliary agencies, for miscellaneous,...and for permanent
capitalization and such other headings or items as may be necessary.
The estimate so made shall clearly show all necessary details' in
order that the board of supervisors and the taxpayers of the county
may be well informed as to every item of the estimate. On the
basis of this estimate, the division superintendent of schools
Bhall request the board of supervisors to fix such school levy
as will net an amount of money necessary for the operation of
the schools, or in lieu of such levy to make a cash appropriation
13, Supra p. 53.
l^t-. The history of this section of the school code is given in The
Virginia Code of 1936, edited by A, Hewson Michie and Chas^ V.
Sublett, (Michie Company, Charlottesville, 1936) notes to Section
6ll of Chapter 33•
15. Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1928 ), Chapter U7I, Section 657*
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 70
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
from the general county levy for operation of the schools* If the
board, of supervisors refuse to lay such levy or make such cash
appropriation as is recommended, and requested by the division
superintendent, then, on a petition of not less than fifty tax­
payers of the county qualified to vote, requesting the same, the
circuit court of the county, or the judge thereof in vacation,
may, in its or his discretion, order an election by the people
of the county to be held during the month of June, to determine
whether such levy shall or shall not be fixed.
The following section provides that, "The1board of supervisors
shall include in the county budget required by law (of 1926 ), and as part
thereof, the budget for the schools of the county..."1°
With a few amendments passed in 1936, these provisions remain as the
basic enactments relating to school budgeting. The Optional Forms Act
of 1952 made no substantial change in the provisions, merely stating
that the general county budget shall "be set up in the manner prescribed
by general law."17 The 1936 amendments provide that the Board of
Supervisors Bhall not reduce the school appropriations during the year
for which they were appropriated, "except by the same percentage ofreduction as all other appropriations are reduced. "18
These statutory provisions distribute important school budgeting
functions between the School Board, the Division Superintendent and the
Board of Supervisors without stating specifically who shall be responsible
for the final determination of school expenditures. The provisions
assume that these three agencies will work in harmony, and provide that
the Division Superintendent in cooperation with the School Board shall
draw up estimates on the basis of their judgment of the needs of the
schools, and then the Board of Supervisors will either make a cash
appropriation or levy a tax sufficient to operate the schools and
provide the funds "requested" by.the Division Superintendent. Much
ambiguity, however, has been dispelled by a reoent decision of the
Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. In Scott County the Division Super­
intendent and the School Board had presented the school budget in accordance
with statutory provisions and the Board of Supervisors rejected the
budget in its entirety.^ To insure the continuance of the schools of
the County the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals granted a writ of
mandamus requiring the Board of Supervisors to lay a levy sufficient to
keep the schools going. The Board of Supervisors was again requested the
following year to approve the school budget and this time it eliminated
some items completely and scaled down other items to the amount of $25 ;000 ,
The budget was approved as curtailed and a levy was laid to raise the money.
The School Board contended that the Board of Supervisors could not lawfully
increase or decrease the budget as submitted to it and that it must raise
16 .
17.
18.
19.
Ibid. Section
658 .
Ibid,
(1952 ),Chapter 368 , Section 2773-n 25.
Ibid.
(1936), Chapter 3 lb , Section 657 .
ScottCounty School Board v . Scott
County Board of Supervisors, 169
Va. 213 (1937).
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 71
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
the necessary money to meet the estimates as submitted to it. The court
in its decision observed that, "The parties appear to he in no mood to
cooperate; though hy implication, at least, the General Assembly through
its enactments assumes that there will he a cooperation between the two
hoards, in order to provide for and improve our free s c h o o l s , "20 The
court decided against the School Board and interpreted the statutory
provisions relating to school budgeting in the following terms ;21
This act (the act of 1936 amending the act of 1928(see quotations,
supra p p . 69-70 )) clearly shows the legislative intent to place
in the hands of the board of supervisors the power and duty of
supervising school expenses. It provides that a detailed estimate
must be submitted to the board of' supervisors in order that the
members may be properly Informed of the expense. It further
provides that the school superintendent must request the board
of supervisors to lay the levy in accordance with the estimate
and that after the appropriation is made the board of supervisors
cannot decrease it during the school term. This is but another
way of saying that they have the right to curtail the budget prior
to the school term.
This decision makes it clear that in so far as legal provisions are
concerned the boards of supervisors in the State are superior to the
school boards with respect to school budgeting. One important additional
consideration operates in Albemarle County to make the Board of Super­
visors enjoy a position superior to the Sohool Board in school budgeting.
This is the method of appointing members to the School Board by the
Board of Supervisors to serve at the pleasure of the Board of Supervisors.
The threat of dismissal may be, and actually has been, used to make
the School Board come into line with the policies of the Board of Super­
visors. Consequently, the role of the School Board in Albemarle County
is one of advising and requesting so far as school funds are concerned.
The Board of Supervisors may treat Bchool funds just as it does other
county funds except that once school appropriations have been made it
can not reduce these appropriations during the term for which they were
made. Consequently, revenues accruing to the County from the school levy
are earmarked in this special sense.
As the above discussion has revealed, it is not obligatory on the
County to raise school funds by a special school levy. Instead, it may
make cash appropriations out of revenues accruing to the general fund—
that is, revenue raised by the general county levy. The question, is
there any advantage in having a special school levy, might well be
raised. If the special school levy were abolished, the estimates in the
present school fund could be consolidated with the estimates in the
general fund. School funds would then be handled in the same way as the
County’s appropriations for public assistance.
In closing the consideration of school budgeting it should be
20. Ibid. y . 215.
21. Ibid. p. 217.
:
:
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 72
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
pointed out that the Board of Supervisors is not completely free in its
control over school funds, as the ahove discussion may have tended to
imply. Regulations of the State Board of Education and the conditions
attached to state grants-in-aid for education place a very real limit
on the scope of authority of the Board of Supervisors.
Control over County Revenues
It is as important that administrative techniques he employed to
check up on county revenues as to check on county expenditures. The
County stands to loose as much hy the failure of officers to collect
revenue due the County as it does hy permitting expenditures to he
made unwisely. This form of fiscal control has heen slow in developing
in county government in Virginia. The problem of controlling county
revenues is inextricably tied up with the fee system since a considerable
part of county revenue comes from fees collected hy the various fee
officers. The problem does not arise in connection with county revenue
in the form of state grants-in-aid since the receipt of this class of
funds merely involves bookkeeping operations which are performed by
the various state departments which handle the funds. These state
departments and the County Executive in Albemarle County check on each
other in handling state grants-in-aid. The problem does arise in
connection with that part of county revenue which is derived from
taxes and fees collected by county officers. Since part of the State's
revenue is collected by county officers in the form of taxes, fees,
licenses, etc., the State also has an interest in seeing that county
officers are efficient and honest in performing their duties.
Much of the controversy which has raged over the compensation of
county fee officers has revolved around the contention that some officers
collected large amounts in fees and were overpaid while some collected
meager amounts and were underpaid. Until quite recently the fact that
fee officers in the counties kept such scant and inadequate records made
it virtually impossible to determine exactly how much such officers were
charging for their services, how much they kept as their compensation and
how much they owed the State. Far too frequently county officers are
encountered who in effect say, "It's'nobody's business how much I'm paid.
The payment of excess fees into the- state treasury after expense
allowances and salaries have been subtracted has.netted the State a
negligible amount of revenue. Scarcely a session of the General Assembly
has been held in recent years which has not attempted to lay down
increasingly stringent regulations regarding the collection of fees by
local officers. But there has been no way of being sure that the
requirements of these laws were being complied with. Local systems of
accounting and bookkeeping were either nonexistent or completely lacking
in uniformity from locality to locality.
In spite of the political atmosphere which has surrounded the
collection and distribution of locally collected fees and the suspicion
that the State Compensation Board and its predecessors were patronage
dispensing organs, there has been considerable improvement in methods
used in collecting county revenue in recent years. The introduction of
a uniform system of accounting in county government in 1932 was a major
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
Page 73
reform,22 Since under the old form of government all the fee collecting
officers were popularly elected and therefore independent of each
other, and for the most part independent of the hoards of supervisors
also, the new accounting system was designed primarily to make these
officers more accountable to state agencies— the Compensation Board and
the State Auditor of Public Accounts. However, if county officers be
thought of as agents of local government rather than local agents of
state government, it is necessary to view the problem of controlling
them in the collection of revenues from a different angle. It is
necessary to consider what measure of control over the collection of
revenue should be exercised on the local level. If the counties are
to operate a budgetary system whereby they project plans for expenditures
a year in advance on the basis of certain estimated revenues, it is
necessary that-this budgeting system make some provision for controlling
the collection of these revenues. The following discussion will review
Albemarle County's experiences in dealing with this problem.
The Optional Forms Act of 1932 contemplates the establishment of
effective control over the collection of county revenues by the board
of supervisors and the county executive or the county manager, as the
case may be. Several provisions of the act may be cited to set forth
the basis for the exercise of control over revenue in Albemarle County.
All moneys received by any officer or employee of the county
for or in connection with the business of the county shall be
paid promptly into the hands of the director of finance; all
such money shall be promptly deposited by the director of
finance to the credit of the county in s^ch banks or trust
companies as shall be selected by the board of county supervisors.2*
All officers and employees of the county shall be paid regular
compensation, and the fee system as a method of compensation in
the said county shall be abolished, except as to those officers
not affected by the adoption of this form of county organization
and government. All such officers and employees shall, however,
continue to collect all fees and charges provided for by general
law, shall keep a record thereof, and shall promptly transmit
all such fees and charges collected to the director of finance,
who shall promptly receipt therefor...All fees, and commissions,
which but for this section would be paid to the said officers
by the State for services rendered, shall be paid into the
treasury of the county. 2^
22. See in this connection: Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts,
Manual of Uniform System of Accounting, for Accounts of Clerks of
the Courts (1937) and Manual of Procedures for the Preparation of
Records, for use by Sheriffs and City Sergeants (1939).
23. Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1932), Chapter 368 ; Section 2773-n 11.(e).
2 k . Ibid., Section 2773-n 25.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page Ik
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
Any officer or employee of the county who shall fail or refuse to
collect any fee which is collectible and should be collected under
the provisions of this section, or who shall fail or refuse to pay
■ any fee so collected to the county as herein provided, shall upon
conviction be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. ?
Referring to the board of supervisors, the act provides: "It shall
have full power to inquire into the official conduct of any office’of
officer under its control, and to investigate the accounts, receipts,
disbursements, and expenses of any county or district officer. .."2 6
It is clear that the provisions cited above make it the responsibility
of the Board of Supervisors and the County Executive to see that county
revenues are properly collected. At the .present time the chief fee
collecting officers in the County are the Commonwealth's Attorney, the
Sheriff, and the County Clerk. They are required to collect all fees
owed the County and to turn them over to the Director of Finance.
Consequently, under the new system people who owe fees for services
rendered by county officers' are under obligation to the County as a whole
rather than to a particular county officer. Officers who collect fees
collect them for the County and not directly for themselves to make up
their own compensation.
Fee officers in the County keep a record of the amounts collected in
fees and turn them over to the County Executive once each month. The
County Clerk accompanies the fees turned over to the County Executive
with a report showing the work.of the office for the past month. This
report gives the number of licenses issued, deeds admitted and the amount
of other recording work done. There appears to be, however, no systematic
method in use for checking revenues against services rendered to see
that citizens have been charged the amount of fees provided by law, and to
see if all collections are recorded and returns to the county treasury
duly made. With reference to the Sheriff's office, the County Executive
has a record of all jail committments, the number of prisoner days, and
the detailed cost of maintaining the jails. Consequently, the County
Executive can keep a close check on county revenue in the form of committment
fees and the State's allowances for the care and custody of prisoners.
The problem of criminal costs and the collection of fees for court work
by the Sheriff and his deputies will be considered in more detail below.^
‘ The largest single class of county revenue is taxes on real estate
and tangible personal property. The collection and custody of tax revenues
will also be taken up later in detail.28 it will be sufficient to point
out here that the collection of taxes in Albemarle County is under the
immediate supervision of the County Executive, The County Executive makes
,a progress report to the Board of Supervisors each month showing the amount
and percent of taxes collected to date with figures for previous years to
25.
26.
27.
28.
Ibid.
Ibid., Section 2773-n 5 .(*>)•
Infra, Chapter 12.
Infra, Chapter 8 .
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
F IS C A L MANAGEMENT
Page 75
enable the Board, to make comparisons.
It is important to remember that since a considerable part of the
State's revenue is collected by county officers the State Auditor of
Public Accounts has prescribed rules and forms to be used by these
officers. Attempts are being made to keep a closer check on the
collection of fees by local officers. State auditors are making
detailed investigations into the accounts and activities of local law
enforcing officers in an attempt to discover the cause of the high
criminal costs in the State.29
Auditing
The County's books are now audited annually by a private firm.
Formerly they were audited by the State Auditor of Public Accounts.
The change was made because the audit could be made sooner after the
close of the fiscal year and at a lower cost to the County. Audits
by private firms are made in accordance with specifications formulated
by the State Auditor of Public Accounts. These audits are very
comprehensive and thorough as compared with the "superficial
examinations" made prior to 1932 .-^
29. Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, Report on Special Study
of the Financial Transactions of the Offices of the Sheriffs of
the Commonwealth of Virginia, for the Calendar Year 1937, (1935),
passim.
30. Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, Annual Report to the
Governor of Virginia, 1931,p. 6 .
See Also: Model for Reports on Audits of the Accounts and Records
of the Counties of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Fiscal
Year Ended June 30. 1957., passim.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER VII
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
In previous chapters we have seen that much improvement in county
government iq .Virginia has "been accomplished in the direction of uniform
accounting and systematic budgeting. For most Virginia counties, however,
personnel management as such, does not exis‘b--jus‘
fc as prior to 1926
systematic budgeting did not exist. It is natural that an up-to-date
nersonnel program should come later than improvements in budgeting and
accounting, since a modern personnel system based on merit principles
strikes more deeply at the root of the county political systems and the
centuries of traditions which go with them. It is not a criticism of
county officers to point out that by and large the administrative personnel
has been recruited with emphasis on the extent to which such personnel
strengthened Borne county officer's or courthouse ring’s political influence.
Many examples of nepotism, excessive compensation, retention of employees
long after their period of usefulness,, and the like, could be given. The
root of the difficulties in county personnel management, as in most aspects
of county government, seems to lie in the apathy and lack of understanding
among the body of the citizens. There exists no organized public opinion
which demands the abolition of the "spoils system" and the establishment
of the "merit system" in county government. In fact, the attempt to set up
a personnel system based on merit principles in Henrico County illustrates
clearly the almost insurmountable difficulties which stand in the way.
Here, court battles and, most important of all, the lingering tradition
for appointments on the basis of local residence and party affiliation
have made progress in personnel administration slow.
Assuming that an improved system of personnel management in counties
is desirable and that an enlightened public opinion would support such a
system, what problems present themselves?
Legal Barriers^
In the first place, the legal structure of the governments of most
Virginia counties simply does not recognize the existence of personnel
management as a separate problem. Constitutional provisions requiring
the election of county administrative officers and the fixing of their
terms of office stand in the way. Most constitutional barriers, however,
could be gotten around by the use of the 1928 amendments empowering the
General Assembly to provide complete new systems of government for Virginia
counties. This raises a very fundamental question with respect to county
personnel problems. On what theory should we proceed in attacking these
problems? According to one theory, which recognizes the desirability of
local self government, the counties would be given an opportunity to adopt
a form of government, as permitted by the Optional Forms Act of 1932, and
then they would be left as autonomous governmental units to set up their
own system of personnel management. Henrico County offers a splendid example
where an attempt has been made to improve county personnel management,!
1. Public Administration Service, Chicago, Program of Personnel Administra­
tion, for Henrico County , 1937, passim.
\
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 78
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
This county has a personnel director who is supposed to act as an "arm of
administration management" as truly as does the director of finance or pur­
chasing officer. Even teachers and school employees have been brought under
the new system. It seems unmistakable that a county which can set up a pro­
gressive system of personnel administration is in a better position to re­
sist state centralization tendencies— especially when the county can claim
that it is better able t 6 select and control employees for itself than some
state agencies can. In carrying out the desire for more local autonomy state
statutes would vest final responsibility and authority for a m o d e m personnel
system in local governing bodies. Only general requirements, that a system
based on merit be established, would be the extent of the State's super­
vision. However, Improvement along this line could probably come only after
county consolidation in many instances and after the whole administrative
system of Virginia counties was overhauled. The poor showing for the past
few years in this field of reform suggests a second way of approaching the
problem.
State Supervision of Local Personnel
Legally speaking, counties are creatures of the State. But county
governments, especially in recent years, have become creatures of the State
in much more than a formal legal sense. Administrative practices have made
real in operation what has always been recognized in legal theory. There
has been a centralizing tendency, .whether good or bad, in state government
at the expense of the counties just as there has been a centralizing tendency
in the federal government at the expense of the states. Recent trends in
public education, public welfare, public health and police protection indi­
cate increased control by the State over county government and consequently
increased control over county personnel. Local welfare officials illustrate
this trend. The old overseers of the poor were elected by the people. In
the early days of reorganization of welfare functions welfare officials were
made appointive. Localities were urged to appoint professionally trained
persons. At the present time the state department of public welfare may
veto any appointment which does- not comply with strictly enforced and de­
tailed qualifications which it has laid down. The state department sponsors
in-service training activities Buch as institutes and conferences. Recently
county superintendents were sent forms for rating their case workers. In
short, it is clear that the impetus for improvement In personnel management
in this field comes from the State and not from the counties. Under the
newer legislation the method of selecting officers for directing local func­
tions completely ignores selection by local election. For the most part, .
it makes local selection by appointment less local by giving some state
official power to lay down minimum qualifications for local officers or by
making the selection of local officers conditional on the approval of state
officers. The tendency is unmistakably ta.tmake local school superintendents,
superintendents of public welfare, health officers and other officers in the
counties local agents of state government rather than agents of particular
county governments. If this tendency is inevitable and to be approved of,
it may perhaps be wise to view personnel problems in the counties as essen­
tially problems of the state administration. If this view is accepted a
personnel system for the State, which seems to be in the offing, would
include provisions for the counties as parts of the. State’s administrative
mahcinery. Any state personnel agency which might be created would be
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
E E B S O M E L MANAGEMENT
Page 79
given some duties to perform in relation to county personnel. The ex­
tent of the state agency’s duties -with respect to the direction and
control over county personnel could vary within very wide "boundaries.
The
state agency could "be made an advisory agency or clearing house for
technical information, lending its services to counties. It could"be
given substantial powers in enforcing minimum standards in counties in
such respects as recruitment, promotions, salary scales, classification,
efficiency ratings and other aspects of personnel management,
"Where states have attempted to solve the problem of
merit systems for governmental subdivisions the following
principal patterns have been used: (l) the state law makes
it mandatory that.certain subdivisions above a certain
population come under the provisions of the law, using the
state agency for personnel selection and.administration;
(2 ) the state law makes it mandatory that certain sub­
divisions set up their own personnel agency; (5 ) the state
law makes it permissive for subdivisions to come under the
provisions of the state law by a referendum of the voters
of the subdivision and the state agency to function as the
personnel agency for the subdividion; and (4) the state law
provides that subdivisions may contract with the state
agency for sucli services as it may from time to time require.2
At the present time there are no Virginia statutes dealing in a
comprehensive way with personnel administration or a civil service system
for the counties. There are innumerable provisions of statutes which
have a bearing on personnel administration in the counties, such as
provisions relative to the fee system, methods of appointing officers,
etc. Doubtless the General Assembly will soon decide whether or not
it will establish a personnel agency for state employees. In doing
so it will have to choose between the possible methods of dealing with
personnel for political subdivisions of the State or Birnply making no
provision for local personnel problems at all. The more power over local
personnel that is given to a state personnel agency which might be set
up, the more the theory of local self government will be infringed upon.
However, with the present small county units, many of them unable to
provide minimum services and entirely unable to afford the increased
staff for personnel management, the alternative of more state control
in personnel management as in other fields of county government may
appear to offer the only hope for progress. County consolidation, which
does not seem to be within the realm of the possible at this time, would
be the way to overcome the difficulties faced by the small county unit.
With this attempt to place the county personnel problem in its
statewide setting, an examination of personnel problems in a particular
county, Albemarle County, may be undertaken. Some of the necessary
structural changes in the county government which make possible centralized
2, National Civil Service Reform league, National Municipal League and
Civil Service Assembly of United States and Canada, Suggested Draft
of a State Civil Service Law, (1958); P* 38,-
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 80
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
personnel administration have been achieved,. The adoption of the Optional
Forms Act of 1932 also removed many legal obstacles, One provision of the
act seems to have teen framed with the more m o d e m philosophy of "positive
personnel administration" in mind. This provision reads as follows: "All
appointments shall he on the hasis of ability, training and experiences of
the appointees which fit them for the work which they are to perform. "3
It is an elementary principle that the power to hire and fire is at
the hasis of personnel management, as it is at the hasis of the hroader power
of direction. Under the county executive form of government the Board of
Supervisors appoints directly 29 employees. The 188 school officials owe
their appointment indirectly to the Board of Supervisors since the School
Board is chosen hy it and serves at its pleasure. Under the old form of
government less-than 10 county employees owed their appointment to the
Board of Supervisors, either directly or indirectly. It is easy to realize
that the Board of Supervisor’s hroader power of appointment and removal
puts it in a stronger position with reference to personnel management. Equal­
ly important for personnel management is the fact that under the present
system the Board of Supervisors has an administrator, the County Executive,
to look to for carrying out its wishes.
When the number and composition of the employees of Albemarle County
are considered it is clear that the County has no need for a separate staff
for personnel management. Table eleven indicates that there are only 228
persops employed hy the County. This number excludes judicial officials
hut includes all elective officials, school teachers and joint city-county
officials. Only 21 of the 228 employees probably would be included in a
classification scheme. Although there are too few employees to justify a
full-time personnel director, the County might profit by some degree of
centralized personnel management on a part-time basis.. Data on jurisdic­
tions of comparable size are given in table twelve to indicate the extent
of personnel management in smaller governmental units.
Although teachers and school employees are usually not included in the
-classified service in most jurisdictions, a central personnel agency may
have important functions to perform in connection with them. The plan for
' 'Henrico County may be cited in this connection.
,
Under the present plan, the Personnel Officer not only
' serves the general County, but also the School Board, and the
'- expenses of his office are divided accordingly. The idea of
.having the Personnel Officer handle both types of work is very
commendable and is an arrangement which might well be established
in''other jurisdictions. Since the appointment of teachers does
not yield very well to the uBe of the written examination method,
it will be the responsibility of the Personnel Officer to work with
3. Virginia. ActB of Assembly, (1932), Chapter 368 , Section 2773-n 7.
h. Floyd W. Reeveb and Paul T. David, Personnel Administration in the
Federal Service, (No. 1. of Studies on Administrative Management in the
Government of the United States, (1937) p. 13* .
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
•
ith permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Salary
Tenure
Method of Selection
r**
O
rQ
©
TABLE XI
Personnel
Data
i>>
P
<D
©
§1 >
•H CQ
-P
P
t;
O •H
O
o
O H
P i csJ
Pi
P i
cd
>
o
P
Pi •
ftp
atFQ
m •
8f '
•H O
GO
P
O
3
cd
O•
la
-P *H
p
© CQ P CQ P
CD ^ P
p
5
P O
t*» Cd J
>a O t>>0 i>)H
©
rQ 3 p p p cd
i> <4H FQ
id ©
•H O p
© ra
0
©
P
!> P
fi P
o©
§
P
fc
P & P
P
4 flip
P lP
< fh C9Q < w
Ct . Executive
Chief Assessor
Employees in
Dept, of Fin.
Farm 2c Home
Demonstrators
Countv Clerk
0
©
P
cd
r| P i B
P iO
fC
o
P
p cc_ P •H
© -P
3
<
3
« d !=-. CQ
m CQ
p P
cd ^
cd
d
<
IH ■H
©
.
© <«
p P O
H d
H o
Pi C b m ©
ft
&°
P P P
1
-P c © o ■3 p 0 <H
+3 >cS ©
< m P? o < CQ Eh O ft *q K O
U
§4 0
©
CQ p C
CD
Pi
■S'W < o < ffl <d Eh <!>
p
nd
-H
m
•H m
CO cd
0 i—i
o
cd
I—I
o
B
x
X
X
0
0
■§
•H
o
p
© Pi
•H
W
©
©
i
P
H
P
-H
cd
P
P
0
•W
o
■H
ra
©
o ©
•H:
ch
ft o
0
ft i—!
o
fH
f
©
©
o
fH cd f>
•H ft p
©I po o p
p
cd. ©
P |H o u
m ft ft ft
0
I
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Clerk’s Deput­
X
ies...... ~
Comm. Attorney
Sheriff
Sheriff’s
Deputies Sup..of Schools
School Prin­
cipals,. tea-.,
chers, etc.
Health Officer X
Employees in
Health Dept.
Public Welfare
Superintendent X
Employees in
Dept.' Pub. Welf.X
Ho. Employees 29
X
X
X
X
JL
X
X
x_ X
X.
X
X
JL
X
X
X
X
8
X.
X
X
X
14
207
21
X
X
L88 8
188
L6
P.i
lo
X
X
29
187
_j£2a 16
X
X
22
-5
1220
Q_
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE X I I
Personnel Expenditures and Employees**
Number
Regular
of
Number of Employees
Appropria- Personnel
tions for Staff
Classi- Unclas-
Annual Payroll cost
for all
$
Cost of Personnel Agency,
-Per :
"Classif.
Per cent of
1 3 2 ,0 0 0
.93
.04i
50
2 9,0 0 0
.92
.0 8 6
81
156
335,787
2.33
.0 5 2
30
29
59
45,889
6 .6 6
.43
6 .6 6
•33
Bakersfield, Cal.
$ 55
59
0
59
Canadaigua, N. Y.
25
27
23
75
East Cleveland, 0.
175
Eugene, Oregon.
200
Galion, 0.
4oo
31
6o
35
95
1 1 8 ,0 0 0
Monroe, Mich.
150
l1
47
100
147
8 5 ,0 0 0
3.19 '
.!7
Olympia, Wash.
150
l1
25
0
25
3 0 ,0 0 0
6 .0 0
.5 0
23
10
33
45,413
2 .1 7
.1 1
21
207
228
Struthers y 0.
Albemarle County
50
l1
193,0.64*
** Taken from unpublished MS of Mr. C. M. Ross.
* This figure does not include compensation of Judicial and Election Officials, Supervisors, Members of
Health, Welfare,or School Boards,and Employees of Health Department. .
- -
-
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Page 83
the County Superintendent in preparing systematic plans for
passing upon the credentials submitted hy applicants for
teaching positions* Thus, the Personnel Officer will have
to do research along these lines.
An equally important problem in connection with the
schools will undoubtedly be that of preparing a procedure for
rating teachers...A rating procedure would be invaluable in •
securing better administrative control over teaching
personnel and in determining whether teachers shall be re­
appointed for the ensuing school year. In addition to the
above two tasks, the Personnel Officer will be responsible
for developing an adequate record system concerning the
teaching staff. If the Personnel Officer is to perform
these functions satisfactorily, it will be necessary that
he so schedule his work as to allow sufficient time for
handling the personnel problems of the School Board.5
If at first glance, this plan of having an officer other than the
Superintendent of Schools participate in recruiting school personnel
seems revolutionary for county government, it should be remembered
that superintendents, however much they may excell as educators, are
not necessarily good recruiting officers. On the other hand, a
personnel officer responsible for recruiting school officials could
be used as a cloak by the governing body behind which to hide "political
appointments. At any rate, since 188 of the 228 county employees are
school officials and school salaries amount to about $ 155,000 annually
or 79 per cent of the total payroll, it is among this olass of county
employees that a progressive personnel system could accomplish most.
Table eleven presents some other interesting facts about county
personnel. The salaries of practically all the county employees are
fixed in whole or in part by the Board of Supervisors* It is clear
that the Board of Supervisors has more power and wider discretion in
fixing the salaries of county officers under the county executive
form of government than under the old form. Under the county executive
form the board of supervisors fixes the salaries of county officers
g
"subject to such limitations as may hereafter be made by general law."
The limitations referred to are those which are prescribed by the
Compensation Board— formerly the Fee Commission. The act describing
the powers of the Fee Commission provides that it "shall determine how
many deputies and assistants, if any, are necessary to the efficient
performance of the duties of the said office, and what should be the
compensation of such deputies and assistants..."? This provision seems
to be still in force with the powers granted to it exercised by the
Compensation Board.®
Statutes, however, passed subsequent to the enactment of the
Optional Forms Act of 1952 which deal with the salaries of county
5.
6.
7.
8.
Public Administration Service, Chicago, loc. cit.
Virginia Code, (1936), Section 2773 (30 ).
Ibid. Section 3516.
Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, op. cit., 6 .
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
P a g e 81*-
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
employees make special exceptions for counties adopting one of the forms
of government contained in
the Optional Forms Act. The Compensation
Board determines what part of the salary and expenses of the Commonwealth's
Attorney, the Treasurer and the Commissioner of Revenue the State shall
pay. For purposes of reimbursing the counties which adopt one of the
optional forms, the Compensation Board fixes the salaries of the three
officers named above and determines their expense allowances in the same
manner as if the counties had not adopted one of the optional forms. "The
actual compensation and expense allowances to be paid the attorney for
the commonwealth, the treasurer and the commissioner of the revenue...
shall be fixed and determined as provided in the said form of county
organization and government without regard to the limits provided in this
act."9
It is interesting to note that the case'workers in the Department of
Public Welfare are the only county officers who are systematically rated
for efficiency. The actual rating is done by the Superintendent of
Public Welfare for the' State department. Employees of this department,
the Health Department and the farm and Home demonstrators are the only
employees who participate in any.kind of in-service training, The impetus
for this activity in each case comes frpp. a state agency and not from the
county government.
>.
Conclusion
It should be clear from the above discussion that one faces a very
confused situation when dealing with the difficulties which must be
faced if systematic personnel management is to be introduced into county
government < There are numerous different agencies participating in the
recruitment, fixing salaries and.removal of county employees. Some
employees serve other jurisdictions as well as Albemarle County. Many
employees have been inherited from the old system of government and it
will require years to replace them. County officials have not yet begun
to think of personnel management as suchj as an integral part of the
broader plan of "manager" government.
In closing, certain objectives which have been laid down for the
personnel agency in Henrico County may be reproduced. There is not a
single objective listed which is too academic or too impractical for
Albemarle County to strive for. In the attainment of these objectives
it could improve its government greatly and take another step in the
direction of efficient local self-government. Simple basic personnel
records, which are not now being maintained could be installed as a
good beginning.
The objectives of the personnel program for Henrico County might
be defined as follows:
1. Secure the selection of employees solely on the basis of
the qualifications of applicants for the particular type of work.
2. Facilitate_elimination of less competent employees and
9. Virginia Code, (1936 ), Section 3H-77b,
~
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
Page 85
give proper recognition to employees performing a high grade
of service.
3.
Provide a plan for promotions that will he conducive
to the efficiency of the service and that will he fair to
employees.
1)-. Provide equitable compensation for the various County
positions, including the same rate of pay for the same type
of work throughout the service, and establishing proper
relationships between the salary rates paid for various types
of positions.
5. Provide in-service training for employees in order
that they may be better qualified for their respective duties.
6 . Establish and enforce standard policies as to sick
leave, vacations, and other absences, and secure proper
control over these items.
7. Create proper working conditions that are conducive
to high type of service.
8 . Maintain adequate personnel records for all employees.
9. Foster proper relationships between employees and
officials. 10
10. Public Administration Service, Chicago, loc. cit~T
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER VIII
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
TAX ASSESSING AND COLLECTING
Introduction
The ‘political’ atmosphere in which the offices of the County
Treasurer and the Commissioner of the Revenue operated prior to 193*f
has already been alluded to.l As would he expected in such a system,
the number of people hired to perform the tax assessing and collecting
functions was relatively large, and there was no fair relation between
work done and compensation received. The two finance offices of the
County were campaign headquarters for local officers as well as business
offices of the government of the County. The political campaign, which
in Albemarle was conducted more or less quietly on a yearlong basis,
centered around these offices.
'Political Attaches'
During 1933, the last year of the old regime, the Commissioner
of the Revenue employed eight persons besides himself. This number
included five tax assessors employed on a part time basis and three
office assistants.2 In the Treasurer's office at the same time there
were no less than eleven different persons employed in addition to
the Treasurer. In other words, there was a total of twenty-one persons
employed in 1933 in assessing and collecting taxes in the County. At
the present time these same functions, and in addition the functions
of accounting and purchasing for the whole County, are performed by
eleven employees, including the County Executive. The only conclusion
that can be drawn from these facts.is that almost twice as many
persons were employed under the old system as were actually needed
efficiently to perform the tax assessing and tax collecting functions
of the County. Not only was it unthinkable that a person would be
employed who did not sympathize with the political opinions of his
employer, but -any semblance of a merit system was absent because of the
common practice of employing one's children and relatives in order to
augment the family income.
Machine Subsidies— "Slush Funds"
A consideration of the amounts paid for personal services under
the old system and under the new system will be a more exact criterion
by which to judge their operation. First, however, it may be well
to see what the total cost of performing the functions of the finance
offices were and then see what part of the total cost represents
expenditures for personal services. In his first annual report the
1. Supra. Chapters'II and III.
2. State Compensation Board, Statement of Receipts and Expenses of Local
Fee and Salaried Officers for Calendar Years Ended December 31. 1933193*1. House Document No. 2, (1935); passim.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 8 8
DEPARTMENT OR F IN A N C E
County Executive makes the following comparison of total
costs:5
TABLE XII
COST OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY
FINANCE OFFICES UNDER OLD AND NEW FORMS OF GOVERNMENT
Under Old Form
Under County E x e cutive Form
1930-31
$25,943-00
1931-32
22,673.00
1935-36
7,829-02
1932-33
18 ,086.00 •
1936-37
7,633.37
Total
66,702.00
Total
25,294.14
Average per Yr. $
8 ,431.38
Less excess fees
for 1931
Net Cost
193^-35
$
9,331.75
2,316.37
64,185.63
Average per Yr. $21,395.21
These figures show that the average cost to Albemarle County of
operating its finance offices for the last three year’s under the old
form and the first three years under the new form averaged $21 ,385.21
and $8,431.38 respectively. This represents an average difference of
$ 12 ,963 .83 . These figures include all operating costs "borne by the
County--postage, sta’tionery, office equipment, etc., as well as salaries.
It is difficult to make comparisons as to the cost of personal
services under the two systems. . Table thirteen shows the net salaries
paid employees in the County's finance offices for the last three years
under the old system. It is clear that these costs were being diminished
during the years covered. An examination of the County's budgets for
the years 1936, 1937 , and 1938 .shows that total costs for personal
services for these years were $ 11 ,892 .72 , $12,158.44 and $12,872.46
respectively.^ This is an average of $12,292.87 for the three years.
The average for the three years under the old system, shown on table
thirteen was $21,092. This shows an average difference of $8,800 for
the years covered. Here again, the only conclusion to draw from these
considerations is that around eight thousand dollars per year too much
was being spent for compensating county officers. It could be argued
that costs of personal services were being reduced prior to 1934, when
3. County of Albemarle, Virginia, First Annual Report (For the year
ended June 30 , 1937, mimeographed, 27 P P .), 4. That part of the total
cost borne by the State is not included. Thus, figures show total
cost to the. County only.
4. County of Albemarle, Proposed Budget, (For the fiscal years 19371938, 1938-1939 and 1939-1940, mimeographed)
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
T3
—i
O
Q.
C
o
Q.
CD
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XIII
COST OF PERSONAL SERVICES*
TREASURER:
Treasurer Hamm
E.
L. Carter
C.
H. Mundy
E.
F. Black
W.
E. Wood
G.
N. Jones
A.
G. Bell
B.
T. Hamm
H.
S. Humbert
Smith & Walker
‘G. B. Taylor &
Thelma Hamm
Total 1931
1933.
1932
1931
Treasurer Hamm
E. L. Carter
C» H. Mundy
E. F. Black
W. E. Wood
G. N. Jones
A. G. Bell
H. L. Johnson
H. S.'Humbert
Virginius &
G. S. Hamm Jr.
Thelma Hamm
Thelma F. Grove
Total 1932
6,000
1,1*00
300
300
75
250
2,500
1,1*00
1,500
53
100
15,878
5,015
1,180
210
220
58
116
2,^58
18
1,^75
690
133
232
11,805
COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE:
________ 1931
Commissioner Garth 4,557
500
E. E. Bibb
500
B. F. Black
5 b6
C. B. Harris
500
W. D. Holladay
500
B. I. Wood
2,500
S. S. Tell
Ruby Garth
350
E. G. Kemper
150
"1932
Commissioner Garth 4,751
E. E. Bibh
500
B. F. Black
500
C. B. Harris
5^6
W. D. Holladay
500
B. T. Wood
500
S. S. Tell
1,707
Buby Garth
3^7
B. P. Kemper
1^7
Total 1951
Total 1932
BOTH OFFICES,
GBAUD TOTAL 1931
9,903
23,781
-
GRAND TOTAL
9,^98
1932 -21,303
Treasurer Hamm
E. L. Carter
C. H. Mundy
B. F. Black
. W. E. Wood
A. G. Bell
G. B. Taylor
H. H. Humbert
V. S. Hamm
G. S. Hamm Jr.
Thelma Grove
Gladys Hamm
Total 1933
M75
916
61
19^
k2
2,108
81
1,05^
181
31
^53
15
9,8ll
" 1933
Commissioner Garth h,429
^50
E. E. Bibb
U50
B. F. Black
¥fl
C. D . Harris
1+50
W. D. Holladay
1*1
C. D. Harris
S. S. Tell
99*f
185
Buby Garth
B. P. Kemper
91
U50
L. C. Huff
87381
Total 1933
- GRAND TOTAL
1933 18,192
* Compiled from data in, Statement of Receipts and Expenses of Local Fee and Salaried Officers, Report
of the State Fee Commission (1933T"and Report of the Compensation Board
Page 90
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
the new form went into effect, and that the reduction in these costs
after 193^ are not attributable to the change in government. Many
things point however, to the opposite conclusion. In the first place,
the consolidation of the offices of Treasurer and Commissioner of the
Revenue under the new form accounts for a saving of around four thousand
dollars per year or the equi'valent of one of these officer's salaries.
This is directly attributable to the change in government. Also, we
have already seen that the total number of persons employed in the
finance offices decreased from twenty-one in 1933 to a little over half
that many for succeeding years.
Results Achieved
The above discussion of the number of employees and their compensation
under the two systems of government should be viewed in the light of
results achieved or actual fulfillment of the duties for which they were
employed. There can be no.objection to more employees and higher costs
for personal services if they mean greater accomplishments and better
results than with fewer employees and lower personal service costs.
How do the two systems of government compare with each other as to
results?
The collection of taxes was a primary function of the County
Treasurer and is now an important function of the Department of Finance.
Some idea of the comparative efficiency with which the tax collection
function has been performed may be had by considering the percentage
of taxes which are returned delinquent each year. Table fourteen gives
the percentage of delinquencies from 1930 to 1937* When considering this
table it must of course be viewed in the light of the general improvement
in business conditions since the early depression years.
TABLE X I V 5
PERCENTAGE OF DELINQUENCIES
1930 ................. 11.86
1931 ................. 16.05
1932 ................. 20.53
1933 ......
....17.96
193^................
...14.3^
1935 ................. 12.82
1936...-.......
10.57
5, County of Albemarle, First Annual Report, loc. cit.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
91
In his first annual report the County Executive commented upon the
reduction of the percentage of delinquencies in the following terms:6
In spite of the fact that the percentage of delinquency has
teen reduced from 2 0 .53$ in 1932 to 10.57$ in 1936, no outside
collectors have teen employed since the inauguration of the
present form of government in 1935. Taxes have teen collected
ty the use of mimeographed form letters addressed to all
delinquents at regular intervals, and the requirement that all
assessors of Personal Property collect taxes due for previous years.
Much the same results as are shown in tatle fourteen may te
obtained ty presenting figures on the percentage of the current levy and
back taxes collected each year. Tatle fifteen indicates that a slightly
.higher percentage of the current levy is being collected under the new
system than under the old system and that a much higher percentage of
tack taxes is being collected under the new system.
TABLE X W
PERCENTAGE OF TAXES COLLECTED
Under Old Form of Government
Current Back Total
1930-31 ..88 .lh
8721 W ^55
1931-32..8 3 .95
1932-33..79.1*7
Average..83.85
Under County Executive Form
Current Back Total
1931*-35. .85.66
18751 105.07
91.36
1935-36 ..87.22
15.05 101.26
13* 1*6 92.88
1936-37.. 8 9 .1*0
12.39 101.79
92.88
Average. .87.1*3
15.95 102.37
7 .Ul
9.03
The County is still suffering from the poor record keeping and lax
tax collecting under the old regime. When Mr. Haden took over this
function, he faced a task that would have discouraged a man less industrious
and conscientious than he. Gradually the chaotic condition of the tax
records are being improved. There existed considerable property in the
County on which taxes had not teen collected for many years. The owners
of some of it were not even known. In some cases when attempts are made
to collect some of these tack taxes, the owners come into the offices of
the Department of Finance and say they are sure they paid their taxes,
tut there will be no record to show that they did. The County has
employed lawyers, and under Mr. Haden's direction, tack taxes are being
6 . Ibid.
7. Ibid. 5.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
c)2
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
collected or the property on which the taxes were assessed is sold to '
satisfy the deht. The County has derived considerable revenue from the
sale of such property.
There are many instances which could be cited to show that under
Mr. Haden’s supervision the Department of Finance insists that all tax­
payers meet their obligations to the County. Even checks to relief
clients have been held up for payment of taxes. The welfare officials
would then make the check payable to the wife in the family to escape
the efficiency of the Department of Finance, ^here is an interesting
story of one old gentleman who came to town annually for about thirty
years to pay the taxes on his small piece of land. Each time he was
told that there was no record of his owning any land and he paid no
taxes. He applied for old age assistance under the Act of 1938* In
making the routine investigation as to property holdings of applicants,
it was discovered that he owned the land and therefore was not eligible
for old age assistance. The County sent him a bill for all his back
taxes. To pay the taxes he sold the land and thereby became eligible
for old age assistance. The County got its taxes; the old gentleman
got his old age assistance.
At the root of the good results which are being achieved in the
management of the Department of Finance and the collection of taxes is
an attitude of impartiality, a conviction that all county citizens
regardless of their political or financial status should contribute
their fair share toward the support of the government of the County.
If Albemarle County may be taken as a fair example of what can
be done to improve the financial affairs of county governments in
Virginia, it appears that many other Virginia counties might consider
the possibility of improving their finance offices along similar lines,
Tax Assessing
The framers of the Optional Forms Act of 1932 evidently intended
that county tax assessing techniques should be improved and placed on
a more scientific basis. The follg'&ing provision relative to tax
assessing is contained in the act /8
The director of finance shall exercise all the powers conferred
and perform all the duties imposed by general law upon commissioners
of the revenue, not inconsistent herewith, and shall be subject to
the obligations and penalties imposed by general law.
Every general reassessment of real estate in the county, unless
some other person be designated for this purpose by the board of
county supervisors in accordance with section twenty-seven hundred
and seventy-three-n ten, shall be made by the director of finance;
he shall collect and keep in his office data and devise methods and
procedure to be followed in each such general reassessment, that will
S. Virginia, Acta of Assembly, (1932). Chanter 368 Section 2773-n 11.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
Page 93
make for uniformity in assessments throughout the said county.
While this provision of the Optional Forms Act implies that
the Director of the Department of Finance is subject to the same
provisions of the general law relating to the assessment of taxes
as are Commissioners of the Revenue in other counties, there may .
he several provisions of the general law which are inconsistent
with the Optional Forms Act and which are not applicable to the
Director of Finance. For example, the Optional Forms Act provides
that the Board of Supervisors shall appoint the subordinate administrative
officers of the County.9 This includes county tax assessors who, under
the provisions of the general law, are appointed by the Judges of the
Circuit Courts.10 Freedom from the provisions of the general law removes
some of the chief obstacles to the improvement of the tax assessing
function.
Statutory provisions prescribe in considerable detail the personnel
and methods for tax assessing. The Tax Code provides that the Circuit
Court Judge shall appoint tax assessors for the counties who must be
freeholders of the county for which they are appointed.H They are to
begin their work as soon as practicable after the first day of January
and continue working until the task is completed. The State Department
of Taxation furnishes forms for making the assessments. The commissioner
of the Revenue is required to "ascertain all the real estate in his
county or city, as the case may be, and the person to whom the same is
chargeable"12 every year, beginning on January first. Actual reappraisal
however, may be made in the year 1934,.and. every fourth year thereafter
if the Board of Supervisors decides to do so by a majority vote of its
members.13 For tangible personal property, every taxpayer owning this
class of property is required to file a return by June first of each
year on forms furnished by the Commissioner of the Revenue. If the tax­
payer does not file a return, then the Commissioner of the Revenue must
enter the fair market value of such property, and assess the same as
if it had been reported to him.1-4 For the purpose of equalizing taxes
in the counties, the law provides that if the Board of Supervisors so
directs the Judge of the Circuit Court shall appoint a board of
.
equalization to consist of from three to five freeholders of the county. '
The Committee on Assessment Principles of the National Association
of Assessing Officers has compiled what are considered to be the best
principles and procedures for assessing property for taxation.16 The
9. Ibid. 3773-n 7 (a).
10. Virginia, The Tax Code of Virginia, 1938 Supplement, (Edited by A. H.
Michie and C. W, Sublett, 1938), Chapter18,Section 2k2.
U . Ibid.
12. Ibid. Section 251.
13. Ibid. Section 242.
14. Ibid. Chapter 21 Section 507*
15* Ibid. Chapter 23 Section 344.
l6 . National Association of Assessing Officers, Assessment Principles
and Terminology, (Nat. Assoc, of Assessing Officers, Chicago, 1937)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
9 I+
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
provisions of the Tax Code cited above and present practices in Virginia
counties violate almost all of the principles laid down by this
organization. Local tax assessors are usually men who have no special
qualifications for that type of work. They work only a part of the
year making the assessment process spasmodic rather than continuous.
Actual reappraisal of real estate is done infrequently with the result
that the old valuations are merely copied year after year. This leads
to widespread inequalities.
Much the same personnel and methods are used for assessing property
in Albemarle County as were used before the adoption of the county
executive form of government. No general reassessment of real estate
has been made in the County since 1925. Consequently, taxes on real
estate are based very largely on assessments made many years ago. There
are no tax maps in use and the exact location of all taxable real property
is not readily discoverable by referring to office records. Tangible
personal property is assessed every year, that is, assessors actually
visit taxpayers every year to discover taxable personal property and
make an appraisal of it.
That the situation with respect to real estate assessments in
Albemarle County is not good is indicated by a study of assessed and
sales values of real estate in 193& made by the State Department of
T a x a t i o n . i n this study Albemarle County is ranked eightieth among
the one hundred Virginia counties, just above its neighbor Greene County,
according to the percentage of deviation from "the Index of Assessment
Inequality". In 1936, real estate in the County was assessed at 40 .7 per
cent of its sales value. The County's "Index of Assessment Inequality"
was 69 .3 , that is, a relatively large number of what are commonly termed
"inequalities" existed in the County.^8 It is clear that a general
reassessment of real estate made by modern scientific methods is needed
in' the County. However impartially and efficiently taxes may be collected
from year to year, the County still has much progress to make so long
as these collections are based on a system of real estate assessments
yhich is filled with inequalities or unfair assessments as between
citizen and citizen. The following data on Albemarle County are also
very interesting.19
17. Virginia, Department of Taxation, The Growing Movement to Equalize
Real Estate Assessments in Virginia, (Reprint from an article by
John H. Russell in the Virginia Municipal Review, April, 1939).
18. Ibid., p. 8.
19. Virginia, Department of Taxation, In cooperation with Works Progress
Administration, State-Wide Real Estate Assessment Survey as of
1936, (1939), 3.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 95
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
HOW DOES ALBEMARLE COUNTY tax LOW-PRICED farm land in comp
arison with HIGH-PRICED farm land?
IF THE SELLING PRICE PER ACRE of the land was
from $ 0 to $ 9j it w&s assessed at 8 5 .9$ of true value
I?
It
" $50 ” $50, ”
” $ioo; up,
"
”
"
” 3k.:% ”
" 27.1# "
”
"
”
"
It
It
Albemarle might well consider the advisability of following
Henrico County' in the movement to put tax assessing on a more scientific
"basis. Henrico County, in cooperation with the Works Progress
Administration, has recently completed a real property survey. The
general purposes of the survey were as follows:
Determination of ownership of all properties.
Determination of the size and location of every parcel of
taxable land.
Location of all acreage and lots on which there are improvements
and for which no assessments are carried for the improvements.
Location of all acreage and lots on which assessment is carried
for improvements that have been wrecked, burned, or where there are
no improvements on the land.
Verification and correction of all double assessments.
Location of all unassessed parcels.
Collection of all essential factual data pertaining to both the
land and improvements.
The preparation of an up-to-date Master Map of the entire County
with a Section number system superimposed.
The preparation of section maps for each of the numbered sections
superimposed on the Master Map.
The preparation of a subdivision plat for each of the subdivisions
located in the County.
The preparation of a plat for all acreage and farm lands not in
subdivided areas,' giving metes and bounds, deed book reference,
and owner's name,"
To prepare a Tax Record Card for maintaining a permanent and
continuous record of property values, ownership, transfers,
improvements, etc.
To prepare a cross index reference to facilitate the location of
properties alphabetically or by section and parcel number.
Maps, plats, and data compiled will facilitate work of the 1938
and future Real Estate Assessment
B
o
a
r d
s
. 2 0
Among other findings which resulted from this survey, 1,017
unassessed parcels were discovered. There were 175 parcels with
20. County of Henrico (In Cooperation with the Works Progress
Administration), Real Property Survey, (1938), Mimeographed,
5 pp., forms A-E, 2.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
9
6
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
double, assessment and kJ9 parcels had improvements on them for which
there had been no assessment.21
County Government Accounting
The Optional Forms Act provides that, "Accounts shall be kept'for
each item of appropriation made by the board of county supervisors.
Each such account shall show in detail the appropriations made thereto,
the amount drawn thereon, the unpaid obligations charged against it,
and the unencumbered balance in the appropriation account, properly
chargeable, sufficient to meet the obligation entailed by contract,
agreement, or o r d e r . " 2 2
When the offices of the Department of Finance are entered in
Albemarle County, one meets with the busy din of bookkeeping machines,
adding machines, and other mechanical office equipment.
Under the old system of government each county officer kept his
own records and accounts, The result was a lack of uniformity and
integration.23 Under the present system all bookkeeping and accounting
for all the departments of the County are centralized in the offices of
the Department of Finance. Here all county revenues, income and
expenditures handled by any county officer are recorded systematically
and promptly. All transactions for one day are posted the following
day. As a result there is one central point where the exact financial
condition of the County is reflected in its accounting system from
day to day. Information is readily available and financial reports to
the Board of Supervisors can be made in a short time. The Department
of Finance has all the information at hand necessary to formulate the
annual proposed budget and the annual report.
Custody of County Funds
Under the provisions of the general law the county treasurer and
a county finance board select the depository for money received by
the treasurer.24 The Optional Forms Act makes the performance of
this function a duty of the board of supervisors,25
Prior to 193^ the collection of county taxes in Albemarle County
was done very inefficiently. Furthermore, once funds were collected
they were handled in a very lax manner. County funds were not deposited
promptly and systematically.
21. Ibid. p T T T
22. Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1932), Chapter 368, Section 2773-n H (a).
2 3 . Virginia Commission on County Government, op, cit. 82. But see also
page 5.f supra, on establishment of uniform systems of accounting in
counties. The accounting systems of Virginia counties have, of course,
been improved without any changes in the general form of their governments.
2k. Tax Code of Virginia, op. cit. Chapter 2k Section 350*
25. Virginia, Acts of Assembly. (1932), Chapter 388 Section 2773~n H
(e).
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 97
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
All this is changed now. Money is deposited in hanks for safe
keeping every day. Every penny spent and collected from day to day
can he accurately accounted for.
Centralized Purchasing
One of the most elementary ways of achieving governmental economy
is the centralization of purchasing. Prior to the establishment of
the county executive form of government each county officer did his
own purchasing. At the present time the Department of Finance performs
this function for all the county officers. The various officers using
supplies fill out requisition forms. Purchase order forms are used in
making all purchases. A fireproof warehouse has heen constructed so
that quantity purchases may he made. This warehouse was huilt adjacent
to the county jail so that the jailor could act as storekeeper and
avoid the necessity of employing another person for this function.
Gasoline is one of the chief commodities used hy the county and accounts
for a large part of the expense of some operating departments. The
County has storage facilities which enables it to purchase gasoline
at around eight cents per gallon, whereas formerly the retail price
was paid. It may he readily seen that considerable money would he saved
on this item alone over a period of time. Purchases in large quantities
are made on a competitive basis, the order going to the lowest bidder .26
Debt Administration
Table sixteen gives the history of the county debt. Between 1921
and 1926 the County sold long term bonds to build roads amounting
to $1,328,450. The roads have been worn out and replaced long ago.
Most of the County1s bonds reach-maturity between 1940 and 1950. The
State took over the building and maintenance of roads but did not
assume the responsibility of retiring the old road debts.
In 1923 Albemarle County had the second largest bonded indebtedness
in the State--$2,431,000 as compared with $3,778,832 for Wise County.
For the fiscal year ended June 30 , 1953; the year before the new form
went into operation, Albemarle County's debt was $1,238,450. Norfolk
County was now leading with Wise County second, Arlington County third,
and. Albemarle County fourth.
Table seventeen indicates that in addition to a relatively large
net debt the new form of government inherited deficits in the sinking
funds which had been created for the retirement of these debts. At
June 30,1933; all tut two of the road debt sinking funds had deficits,
the percentage of deficit for all funds being 48.2$. At June 30, 1938
all but one of these funds had a deficit and the percentage of deficit
for all funds had increased to 50.8$. It is clear that if this trend
continues some of the County's bonds will have to be refunded. The
County's net debt has been reduced from $1 ,136,725 in 1933 to $879,038
in 1938. It is interesting to note that temporary loans, which were
frequent before 1933, have not been resorted to .since that time.
2 6 . Ibid. Section 2775-n 11 fa).
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
~
!
TABLE
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF
1938
1937
1936
57,077
16,957
35,100
25,000
1935
Long Term Bonds Sold
Literary Funds Loans
Temporary Loans
Long Term Bonds Retired
Literary Funds Loans Paid
19,000.
26,450
8,042
8,557
Temporary Loans Paid
Bonds Outstanding End of Yr.
Lit. Fund Loans Outstanding
1,079,000 1,098,900
107,516
116,074
1,134,000 1,159,000
58,997
42,040
Temporary Loans Outstanding
Gross Debt End of Yr.
Balance in Int. & Sink. Fund
Net Debt Outstanding
1,186,516 1,214,974
'307,480
879,036
1,192,997 1,201,040
253,466
268,239
203,133
961,508
924,758
997,906
* Taken from, Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, Reports on
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
XVI*
ALBEMARLE COUNTY DEBT 1928-1938
193 l+
1933
1932
1931
19,300
55,000
268,000
12,709
25;000
l,l85;l+50
50,082
1,255,552
167,71+8
1 ,067 ,781+
1,238,1+50 l;238,1+50
62;792
65,000
1+30,000
1929
1928
135 ;888
1+9 ,91+5
32 ;500
500
8,709
12,1+12
9 ;750
8,081
22,993
65,000
1.1+5,000
ll+0,000
1,506,1+50
1,91+0,1+50
62,792
62,792
71,501
25,000
5,700
1,501,21+2 1,326,21+2
161+,517
1930
1,57!+, 91+2
80,355
282,1+36
1 ,136,725 1 ,21+5,887
1 ,292,506
2 ,011,951
2,238,500 J ,271,000
85 ,91!+
95,333
l+i+,855
53 ,91+5
2,367,21+8 5!>1+20,279
Comparative Cost of Local Government, (1928 -1938 ).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABES X V T I
RETIREMENT OF LONG TERM DEBTS THROUGH SINKING FUNDS, ALBEMARLE COUNTY
______ At June 30, 1933_______________
Surplus In
Deficit in
Surplus In
Sinking Fund
Sinking Fund
Sinking Fund
SANITARY DISTRICT:
Woolen Mills Sanitary Improvement
At
June 30, 1958_____
Deficit in
Sinking Fund
-----
105.13
ROADS:
Charlottesville District
Ivy District
2,406.40
Rivanna District
5,367.59
553.03
15,719.60
20 ,818.30
Samuel Miller District
94 ,901.74
135 ,227.97
Scottsviiie District
White Hall District
Total
20 ,186.61
53,666.00
48,744.83
56,518.82
Net Deficit
Amount -which sould he Invested in
Sinking Funds
Percentage of Deficit in Sinking Funds
209,712.27
173 ,629.89
' 658 .I6
13,724.29
318 ,162.*13
153,193.^5
317,503.97
317,710 .1*5
624, 983 .97
48.2
50.8
Data in this table were taken from: Virginia,, Auditor of Public Accounts, Report on Comparative Cost of
■fop?! Government, (1933, 1938) and Reports on Annual Audit of Albemarle County (l933, 1938).
DEPARTMENT OF F IN A N C E
Page
101
Tax Bates
Tax rates in themselves mean very little. They should he
considered in the light of'services'actually rendered, assessed values
and other factors. The general county levy, exclusive of special
levies to retire road dehts, has been reduced from $1.60 in 1932 and
$1.15 in 1933 to $1.10. A better viefw of the relative tax burden in
the County may be had by considering the ratio of assessed value to
true value and then considering true tax rates. In 193^ the County
assessed real estate at lf0.7. per cent of its true value. For the
same year the-County’s true tax rate was 85 cents per $100 of true
value. Among the one hundred Virginia counties in 1936; k2 had a
lower true tax rate than Albemarle County.
Table eighteen shows trends in assessed values in the County from
1927' to 1938. Tables nineteen and twenty show trends in county
revenues and county expenditures (exclusive of schools) respectively.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XVIII
Assessed Values**
Tangible Personal
Property; Machinery
and Tools; Merchants *
Real Estate
Capital
Total Subject to*
Local
Taxation
Tax
Year
1927
1,715,669
7,335,860
1928
2,273,443
7 ,417,44o
10,234,965
1929
2,313,867
7,473,030
12,883,839
1930
2,242,679
7,583,120
12,945,564
1931
2,117,530
7 ,812,380
13,063,436
1932
1,550,629
7,894,890
12 ,721,162
1933
1 ,336,836
7 ,858,180
12,357,946
1934
1,335,979
7,863,410
12,373,389
1935
1,539,517
7,972,040
12,763,729
1,710,462
8,755,441
13 ,686,112
1936
1937
* Includes'assessed value of public service corporations vhich are not
listed in this table.
**Data are from: Virginia, Department of Taxation, HeportB (1928 -3 8 ).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE X I X
Summary Statement of Revenue, Albemarle County*
FBOM THE COMMONWEALTH
1937
For General Purposes
Amount for General Purposes
Percent for General Purposes
40,868
35-78
1936
21,290
20.52
1933
9>279
8 .90
1934
2,544
2.90
1933
2,832
2.36
1931
1930
23,28l
16.20
3>229
2.50
5,684
50,759
21.94
69 >819
26.19
67,577
1932
For Hoads
Amount for Eoacls
Percent for Roads
For Schools
Amount for Schools
Percent for Schools
96 ,524
42.20
90,886
35-30
86,918
45.38
8l,l87
39-93
91,077
4l.l8
101,432 100,902
49*54
49.03
97,120
137,392
112,177
96 ,198
83,731
93,909
175,472 173,950
170,382
29.12
23.09
22.85
20.38
21.6l
Total Amount
310,732
314,380
324,815
316,165
340,655
404,337 427,638
TOTAL FROM COMMONWEALTH AND
LOCAL SOURCES
448,124
426,557
421,013
399,896
434,564
579,809 601,588
Total for all Purposes
Total from Commonwealth
Percent of Total County
Revenue
30.26
28.92
FROM LOCAL SOURCES
* Taken from: Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, Comparative Cost of Local Government, (1930~1937)-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XX
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF COUNTY EXPENDITURES, ALBEMARLE COUNTY**
OVERHEAD
1938
General Administration
Assessment of taxes
Collection & Distribution of Taxes
Eecording of Documents
Elections
Maintenance of Buildings and Grounds
Total Overhead
1937
1936
1935
7,562
5,496
7,594
3,121
15,578
8,825
1,749
5,687
6,959
3,146
13,321
7,962
1,341
14,272
9,347
2,617
12,695
8,973
1,537
2 ,8ll
40,522
33,883
33,610
34,732
Administration of Justice
Crime Prevention and Detection
Fire Protection
Public Welfare
Public Health
Public Works
Agriculture and Home Economics
Protection of Livestock
Miscellaneous
9,422
12 ,724
73
28 ,614-6
6,113
22
3,572
2 ,0^7
h2
9,014
12,538
79
29,865
6,285
2,159
3,588
2,020
8,559
14,516
8,499
12,909
116
24,253
6,703
778
3,151
1,345
122
16
i 8>093
7,115
166
14,822
7,346
2,837
2,732
1,684
Total Service
62,661
65 ,5^8
59,543
50,926
41,496
33,822
38,118
103,183
99,431
93,153
85,658
72,793
67,741
75,199
883
3,271
1934
4,918
2,322
12,728
5,944*
2,298
3,087
31,297
1933
1932
2,995
8,4u
9,675
2,398
2 ,lfl2
6,576
6,458
8,028
16,215
2,248
3,037
2,547
33,919
37,081
3,724
1,793
538
14,477
3,5^
SEKVTCE
Grand Total
1,457
4,944*
4,602*
8,203
3,888
298
15,373
6,915
3,025
2,062
3,377
3,427
5,200
1,300
**Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts^ Comparative Cost of Local Government (Keports 1931-1938).
* Figures.for these'items show sharp increases 'after 1933 because they include fees collected which under the
new form of government are paid into the county treasury and which under the old form went to the officers as
part of their compensation.
6
CHAPTER IX
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
The School Controversy
The first growing pain which troubled the new county executive form
of government in Albemarle County was in connection with education.
Dissatisfaction with the administration of the schools had existed for a
long time before the new form of government was voted on. The adoption
of the county executive form of government, brought the school issue to a
head. The controversy will be treated here only with regard to its
political aspects. Over-all management of schools will be considered later.
There is perhaps no aspect of local government in which citizens
generally are more interested than education. In Albemarle County, as
in many other localities in Virginia, this general interest in the
schools has been expressed as a desire fof more local control over them.
State centralization with respect to the management of schools has en­
countered more opposition than state centralization in public welfare
or in construction and maintenance of roads. The usual meaning given
to "local control" has been more direct control over the selection of
school trustees and the superintendent of schools. Along with this demand
for more local control, there has also been a demand for more state
aid in paying the cost of operating the schools. However, state aid
usually means a diminution of local control.
In the light of this general statement of. the problem, it will be
interesting to trace a school controversy which took place in Albemarle
County. It will be remembered that under the old system of government
the Judge of the Circuit Court appointed a School Trustee Electoral Board.
This board appointed a Board of School Trustees. The latter board chose
the Superintendent of Schools. Thus, the immediate authority to appoint
a superintendent was possessed by the Board of School Trustees. Remotely
his appointment went back to the local Circuit Court Judge. This method
of appointment has, as intended, placed control over the superintendent
in the hands of Democrats in most Virginia counties. However, it has
not always resulted in the particular Democratic faction in power
getting a superintendent which it approved of. The requirement that
the superintendent must be chosen from a list of three eligibles sub­
mitted by the State Board of Education usually has the effect of making
the appointee come from outside the county, and consequently he is
usually a person who is not one of the local machine's "local boys".
Much of the dissatisfaction expressed as lack of control over the schools
by the people might be more correctly expressed as lack of control over
schools and the selection of a superintendent by the local machine. The
indirect method of appointing the superintendent has resulted in many
localities in the superintendent assuming a position in which he refuses
to play up to the local machine. Such an official soon finds himself
sniped at from every angle by the local politicians. If the school board
supports the superintendent .he will be able to"buck" the local machine.'
Witjq the school board's support he can at least keep his position, even
i f in very trying circumstances. Sooner or later, however, the local
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 106 *
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
machine can so change the membership of the board of school trustees that he
will not be reappointed.
Therefore, it is of great importance to the super­
intendent that he have men on the board of school trustees who cooperate with
him and support him.
This necessity has a tendency to make some superinten­
dents "play politics" and in unusual cases actually become active politicians
themselves. There are localities where, on election days, the superintendent
of schools will be seen at polling places watching the "turnout" with as
much interest as the candidates who are being voted on.
The 1934 report of the Virginia Commission on County Government con­
tains a very interesting example which reveals the extent to which school
superintendents often become involved in local politics. Referring to the
unsuccessful campaign to adopt one of the optional forms' of government in
Princess Anne County the report reads as follows:
In the first place, the movement was not started under
the most favorable conditions. Just prior to its inauguration
it happened that.the school board of the county had failed to
reappoint the incumbent division superintendent. The proximity
of these two events, together with the fact that the defeated
superintendent took a leading part in the campaign to change
the form of government,.led many people of the county to believe
that the movement was started by his friends for the purpose
of overthrowing the organization responsible for his defeat.
Assuming, for argument’s sake that this was not true, it had
the same phychological effect as if it had been true. If it
was not true, the movement was poorly timed by its proponents.^
The desire for reappointment is not the only factor which makes it
desirable for the superintendent to be in good standing with the local machine.
Local governing bodies pass the annual tax levy for raising school funds and
approve the annual school b u d g e t , 2 in localities where the superintendent
does not enjoy the confidence of the local machine and local governing body,
an endless amount of conflict and misunderstanding can develop with reference
to school finances. The board of school trustees and the superintendent
may contend that although they are responsible for the general direction of
the schoolB, the local governing body will not give them sufficient funds
to perform their duties satisfactorily. On the other hand, local govern­
ing bodies will contend that they are not responsible if the schools are
not runproperly since they have no general power of direction over them
and after school appropriations are once approved they have no control over
the expenditure of them.
In Albemarle County Mr. A. L. Bennett was division superintendent from
1920 to July 1, 1937* During this relatively long stay in the County, he
worked conscientiously for the improvement of schools. He made many enemies,
especially among the county officials and the courthouse ring. When the
movement to adopt the county executive form of government started in 1933 he
supported it, as did the entire membership of the Board of School Trustees,
1. Virginia Commission on County Government, Report, etc. (1934) page 7 .
2. See supra., pp. 69 -72 .
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Page 107
Mr. Mercer Garnett, a friencL of the Superintendent and for many years
Chairman of the Board of School Trustees, was, as we have seen, one of
the most active leaders in the Citizens League campaign. One of the
chief arguments advanced ty the Citizens League was that the adoption
of the county executive form of government would give, the Board of
Supervisors more control over the schools. Specifically, this meant
that school funds would he handled ty the County Executive and that school
expenditures would te under the control of the Board of Supervisors in
much the same way as other county expenditures. In addition, all pur­
chasing of school equipment and supplies would te transferred from the
office of the Superintendent to the office, of the County Executive. The
most important change was the appointment of school trustees ty the
Board of Supervisors rather than ty an electoral toard appointed ty the
Circuit Court Judge. Appointment of the Superintendent, however, re­
mained in the hands of the Board of School Trustees. These changes meant
that the relatively large degree of independence which the Superintendent
had enjoyed in running the schools would te diminished consideratly.
Also, as previously pointed out, the Judge of the Circuit Court was de­
prived of the influence'over the schools which he had had by reason of
his appointing p o w e r T h e Superintendent’s responsibility to a lay
school board was supplemented by greater control by the Board of Super­
visors and an additional responsibility to a full time professional ad­
ministrator, the County Executive who acted for the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Bennett apparently raised no objections to the proposed changes
when they were being discussed in 1933* However, a short time after the
new form went into effect trouble bogan to develop. As one member of
the Board of School Trustees expressed it, "There were quite a few
influential people in the county out to get Mr. Bennett," That is, he
had made enemies who sought to prevent his reappointment. One of these
influential persons was elected to the Board of Supervisors in 1935. He
was one of Mr. Bennett’s strongest opponents. Through his influence,
one of Mr. Bennett's enemies was appointed to the Board of School Trustees.
When the time came in 1936 to reappoint the Superintendent a movement
to oust Mr. Bennett began. Most of the members of the Board of School
Trustees were in favor of reappointing Mr. Bennett and could not see
that there existed any good reasons for making a change. Also, there
was some disagreement as to the respective spheres of authority of the
Board of School Trustees and the Board of Supervisors with reference to
school administration. The School Trustees contended that they were
specifically given legal authority to appoint the Superintendent and
consequently were not bound by the desires of the Supervisors in this
respect. The constitutional provision granting this authority reads
as follows:
There shall be appointed by the school board
or boards of each school division, one division
superintendent of schools, who shall be selected
from a list of eligibles certified by the State
Board of Education and shall hold office for four
years. In the event that the local board or boards
fail to elect a division superintendent within the
time prescribed by law, the State Board of Education
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 108
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
shall appoint such division superintendent.3
The Supervisors contended that they appointed the School Trustees and
could remove them at their pleasure, so that in effect they could control
the selection of the Superintendent "by changing the membership of the Board
of School Trustees.
But such a drastic move would have been very un­
popular. Men on both boards had supported the adoption of the county execu­
tive form of government. Moreover, the School Trustees were prominent people
in the County. In fact, some county citizens contend that the membership
of the Board of School Trustees has always been of a higher caliber than the
membership of the Board of Supervisors, Certainly it would be difficult to
imagine University professors, who have served on the Board of School Trustees,
being elected to-.the Board of Supervisors.
The Board of Supervisors wanted the Board of School Trustees to refuse
to appoint Mr. Bennett but did not want to take such a drastic step as to
remove School Trustees. This put it in the position of ordering the Board
of School Trustees to do s.omething which, from a strictly legal point of
view, was within the scope of authority of the Board of School Trustees.
Most of the Trustees were not the type of persons to be handled in this
manner. They felt that they were more familiar with school affairs and
therefore in a better position to pass judgment on the qualifications of
the Superintendent. On the other hand,.the School Trustees wanted the new
form of government to be a success and consequently did not want to engage
in an open conflict with the supervisors. The only way to solve the diffi­
culties seemed to be the resignation of the School Trustees, This they did
en masse.
A very interesting exchange of resolutions between the Board of Super­
visors and the Board of School Trustees took place during the course of this
controversy and illustrates very clearly the type of conflicts which arise
in school affairs.
The resolution of the Board of Supervisors to the Board of School
Trustees opened with the request for a joint meeting to consider the budget
for the coming fiscal year. This statement, plainly threatening the School
Trustees with dismissal unless they refused to reappoint Mr. Bennett,, appears:
You will shortly begin reappointment of personnel for next
year and now is the time to rule out any employee whose acts
demonstrate he is not in accord with our system and form of govern­
ment and since Mr. A. L. Bennett has by his many acts demonstrated
conclusively that he neither has the will nor the temperament to
efficiently conduct the affairs of the department of education
under the county executive form of government, the board of county
supervisors unanimously express disapproval of his reappointment
and request you to appoint a new superintendent of schools.
While all of us realize that any appointee serving Albemarle
County, serves at the pleasure of the appointing hoard and the
Attorney General has ruled that wherever the General Law conflicts
3. Constitution of Virginia, Article IX, Section 133.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Page 109
with the' Special Law in the Executive form of county govern­
ment that the special law applies in this county, we suggest
that you hear in mind the provisions of the general law in
Section 6k9, Page 501, Act of Assembly 1936; providing for
the appointment of Division Superintendents from, a list of
eligibles, supplied by the State Board of Education, within,
the sixty day period prior to May 1st, 1937* We give you
specifically as our reasons for not approving the reappoint­
ment of Mr. A. L, Bennett as follows:
Then there follows some ten specific complaints against Mr. Bennett.
He was charged with disregarding a salary agreement for teachers and
principlals which the two boards had drawn up, discrimination and neglect
toward small rural schools, misrepresentation of facts to the purchasing
agent regarding the purchase of school supplies, spending too much of
his time away from the County in other endeavors and being unduly slow
in receipting for goods and returning vouchers for payment after goods
had been delivered.
'
;
The School Board answered these complaints. Its resolution begins:
We, the County School Board of Albemarle County,
Virginia, have carefully studied your complaints made
against Superintendent A. L. Bennett and find that on
the whole the complaints should have been largely against
the School Board rather than him since most of the things
complained of are covered in actions taken by the School
Board.
We feel that these complaints have been a result in
part of a lack of full and clear interpretation of
law, possibly on the part of the School Board and Mr.
Bennett.
We also desire to call your attention to the fact
that no member of the Board of Supervisors (and in
practically all instances the county executive) has
said nothing to the School Board or to Mr. Bennett
concerning the charges made. We believe that these
can and will be adjusted if a thorough understanding
is had on the part of all concerned.
We can best answer your complaints by taking themup item by item.**Each complaint made by the Board of Supervisors is taken up separately
in the resolution and in nearly every case it is pointed out that the
action complained of was either initiated or approved by the Board of
School Trustees.
k . Both quotations from the resolutions of the two boards were taken from
the confidential papers of a former member of the Board of School
Trustees.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Pago H O
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
In the end the Trustees resigned and Mr. Bennett was not reappointed.
Mr. Graham, the present Superintendent, was appointed in his place. Another
local Superintendent had failed to see eye to eye with the local governing
hody and went the way of many other superintendents "before him. His enemies
had accused him of faults varying in seriousness from the use of government
privileges to purchase supplies for his own automobile to "being too much
of a "speaker" and exhibitionist. His friends still maintain that he' was
one of the most competent educators in the State. One final act which in­
flamed his local enemies was a speech made by him in Chesterfield County
in which he bitterly denounced the new forms of county government.
This controversy raises some very interesting questions with respect
to the proper position of various county officials in school administration.
There seems bo be two general schools of thought. On the one hand, it is
contended that one of the primary purposes of the new form of government was
to bring the administration of the schools more under the control of the
Bo$rd of Supervisors, on the theory that .this change would make school
administration more responsive to the wishes of county citizens. Those who
have this point of view naturally feel that this theory of more control by
the board of .supervisors should be carried out in the practical operations
of the government. It follows that the provisions of the Optional Forms
Act should be so interpreted as to increase the power of the Board of
Supervisors. There is no question but that the provision for appointment
of school trustees by the board of supervisors to serve at its pleasure,
was substituted for the old method in order to bring control over school
affairs closer to the supervisors. It is less certain, however, that the
provisions of the act empowering the Board of Supervisors to fix the salaries
of county .officers and establish a centralized system of purchasing should
apply ;to school officials. Those who favor a strong board of supervisors
believe that it is within the power of the board to fix salary scales for
teachers, as it has done in Albemarle County.. Furthermore, there is no
objection to be raised if the Board of Supervisors asks that the school
budget be submitted to them with items of proposed expenditures listed in
detail so that it may express its approval or disapproval of particular
school expenditures. School funds have to be raised by a tax levy which
is fixed by the Board of Supervisors. Since citizens hold the board of
supervisors responsible if tax rates are high and since school expenditures
constitute the largest part of county expenditures, the board of supervisors should
•have some voice in determining the amount and purposes of school expenditures.
A second school of thought holds that school administration should be relative­
ly independent of the Board of Supervisors. Usually linked vith this con­
tention is the belief that control by elective officials brings with it
"politics". That is, supervisors who are popularly elected will tend to
bring pressure to bear on the superintendent, especially in election years,
for the appointment of friends and supporters to teaching positions, and
engage in similar "political" practices. Adherents of this school of
thought contend that the Constitution of Virginia places the general direction
of the schools in the hands of the School Board. The School Board not the
Board of Supervisors is the proper body to determine the details of school
expenditures, fix school officials’ salaries and decide what school supplies.,
should be purchased. Furthermore, if long range planning and continuity of
policy are to exist in school administration it is undesirable that school
trustees’ tenure be indefinite and uncertain by making them subject to removal
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Page m
"by the Board of Supervisors at any time. School trustees, it is
contended, should he appointed for fixed and staggered terms. Otherwise
the threat of removal or actual removal is an everpresent shadow over
the school trustees which prevents them from taking decisive action except
when it is certain that the Board of Supervisors concurs in the action
contemplated,
The above discussion of the school controversy and the different
schools of opinion concerning proper control over the schools was not
intended to imply that there has been continued conflict in Albemarle
County among county officials and citizens with reference to school
administration. So far as the author’s knowledge extends the relation­
ship between school officials and the board of supervisors has been
friendly and cooperative, at least since 1937• Furthermore, there is
evidence that there is less so-called "politics" in the administration of
Albemarle County schools than in many other Virginia localities. However,
the problems which have been discussed above are important and are re­
lated to the operation of the county executive form of government in
Albemarle County.
School Administration
An adequate study of the details of school administration in a
particular county could constitute a project in itself. Since the
purpose of this study of the government of Albemarle County is not to go
into the details of the management of the "line" departments, no attempt
will be made to go into the details of school administration. It is
hoped that the discussion of school budgeting contained in chapter six
and the description of the school controversy at the beginning of this
chapter have thrown some light on the changes which were brought about
in over-all management of the County’s schools by the adoption of the
county executive form of government.
Sohool finances
Table twenty-one gives an analysis of school fund expenses and
revenues. The percentage of the total cost which was paid by the County
was slightly higher than that paid by the State. The County’s share is
raised by a special school levy as previously explained.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE, X X I
SCHOOL EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES*
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
SCHOOL FUND REVENUES 1957-38
Source
Amount
From State
Per Cent of Total
99,4l8
.445
From County
104,587
.468
Other Funds
4,591
.019
Loans and Bonds
1,275
.005
15,547
.059
Balances at Beginning of Year
TOTAL
225,019
SCHOOL FUND EXPENDITURES 1957-58
Oh.lect
Amount
Admini strat ion
Instruction
Auxiliary Agencies
Operation of Plant
Maintenance of Plant
Fixed Charges
Capital Outlay
Debt Service
Balances Close of Year
6,497
143,705
34,544
9,225
5,717
2,894
2,479
14,134
TOTAL
223,019
5,811
Per Cent of Total
.029
.644
.154
.041
.025
.012
.011
.063
.017
* Virginia, State Board of Education, Annual Report of the Superintendent
of Public Instruction, etc., (Vol. XXI, No. 3 , September, 1938 )
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER X
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE
Introduction
The present welfare organizations in Albemarle C o u n t y grew out of
the pioneer work of the Albemarle County Red Cross Chapter which waB
organized in August, 1917* Originally, social work was carried on by
private individuals and organizations on a non-profesqional basis.
Later Bocial work functions were assumed by the Red Cross nurses. In
May 1923; the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle Copnty entered into
an agreement, and set up joint Boards of Public Welfare' and employed a
full time Superintendent of Public Welfare.1
To clear the way for the reorganization of the county government,
the old county welfare board met on December 29, 1933, submitted its
annual report, and disbanded. The following list of expenditures by
the board for the year ended December 1933, will to some extent
indicate the nature and scope of the work which it waB 'doing.
FEDERAL: R. F. C. funds...............................$1*6,446.95
STATE: Emergency Relief Funds
..... ......... .
5,95^ .00
COUNTY: Appropriation of Board of Supervisors......
5,700.00
PRIVATE: Funds from Red Cross.............. ..........
2,000.00
From Red Cross in Flour, Clotheg, etc........
7.000.00
TOTAL EXPENDITURES....................................$67,102,95
It will be remembered that at this time the New Deal relief
activities were just getting under way. The local county welfare office
was handling work relief financed by federal funds as well as relief of
unemployables. The demands for relief were beginning to be too great
for the county and local private welfare organizations to take care of.
The State had not as yet assumed a large share of the cost of caring
for the poor and needy. State mother’s aid had been in operation for
several years, but participation in the program was optional with the
localities. The State had been concerned until 1932 primarily wi'th
the supervision of local "indoor relief" or committments to almsh.ouses
and hospitals for the insane. Albemarle had been participating in the
maintenance of a modern district home with four other counties for
several years. The change from the old county poorhouses to district
homes was one of the earlier forms of functional consolidation in
1. F. W. Hoffer, Counties in Transition, A Study of County Public and
Private Welfare Administration in Virginia, (Institute for Research
in the Social Sciences, Monograph No. 2, 1929), 37»
2, Charlottesville Daily Progress, December 30, 1933.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 11^
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE
county government.5
As the Federal and State governments Began to enter the field of
poor relief, local welfare organizations had to he rather drastically
reorganized to meet the conditions attached to grants of funds. Early
in 193^, Miss Frances Southall, the present Superintendent of Public
Welfare in the County, was appointed to direct county welfare activities.
Miss Southall is professionally qualified by education and experience to
hold this position. Before coming to Albemarle, she had done welfare
work in other Virginia Counties. Roanoke County, where she was Superinten­
dent before coming to Albemarle, had the old form of county government.
Under the system there, she was appointed by and was responsible to a
welfare board. .She relates that the removal to a system with unified
administrative management was quite a change. She is emphatic in expressing
her preference for the new form of government and states that she had
rather work under it than under the old form. As she expresses it, in
Albemarle she is just a cog in a machine. Under the old system she was
more or less independent. • Like other county officers who deal with Mr.
Eaden, she admires his businesslike and straightforward manner. With
all the rapid changes being made recently and the increasing responsibilities
in public welfare, Albemarle has been fortunate in having a person as
capable and experienced as Miss Southall. Many local welfare organizations
have suffered from rapid turnover in their personnel.
Local and State Relations
Few people realize the importance and scope of the work now being done
in local welfare offices. The counties and cities are the areas where the
the basic administrative work necessary in carrying out a great deal of
federal and state legislation is performed. Perhaps because social work
has not yet completely outgrown the "ladies aid" label, it should be
stressed that at the present time this aspect of county government is of
more importance than ever before in relation to other county functions.
The work involved in directing local public welfare offices is becoming
more and more a task requiring first class executive and administrative
abilities. The proportion of the work requiring technical training in
statistics and sociology now dwarfs the simpler functions of distributing
Christmas baskets and investigating cases. A few examples to support
this may be cited. Instructions from the State Department of Public
Welfare are compiled in a Manual which is now a sizeable volume. These
instructions cover every phase and detail of the work of the local
welfare office. Recent changes made in connection with the inauguration
of old age assistance have been so frequent that it is difficult to
keep instructions revised and up to date. All of this indicates strict
and increasing control over the local office by the state department.
The relation between the local office and the state department may be
expressed as centralized determination of policy and decentralized
■administration. The records which local offices are required to keep
3. Bee tables 2^-26 at end of this chapter for data on the operation
of the district home. See also, James, A. W., The Disappearance of
'the County Almshouse in Virginia, (State Board of Public Welfare,
192677
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE
Page 115
and the periodic reports which they make to the state department and
local boards are becoming quite complicated. It takes the Superinten­
dent and a stenographer about three days to assemble the required
data and correctly compile the monthly report to the state office.
The fact that large numbers of applications for relief and old age
assistance sent to the state office for approval are returned for
correction and completion indicates that there is still considerable
lost motion between the state department and the local office. Also,
it shows that there has not been sufficient time to train local
personnel in their new responsibilities.
Organization of the Department of Public Welfare
The above discussion indicates that in many respects the local
welfare office is more a unit in the State government than it is a
part of the county government. Although some responsibility and
authority in running this office is still left to the local government,
administrative policies are being determined more and more from
Richmond. Most of the state welfare program is now obligatory on the
County. The locality may refuse to accept certain funds and not
participate in the state program, but once it does accept it must meet
the conditions laid down in federal and state laws and regulations.
In Albemarle County the Superintendent of Public Welfare is
appointed by the Board of Supervisors. This appointment is made on
the recommendation of the County Executive from a list of eligibles
furnished by the State Commissioner of Public Welfare, To be eligible
a person must have had professional training at a recognized school
or have had considerable experience in social work. Thus, unlike tax
assessors, who should be equally.as professional in training, social
workers may come from out of the county, or even out of the state. The
method of local appointment, restricted as it is, with the corresponding
power of dismissal at will, makes local people feel that the Superinten­
dent of Public Welfare is essentially a county and not a state official.
In Virginia counties which do not have one of the unified manager forms
of government, the Judge of the Circuit Court appoints the County
Welfare Board and this board in turn appoints the local superintendent
from a list of eligibles. The Welfare Board in Albemarle County is
"Appointed in the same way as the Board of School Trustees, that is, by
the Board of Supervisors, but as will be seen later, the Welfare Board
does not in practice enjoy the same general power of direction as the
Board of School Trustees does.
In Albemarle County the Welfare Board sits as an "administrative
court" which is independent of the regular governmental machinery.
The Superintendent initiates at her own discretion investigations
into applications for relief or assistance. By visits and other methods
she assembles a "record" containing all the pertinent facts as to cause
of need, possibility of aid from relatives, etc., and recommends to
the Welfare Board the amount which should be granted. The sole function
of the Board is to consider these individual "records", along with the
explanation of the field worker who made the investigation, and approve
or reject the application. AI b o , within prescribed limits the board
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 116
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE
fixes the amount of relief or assistance granted. Thus, the Board
determines that a person is in need in the light of standards previouslydetermined ty the state department and on the "basis of evidence gathered
by the -workers in the county office. Appeals from the decisions of the
local board may be taken to the State Board. In practice there are far
more applications for relief and assistance than there are funds
available to take care of. The local workers use their ingenuity to
eliminate ineligibles and to restrict applications accepted to the more
needy. It is useless for those seeking relief or assistance, or their
friends, to bring pressure to bear on the County Welfare Board's members
since they cannot consider a case until it has been investigated in
accordance with detailed instructions contained in federal and state
regulations and duly brought before them at a board meeting. Likewise,
the members of the Board of Supervisors, in practice, can bring no
pressure to bear since they neither control the investigation of
particular applications nor the final acceptance or rejection of them.
Consequently, the focal point for pressing individual claims is in the
Superintendent's office. It is here that the presence of a professionally
trained official operates to the good of the community. To grant relief
or assistance on any other basis than that of need as shown by recorded
facts would, the Superintendent realizes, be the quickest way for a
local welfare officer to damage her reputation with the state office,
and, for that matter, ultimately in the community. There appears to be
no serious accusations that "politics" or favoritism play any part in
local relief dispensing in the County.
The Superintendent of Public Welfare is under the administrative
control'of the County Executive in matters’relating to budgeting and
purchasing. All employees in the Superintendent's office are appointed
by-the Board of Supervisors on the recommendation of the County Executive.
The state department may reject any appointment in the local office which
does not measure up to standards prescribed,^- The County Executive's
office handles all the negotiations with reference to state funds, local
matching funds and appropriations by the Board of Supervisors, Budgetary
estimates are compiled for the welfare office in the same way as in
other county offices. The County Executive exercises the functions of
a controller over welfare expenditures only to the extent of determining
that funds are available for any particular item of expense and that
the expenditure is applied to the purpose for which the funds were
appropriated. Control in the form of determining whether a particular
expenditure is wise is exercised by the County Welfare Board, as
explained previously. Miss Southall expresses relief that she is not
subjected to the same problems of handling funds as her fellow workers
in other counties. Mr. Haden, the County Executive, is always on
hand to tell her exactly how much money is available, how much has
been spent out of particular funds, and how much is left. There may
not be as much money available as she could use, but there is never
any uncertainty as to the amount which is available and the purposes
for which it can be spent. All negotiations with the Board of Supervisors
for the appropriation of funds for public welfare are handled by the
It-. Virginia Code, (1936), Section 1904 (8 ).
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF P U B L IC -WELFARE
Page117
County Executive. Consequently, the Superintendent's work may he
planned ahead with reasonable certainty. It Is far more satisfactory,
she belieyes, to have a single person to go to in these matters than
a hoard which meets together only a short time and at intervals. Then
too, there are an endless number of occasions when the County Executive's
cooperation and advice is needed. He can arrange trucking facilities
for distributing surplus commodities, provide storage space, enlist
the help of the other county officers, etc,
The personnel of the welfare office at the present time consists
of the Superintendent, two case workers and a stenographer. It has
been necessary to have a part-time stenographer, and another case worker
will be added to the staff soon. This office has, perhaps, suffered
from understaffing. One full time employee could be kept busy answering
telephone inquiries, looking up information, receiving and interviewing
applicants and doing incidental clerical work. The Superintendent
should be able to devote all of her time to the work in the office and
the supervision of field workers. She should not have to make field
investigations herself. In an ideal system, supervision of field
work and directing the office would be done by two different persons.
With its present work load and staff, the welfare office has to struggle
to keep up with current business; there is no time for what might be
called preventive social workr Fortunately, the community has a large
number of active private welfare organizations engaged in preventive
work. However, it is not difficult to visualize the County welfare
office, with an adequate staff and a progressive point of view, being
the focal point for leadership and cooperation in these activities.
Functions of the Local Welfare Office
The main object of this study is to consider "line" departments
primarily from the point of view of over-all management. The functions
of the welfare department will be considered only in sufficient detail
to indicate the nature and extent of the problems faced by it.
At the outset it should be pointed out that the county welfare
office is by no means the only local organization engaged in caring
for the unfortunate and needy. Field workers from the state office
who visit Albemarle County remark that there is far more private
social work carried on in this County than in the average Virginia
county.
'
In 1938, the General Assembly enacted a comprehensive Public
Assistance Act which is now the basic law regulating the four large
categories of local welfare work: Old Age Assistance, Aid to Dependent
Children, Aid to the Blind and General Relief. As indicated above, this
law is supplemented by a great number of both federal and state rules
and regulations which must be complied with.
The old age assistance part of the program was the last to be
undertaken and was not.put into effect until July 1938. As soon as this
part of the program was put into operation, all general relief cases
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 118
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE
which were eligible for old.age assistance were transferred to this class
of relief. Many other applications have been received and accepted. In
general, to receive old age assistance a person must be 65 or over,
comply with a residence requirement, be actually in need of assistance
and unable to secure it from relatives, and must not be an inmate in a
local, state or national institution. Detailed supplementary rules have
been compiled defining what actually constitutes "need", what documentary
evidence is necessary to prove ones age, etc., which taken all together
materially limit the discretion left with the local officials. If the
local board does not provide old age assistance for an individual who
meets all eligibility requirements he -may appeal to the state welfare
board. Consequently, in this qualified way old age assistance is
obligatory on the local government.
Applications for aid to the blind, aid to dependent children and
general relief are investigated and approved by county officials by much
the same procedure as old age assistance applications. Aid to the blind
is administered on the state level by the Commission for the Blind, an
agency separate from the Department of Public Welfare. In these categories
of relief also, what constitutes "need", "dependency", who is "blind",
etc., within the meaning of provisions of the state laws and regulations,
have been prescribed in such detail as to leave little discretion with
local officials in determining the eligibility of particular applicants.
In practice, the local welfare board makes a "finding of fact" based on
its review of the "record" built up by an investigator that an applicant's
condition and circumstances make him eligible for assistance or relief in
one of the various forms. The accompanying tables give an analysis of
the local welfare office's case load in connection with the public
assistance program.
The department of public welfare performs many functions which do
not directly involve the expend!ture of money. These functions are
called "service" functions as distinguished from "relief" functions.
There are about IvO illegitimate children born in the County every
year. The circumstances surrounding many of these births will be such
that the welfare office will have to take steps to see that the mother
and child are properly supported. If the child is put into a children's
home and the County pays for its clothes and board it will be a "relief"
case. If the county welfare worker only performs a service by securing
a private home for the child, it will be considered a "service" case.
This example of service rendered in the case of illegitimate children
is only one of the many service functions the welfare office is called
upon to perform.
The other more important functions of the department of public welfhre
may be outlined as follows:
1. Investigation and certification of applications for Works
Progress Administration work relief and Civil Conservation Corps
work relief.
2. Distribution of surplus commodities and clothing furnished by the
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE
Page 119
federal government.
3. Handling committments to institutions' such as; State
Hospitals fo,r the Insane and Feeble-minded. Tuberculosis
Sanitoriam, District Home for the poor, Children's Homes.
1+, Court work in connection with juvenile delinquency and
probations.
An interesting extension of the more advanced forms of social
work in the County is found in connection with the recently organized
Family Consultation Service which seeks by voluntary methods to
educate the' indigent and the poor in the methods of birth control.
This agency is partially supported by county funds.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XXII
VIRGINIA PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FUNDS
RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES-1937**
EXPENDITURES
Month of June, 1937
Service
Relief
Total
Unemployables
39
60
99
Employables
53
14
Aged 65 & over
10
Blind
Dependent Children
Transients
V. P. A. TOTAL
2.
25
5
155“
Whole Year, 1937
$ 6 ,986.62
67
$430.30)
)
67.36)
71
81
276.14
4 ,382.67
3
5
15.50
233.63
22
47
272.73
303.93
304$1,o 62.05
$ 14 ,635.85
170
Administrative Expense
Grand Total
382.35
$1,444.38
4,596.61*
$19 ,232.46
RECEIPTS
State funds for relief (90$ of total)
$ 9,27^.60
Local funds to match state 1s 90$
5,564.68
State funds for administrative expenses
1 ,050.51
Other local contributions
Total
87.40
$15,957.19
**Compiled from data contained in the monthly statistical reports of the
superintendent of public welfare to the state department of public
welfare and the board of supervisors.
* Includes all expenses of office for administration of all welfare work,
including expenses for work not connected with the administration of
the state public assistance program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE X X I I I
VIRGINIA PUBLIC ASSISTANCE FUNDS
RECEIPTS AND EXEENDITURES-1938**
EXPENDITURES
Whole Year, 1938
Month of June, 1938
Service
Relief
Total
Unemployables
31
87
118
Employables
65
15
80
757.53)
)
8 1 .00 )
53
60
302.1*0
3 ,617.70
Aged 65 & over
7-
$
$ 7,507.12
1
3
1*
15.00
193.50
Dependent Children 19
25
1*1*
31*2.71
1+,21+8.61*
Blind
Transients
V. P, "A. -TOTAL
•
123
183“
505
Administrative Expense
Grand-Total
$1 ,1*9 8 .61*
$15 ,566.96
3l*l*.1*2
$ 1 ,81*3.06
l*,1+96.1+0*
$20 ,06^.36
RECEIPTS
State funds for relief (90$ of total)
$ 9,380.78
Local funds to match state's
5,628.1*7
State funds for administrative expenses (10$)
1 01 2.31
Other local contributions
Total
,*
357.71
$16 ,608.27
* Includes all expenses of office for administration of all welfare
work, including expenses for work not connected with the administration
of the state public assistance program.
**Compiled from data contained in the monthly statistical report of the
superintendent of public welfare to the state department of public
welfare and the board of supervisors.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XXIV
BALANCE SHEET OF THE DISTRICT HOME FOR ALBEMARLE, ALLEGHANY, AUGUSTA,
BATH AND ROCKBRIDGE COUNTIES AND THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE*
ASSETS
Cash
Farm
Buildings
Sewer 85 Water
Furniture & Fixtures
Inventory
Accounts Receivable
L. H. Naylor, Supt.
Coal Reserve
2,917.66
27,229.88
44,816.31
3,880.99
4 ,189,31
2,990. 42
1,207.90
100.00
378 .48
$ 87,710.95
LIABILITIES
Investment:
Albemarle
Alleghany
Augusta
Bath
Rockbridge
Charlottesville
Reserve for depreciation
Inmates accounts
Suspense
19,730.00
11 ,385.00
25,050.00
4,555,00
15,185 .00
7,220.00
83 ,125.00
4,410.07
31.90
143.98
$87,710.95
* Taken from the annual report of the District Home for the fiscal year
January first to December thirty-first, 1937.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XXV
POPULATION OF DISTRICT HOME*
Dec* 31, 1937
White
Males Females
1H ' 19
Colored
Males Females
7
6
Albemarle
Augusta
~l6
Alleghany
5
25
Bath
Total
73
Rockbridge
T
"13
C'ville
Madison
13
9
Change in Status of Inmates From Albemarle County
In Home Jan. 1, 1937
Admitted During Year
16
^
20
Died
Admitted to State
Hospitals
Discharged
In Home Jan, 1,
1938
5
2
1
“ 5
12
TABLE XXVI
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS 1937*
Total inside expense
Less profit on farm
13,557*31
2,705*^2
$10,851.89
Depreciation allowance
1.300*85
$12,152,7^
Less refunds int. on savings etc.
281+.93
Total net cost of all operations
$11 ,867.81
Net cost per month per inmate
13.68
Distribution of Cost of Maintaining District Home, 1937.
Albemarle
Alleghany
Augusta
Bath
Rockbridge
Charlottesville
Madison
’Total
$2,387 .97
§1+7.99
3 ,961.25
98U .38
2,310.88
1,250.32
125.02
$11,867.81
* District Home Annual Report, (1937)*,
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Total
~ W
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTEH XI
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
'' The evolution of the state department of public health in Virginia
has been Bimilar to the evolution of the state department of public
welfare. Until relatively recent times, the health department was little
more than a central statistical collecting agency and an advisory agency
to local health departments. Advancement in public health in rural areas
has lagged even more than improvements in methods for caring for the
indigent and needy. Naturally, when the counties failed to provide even
minimum standards of public health, the State soon stepped in and
assumed responsibility for the performance of this function. In most
cases rural health programs for the counties have been, in a senBe, im­
posed from above, just as public welfare programs have been imposed from
above. As in public welfare, federal subsidies have given a new impetus
to the State’s activities in the field of public health. Even at the
present time there are 56 counties which do not have m o d e m full time
public health programs in operation.
Albemarle County has been one of the most progressive rural
communities in the State and country in promoting public health work.
Its. health program grew out of the intelligent foresight of local leaders
in medicine and civic affairs and was in no sense imposed from above.
In 1930, Albemarle County had one of the fourteen rural health units in
the State which included the services of sanitation officers, nurses and
health officers. It was one of the first to establish a full time health
department. In January, 1930, an agreement was drawn up between the
County of Albemarle, the University of Virginia and the City of Charlottes­
ville whereby a joint health department for these three jurisdictions was
to be maintained. A joint health board, composed of two members appointed
by the City, two by the County and one member from the faculty of the
University Medical. School, was given power of general direction over the
department. The health officer, required to be professionally trained
in public health work, was appointed on the advice of the board of
health and subject to radification by the three parties to the agreement.
Subject to the approval of the joint health board, the health officer was
given power to appoint subordinate employees, remove them for cause, fix
their salaries, and have general power of direction over the department.
The University's interest in the jqint agreement is explained by the
following paragraph:
THAT the contracting parties further agree that the
facilities of the Joint Health Department may be utilized
for the teaching of medical students, of nurses and for
research by collaboration between the Health officer and
the Department of Public Health and Hygiene of the Medical
School so far as this may be practical without interfering
with the administrative efficiency of the Organization.-*1. Agreement for the Operation of a Joint Department of Health between
County of.Albemarle, City of Charlottesville and the University of
Virginia, p . 4. (typewritten copy on file in the offices of the joint
health department.)
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 126
DEPARTMENT OF P U B L IC HEALTH
The city was to appropriate $7*500 annually to finance the department,
and, in addition, furnish office space and janitor service. The County was
to appropriate $7*500 annually as its share of the expenses of the department.
The University agreed to contribute $1,500 annually and make available its
laboratory facilities for public health work. In addition, the University
agreed to give city and county indigent patients, certified by the health
officer as in need, of care, preference in its clinical and other services.
The University Hospital's contribution has been of inestimable value to the
community, Whereas in most counties, the Department of.Public Welfare has to
pay for medical care of its clients out of its own budget, in Albemarle
County the University Hospital Clinic' furnishes a large portion of this
service without cost. In case either party to the agreement decides to with­
draw from the joint arrangement, the withdrawing party is to give the other
parties at least 90 days notice of its intentions.
This agreement setting up a joint health department has been in effect
since 1950* Throughout its history the department has been under the direction
of a doctor professionally qualified for public health work. What is even
more important for the purposes of this study, the arrangement has been a
real joint one; that is, political boundaries are given no consideration in
allocating the time of the personnel of the department. The joint arrange­
ment seems to have been quite successful and satisfactory to all three par­
ties until a dispute between the city and county governing bodies over the
annexation of certain county territory to the City led to difficulties.
After the City annexed part of the County’s territory, the County contended
that its contribution in support of the health department should be decreased.
The City contended that it had always contributed more than its share and
still did so after annexation of county territory. The County Board of
Supervisors and the County Executive are contemplating a plan whereby the
County would set up its own independent health department, perhaps entering
a joint agreement with its neighbor, Greene County, The change has been
proposed, not because of any dissatisfaction with the administration of the
department, but purely because'of misunderstanding between the governing
bodies of the City and County as to their respective share of the coBt of
the department.
In support of a separate health unit for the County certain arguments
are advanced. In the first place, it would be in keeping with a healthy
trend in county government to coordinate more closely under the control of the
County Executive and the Board of Supervisors active supervision of all
county affairs. County officials dislike especially what they think are
intimations by city officials that the County is something of a stepchild to
the City, unable to care for itself without the aid of others. In the
second place, setting up a separate unit for the County could possibly result
in better health service to the County. The primary argument against the
proposed change is that it would be more costly to serve a smaller area with
fewer people than with the present area and population. In other words, the
overhead expenses would be higher and, assuming the same appropriation, ser­
vice functions would have to be curtailed.
This controversy with respect to the health department is an illustration
of the difficulties which are almost sure to arise where functional consolida­
tion between independent units of local government is attempted. Something
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Page 127
of a dilemma presents itself. Relatively large areas and population
groups are necessary to justify sufficient expenditures for competent
personnel and expensive equipment. When a single governmental
unit operates a health department the cost is higher than when
several governmental units combine. But after functional consolida­
tion is achieved, problems of over-all management and financial
support by two independent jurisdictions seem to be insoluble..
There is little doubt in the mind of the health officer that dis­
continuance of the present joint arrangement would not be in the
interest of better health service to the community.
In order that a better understanding maj'" be created between
the governing bodies of the City and County in the future, Dr.
Lawson, who represents the University of Virginia on the joint
health board, is conducting a survey of the health department with
a view to determining the proper portion of the cost of the de­
partment which each governmental unit should b e a r
State Centralization versus Local Self-Government
. The policy of the state department of health with reference
to county health units illustrates very clearly the advantages of
administrative reorganization In county government as a means of
resisting state centralization and, ultimately, the disappearance
of local self-government. The following commentary reveals both
the development of the state department’s policy and the way its
policy differs as between reformed and unreformed counties.
'With the exception of Chapter 368 of the Acts of
1932, providing for optional forms of county organiza­
tion and government, the laws of Virginia do not make
it mandatory that a county shall maintain a health de­
partment, either part-time or full-time. Sections 1^96
and 1^98 of the Virginia Code,.1936, read in part as
follows:
1^96 . If any city, town, 01- county authorized
by law to appoint a local board of health or
health officer shall omit to do so, the State
Board of Health may exercise the authority and
perform the duties of such local board or health
officer until such local board of health be
established or such health officer regularly
appointed, whereupon the jurisdiction of the
2. The results of this survey appeared too late to be used In
connection with this study. See: G.M. Lawson, A Survey of the
Joint Health Department with Reference to the Distribution
of Service Rendered to the City of Charlottesville and the
County of Albemarle.(19*f-0, 36 pp. mimeographed).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 128
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
State Board of Health or its officer shall cease.
li+98 . Each local hoard of health may elect a health
officer for its city, town, or county, hut if no local
health officer he so elected the secretary of the
local hoard of health shall act as health officer
for his city, town, or county.
In Henrico and Albemarle Counties where the county manager and
county executive forms of government, respectively, have heen adopted,
it is mandatory that each maintain a health department as one of
the estahlished departments of the county government.,..
In the three counties that have adopted optional forms of local
government, funds granted as State aid are paid into the county
treasuries ,to he administered by the county health officer under
the supervision of the county manager or the county executive. In
return for this State aid the Commissioner of Health reserves the
right to pass upon the qualifications of the health officer to he
employed. Of course the State Department of Health always is
ready and willing to. render advisory and technical services to
these counties, hut it assumes no administrative control.5
Plans for financing all other county health departments are
made hy the director of the Bureau of Rural Health in consultation
with the hoards of supervisors of the several counties. At these
conferences an agreement is reached as to what proportion of the
total cost of operating the department is to he h o m e respectively
hy the county, the State, and such other organizations as currently
may he contributing funds in support of these activities. Funds
for the maintenance of such departments are paid into the State
Treasury and are disbursed hy the State Department of Health in
the same manner as it disburses all other expendable funds. Under
this arrangement the county health officers are appointed hy the
county supervisors for an indefinite term. Selections must he
made, however, from a list of applicants approved hy the State
Commissioner of Health to whom the appointee becomes directly
responsible. ^75
This seems to offer a concrete example of the merits of the governments
of the three counties in Virginia which have adopted one of the optional
forms of county government so far as self-sufficiency and self-government
are concerned.
The current controversy over federal subsidies for increased public
health work and medical care cannot he discussed in this study. However,
it will he interesting to watch the changes which will be made in rural
health work as a result of federal subsidies, if they are forthcoming. The
general change which first suggests itself is that the relative independence
which Albemarle County and the other two reformed counties now enjoy may
he diminished and a trend similar to that taking place in public welfare
started.
3, 4. Italics furnished by the author.
5. J. F. Kendrick, Public Health in the State and Counties of Virginia,
(Virginia, Dept, of Health, 1939)> PP* 61-62.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE X X V I I
RECEIPTS AMD EXPENDITURES OF JOINT HEALTH
DEPARTMENT 1937-38 1938-39*
RECEIPTS
Estimate 1938-39
Amount .
%
Actual 1937-38
Amount
$ _
7,500
33
32
7,500
33
7
1,500
6
5,920
26
5,500
24
500
2
500
2
$ 7,500
32
Charlott esvilie
7,500
University of Virginia
1,500
State
Albemarle County
Miscellaneous
Total
,
$
$ 22,500
$22,920
EXPENDITURES
Actual 1937-38
Estimate 1938-39
Personal Services
Health Officer
Nurses (*0
Sanitation Officers (2)
Cleric (l)
Extra Office Help
Total
$
$
If,000
6 ,5*10
3,396
1,020
75
15,031
$
4,200
$
6,600
3,480
1,050
75
15,405
it-,300
4,200
To City Auditor
180
180
City Schools
500
500
1,000
500
*150
500
75
1,38)+
75
l,l4o
Travel
County Schools
Biologies
Medical Supplies
Other Expenses
Total
$
22,920
$
22,500
* From annual reports of the Health Officer to the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors and Charlottesville City Council, (1938 ).
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE X X V I I I
POPULATION— BIRTHS AND DEATHS*
Population, 1938
Charlottesville
White
Colored
Total
Births
Total Number
White,Number
White, Rate per M
Colored, Number
Colored, Rate per M
Rate per ^ White and
Colored
Deaths
Total
White, Number
White, Rate per M
Colored, Number
Colored, Rate per M
Rate per M White and
Colored
Albemarle
Total
11,870
21,128
32,998
If,362
6,008
10,370
16,232
27,136
If3,368
1936.
•Charlottesville Albemarle
279
207
17.7
72
16.7
612
452
21.7
160
25.8
17.^
.22.7
•1936
Charlottesville. Albemarle
66
15.3
362
257
12.4
105
16.9
12.8
13.4
205
135
11.9
Charlottesville
and Albemarle
1936
1938
891
659
822
613
232
209
Charlottesville
and Albemarle
1936
1938
567
492
454
171
162
♦Virginia, Department of Health, Annual Report, (1958),
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
292
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XX3X
COMMUNICABLE DISEASES —
CASES AND DEATHS*
AVERAGE
Albemarle County 1934-35-36
NUMBER
CaBes
Typhoid
Paratyphoid
Diarrhea & Dys.
Chichenpox
Measles
Scarlet Fever
"Whooping Cough
Diphtheria
Poliomyelitis
Encephalitis
Meningitis
Influenza
Tuberculosis.
Tularaemia
Malaria
Pellagra
Syphilis
Gonorrhea
Typhus
R. Mt. Sp. Fever
Smallpox
Tetanus
Trachoma
Undulant Fever
Amoebic Dysen.
Opthal. Neonat.
8
0
38
25
215
50
30
20
1
0
5
21
64
0
0
1
80
48
0
2
0
0
0
k
0
0
6
0
19
k
101
l4
19
2k
85
1
10
4l
36
1
0
2
78
1.4
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
AVERAGE
Deaths
6
0
21
12
5
14
13
22
2
3
7
52
26
1
0
1
91
7
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
Charlottesville
6
0
l4
0
2
2
3
5
1
0
2
k
57
1
0
1
5
2
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
6 10
0 0
6 0
0 0
2 0
1 3
5 0
1 0
k 3
k 6
11 22
0 0
0 0
1 0
2 1
1 0
0 0
1 2
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
C.
D.
7
0
26
14
107
26
21
22
29
1
7
li4
42
1
0
1
83
23
0
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
10
0
3
1
2
3
2
0
3
5
30
0
0
1
3
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
* Virginia, Department of Health,'Annual Reports, (1935-38).
1934-35-36
NUMBER
Cases
14 13
0
l
4
2
15
5
113 153
33 12
9 29
24 19
1 79
0
2
0
2
4 11
49 27
0
1
1
1
2
0
137 158
55 39
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
5
22
3
6
2
13
0
1
11
18
27
0
1
3
161
19
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
- -
Deaths
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
10
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
1
0
3
1
0
0
1
1
10
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
CHARLOTTESVILLE
AVERAGE
:c.
0
9
0
0
4
3
0 14
0 90
0 17
0 13
0 19
0 27
0- 1
4
3
4 11
14 34
0
0
0
1
2
2
4 152
0 38
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
D.
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
3
11
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
AND
ALBBMARLE-
c.
16
0
30
28
197
43
34
4l
56
2
11
125
76
1
1
3
235
61
0
3
0
1
0
2
0
0
D.
.
1
0
12
0
3
1
3
3
2
0
4
8
4l
0
0
2
5
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
Page 132
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Health Department Functions
An attempt will he made in this section to discuss some of the .more
important functions of the local health department in order to show how im­
portant this activity of local government is to the community. During the
course of this description, results achieved hy the department in various
phases of its work will he examined in the light of standards set forth
in Professor Ira V. Hiscock’s hook, Community Health Organization.^ It
must he remembered, of course, that this more or less "armchair" survey
will not take into account factors peculiar to the locality and consequent­
ly must not he taken to indicate anything more than general comparisons
between the standards set forth in the above mentioned hook and the results
reflected in the reports of the local health department.
Communicable Disease Control
Communicable diseases are reported hy physicians, the University
Hospital and others to the health department,. State statutes require pri­
vate physicians to report, to public health authorities any person "suffer­
ing from an infectuous, contagious, communicable and dangerous disease."7
Dr. Hollowell, the director of the joint health department, believes that
cases of communicable diseases are reported reasonably promptly and adequate­
ly.
TABLE XXX
COMMUNICABLE DISEASE REPORTING
Reported to Health.Dept.________
Cases, Average
Deaths, Average
Number: ' 3b’ 35- 3 6
Number:
x3 k '35*36
Typhoid & Paratyphoid
Standard
Number of Cases
Expected per Yr.
8
1
10
Measles
98
1
Scarlet Fever
22
0
60
less than 50
Whooping Cough
17
Diphtheria
20
1
2
25
30
After cases of communicable diseases are reported to the health de­
partment, it then becomes its duty to take measures to prevent the spread
of the disease. Also, in many cases where the diseased person is unable to
secure adequate medical treatment, the health department will take steps to
have the necessary services provided.
Home visits to persons with communicable diseases by trained nurses are
now a part of the generalized nursing program of the department. The old
procedure of simply having a sanitary or health officer tack a sign on the-
6 . IwV. Hiscock, Community Health Organization, ■(New York, The Commonwealth
Fund.
7. Virginia, Acts of Assembly, (1930), Chapter l8l, Section 1515*
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Page 135
on the diseased persons door, warning outsiders that a contagious disease
is present, and then letting the case drift along more or less unsupervised, is now recognized as wholly inadequate.
TABLE XXXI
HOME VISITS IN COMMUNICABLE DISEASE CONTROL
Cases
Actual
Average
1938
•3b*3 5 '36
Visits
Standard
Actual
...193,
8 .,.. Minimum 1938
Diphtheria
20
27
83
108
Scarlet Fever
22
13
26
52
Typhoid &
Paratyphoid
8
8
12
32
Poliomyelitis
28
1
2
k
6
3
3
12
Measles
98
3k 6
h9
692
Whooping Cough
17
75
25
150
200
1,050
Meningitis
Total
According to the above table the local health department does
not make a very creditable showing for home visits in communicable disease
control. Measles were especially prevalent in 1938 and. not even one
visit per case could be made. Figures in the column for standard
minimum number of visits are based on the following desirable number
of visits per case:
if visits per case of diptheria, scarlet fever, typhoid,
poliomyelitis and meningitis.
2 visits per case of measles and whooping cough.
Additional nursing personnel would be required before the health
department could measure up to what are considered to be minimum
standards in communicable disease control. The purpose of nursing
visits is to instruct those caring for the diseased person in proper
quarantine measures and bedside care techniques. Persons who have
been exposed to the disease, relatives, neighbors, etc., are
sought out and urged to immunize themselves against the disease.
For some diseases immunization among children is carried on systematically.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page lj4
.DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
For example, the health department reports that :for ‘diphtheria:
The immunisation of infants from six months to one year of
age is stressed under a definite program started several years
ago. Letters are sent to parents when the infant is six months
of age urging the immunization he given hy the family physician,
A card is enclosed, to he returned when the immunizing dose is
given. If this card is not returned another letter is sent and
if no reply is received the nurse makes a home visit before the
infant is one year old and, in many instances, gives Toxoid at
that time... Pre-school children are given Toxoid hy the nurse
when found during home visits. Also, all infantB and pre-Bchool
children attending well-baby clinics are immunized. The school
children in the first grade are Schick tested and the positives
are given Toxoid.8
Venereal Disease Control
The local health unit has played quite an important part in the move­
ment for the control of syphilis and other venereal diseases, especially
among negroes in rural areas. Soon after the joint health department was
created Albemarle County was selected as one of the six rural areas in the
United States for study of the venereal disease problem. The study was made
by the United States Public Health Service and under the auspices of the
Eosenwald Fund. In his recent book, Shadow on the Land, Dr. Parran, Surgeon
General of the United States, commented on the findings made in Albemarle
County as follows:
How much syphilis was found in these rural negro groups?
In Albemarle County Virginia (Charlottesville), the ratio was less
than among many white groups— 8.9 per cent. Here for a hundred
years, the University of Virginia Hospital has furnished good
medical care to the Negroes. Through rendering domestic and other
services, they have been in close contact with the whites. They
have better than the average schools; their general economic
conditions were much better than in the deep south, The result
was little syphilis.9
At the present time, since September, 1939, the United States Public
Health Service is again conducting an extensive experiment in this locality
in the detection and cure of syphilis. The personnel for carrying on this
program consists of one doctor, two nurses and a clerk. Also a laboratory
technician has been engaged to work in the University Hospital laboratories
in connection with the program. The undertaking is being financed by the
United States Government.
Roughly, around one-fourth of the population served by the joint health
department is colored. It has already been pointed out that the negro enjoys
a much better environment in this area than in many sections of the State and
8 . Joint Health Department, Narrative Reportj (193S), p. 2.
9. T. A. Parron, Shadow on the Land, p. 169 ,
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH____________
.
______ Page 135
the south. The Bosenwald study in 1931 found that syphilis cohld he
expected in ahout 8.9 per cent of the negro papulation* "With 10,500.
negroes this would mean an expectancy of 93k negroes vitji'syphilis.
Taking into consideration the whole population, white and colored, on
the basis of 600 pew cases per year per 100,000 population, a little over
200 new cases per year would he expected in this community. Table
twenty-nine indicates that an average of 235 cases of syphilis and 6l
cases of gonorrhea are reported to the health department annaully. For.
both diseases the yearly average for the 193^-1935-1936 period was 299.
This indicates that the first essential,atep in venereal disease control,
discovery of persons with the disease, is being performed very efficiently.
The role of the health department in venereal disease control is
explained by the following excerpt from the health officer's 1938 report:
Venereal disease control was limited largely to followup of delinquent cases from the University Clinic. A Wassermnn and ICahn test was made on all restaurant employees in the
city and those found positive were required to take treatment...
No clinics are held by this department as treatment facilities
are available at the University Clinic.10
In 1938 the department made a total of 123 field visits in venereal
disease control. The health officer recommends that this work be expanded
by an increase in personnel.
Tuberculosis Control
Table thirty-two indicates that tuberculosis causes more deaths in
Albemarle County and Charlottesville than any other disease. In fact,
almost as many deaths are attirbutable to tuberculosis in the community
as to all other communicable diseases combined.
Assuming 5 active cases and 15 contacts for each death from tuber­
culosis, this community would have around 100 active cases and 315 new
contacts. As shown in Table thirty-two, at June 31, 1938, the health
department had registered a total of 8^ cases, 28 suspects and 776 contacts.
To supervise properly cases of tuberculosis home visits by nurses
are necessary. Persons who have come into contact with active cases
must be discovered and, most important of all, children must be removed
from close association with active cases. Assuming 5,000 nursing visits
per 100 deaths from, tuberculosis to be adequate, and on the basis of an
average of *1-1 deaths per year, this community should have 2,050 nursing
visits per year in tuberculosis work. In 1938 the department made a
total of 1514 visits in connection with tuberculosis cases. The health
department workB in close collaboration with the Albemarle Tuberculosis
Association whose annual seal drive and other activities raise funds to
help finance the local tuberculosis control campaign.
Clinical work in connection with tuberculosis is provided by the
10 . Oj>. cit., p. 2 .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XXXII
TUBERCULOSIS CONTROL*
Cases
No.
Total registered
at June 31, 1938
84
Per
Death
2
Suspects
Per
No. Death
Contacts
Per
No. Death
28
776 ,18.9
.7
Total
No.
Per
Death
888
.21.4
178
4.3
1362
152
1514
33.2
3.7
36.9
1
Registered during
year, 1938
Visits
Field Nursing
Office Nursing
Total
4l
1
403
9.8
81
ij84
2
11.8
15
130
21
151
.4
122
3
20.2
3.7
829
50
879
21.4
Clinics: 1938
Number
Per Death
New Patients Examined
224
5.2
Patient Visits
412
10.0
56
169
225
5.5
28
26
3
57
1.4
Tuberculin Tests
Positive
Negative
Total
X-Rays
Positive
Negative
Suspicious
Total
Chest Examinations
Positive
Negative
Suspicious
Total
Recommended Cases
for sanatoruim care, 1938
Cases sent to sanatorium, 1938
36
73
21
130
3.2
16
19
(Note: Figures in this tahle are calculated on the hasis of an average of 4l
deaths per year from tuberculosis)
* Joint Health Department, Monthly Statistical Report
fjune, 1938).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 137
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
University of Virginia Hospital. Also, the health department holds
clinics in three different places out in the County. On the hasie of
I,5 0 0 visits per 100 deaths from tuberculosis as a minimum standard, this
-community with an average of Jfl deaths per year should have 619 clinical
visits, In 1938 there were k l2 visits hy tubercular patients to clinics.
Maternity and Child Hygiene
Table thirty-three indicates that there were 822 births in the community
in 1938 . The birth rate was highest among negroes in the County. County
whites, Charlottesville whites and Charlottesville negroes came next in order.
Supervision of expectant mothers and child birth is now recognized to
be one of the most important parts of a public health program. The local
health department plays an important role in furnishing advice and medical
services in the birth, preschool and school life of children. The department
collects statistics with reference to births and deaths for everyone within
its area. The degree to which it actually renders medical services depends
upon the ability of the patient to purchase those services from a private
physician or hospital. The health department's annual report for 1958 explains
its role in maternal hygiene.
Home nursing visits are made to expectant mothers and they
are urged to visit their physician or the clinic at the University
Hospital regularly. Instructions for getting ready supplies
needed for delivery and bulletins concerning prenatal and infant
■ care are given on these visits. One hundred and twelve new
prenatals were registered and k^S nursing visits, were made to
them and 128 postnatal nursing visits were made.31Table thirty-three shows that in 1958 the health department had registered
13.6 per cent of the pregnant women in the area. This is considerably below
the 20 per cent suggested by Hiscock as a minimum. The number of maternity
visits made by the department in 1958 , 1 .2 per case registered, is also below
the suggested 5 visits per case registered. In rural areas clinical visits
are more difficult to secure and must be substituted by nursing visits. The
4.3 antepartum visits shown in the table compare favorably with the suggested
5 visits per case registered. In 1938 , 11.6 per cent of the births were
registered with the health department as postpartum cases and slightly over
one visit per case registered was made,
i
Infant and Preschool Hygiene
The health department's report for 1958 describes this phase of the
health program as follows:
Four well baby clinics are held monthly in the county.
These are conducted by a pediatrician from the University of
Virginia Hospital. Infants are examined and the mother is
advised regarding the feeding and habits of the infant and
diphtheria and smallpox immunizations are also given. Cod
liver oil and some milk and cereals are furnished those unable
to secure them for the infant,-^
II. Op. Cit.V p. 3.
12. Ibid.
1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XXXIII
MATERNITY AND CHILD HYGIENE*
1933
MATERNITY
Births, 1938 .... 822
Registration— antepartum
New cases registered
Cases dropped
Antepartum visits
Field visits
-Office visits
Total
Clinic
New patients attending '
Visits hy patients
Visits to private phys.
Postpartum
New cases registered
Field visits
Postpartum examinations
At clinic
By private phys,
Number
112
100
Per Cent
of Births
13.6
Per Case
Registered
456
4.1
32
488
4.3
39
143
61
96
128
11.6
1.3
5
9
INFANT
New cases registered
l4l
Field nursing visits
1,201
. 18
Office nursing visits
Number of clinics held
New infants attending
Total visits by infants
PRESCHOOL
New cases registered
Field nursing visits
Office nursing visits
New preschool attending
clinic
Visits by preschool to
clinic
49
92
265
1.8
180
1,986
61
250
490
* Joint Health Department, Monthly Statistical Report, (June 1938 )
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Page 139
Table thirty-three indicates that there were 265 visits hy infants -to
clinics in 1938, an average of 1.8 visits per case registered* A total
of 5 visits per case per year is held hy Hiscock to he desirable.
The state children’s bureau holds an orthopedic clinic at the
University Hospital. The local health department performs follow up
services for a few cases referred to it.
School Hygiene
School children are given physical examinations hy the health
officer and nurses. In 1938, children in the first and third grades
were given physical examinations— a total of 2,088 children. Table
thirty-four indicates that 86 per cent of all the children in school
in 1938 were "inspected", that is examined hy the teachers for obvious
defects.
The health officer reported on the sanitary condition of the schoolB
as follows:
Of the 8 l schools in the county J6 have safe means of
excreta disposal and 25 have safe water supply. Twentythree schools secured safe excreta disposal and safe water
supplies this year. All schools have had safe excreta dis­
posal hut through misuse some were in need of repair.^3
Sanitation
The health department employs two sanitary officers and performs
innumerable functions in connection with sanitation. These functions
include inspection of supplies of water, milk and foods. The department
works to improve methods of excreta disposal in the community. The
department is called upon to investigate many complaints and nuisances.
Conclusion
The outstanding feature of public health activities in Albemarle
County is the presence of the University of Virginia Hospital and its
staff which serve as a focal point for medical activities. The clinical
facilities of the hospital have been of inestimable value to the community.
Evidence of the close relationship between the health department and
the University Hospital is seen in the fact that the health officer
teaches public health in the University of Virginia Medical School.
Throughout its history the health department has been under the
direction of a professionally trained health officer. Although there
is need for strenghtening the department's program in some of its
aspects, the community has probably enjoyed public health services
superior to those rendered in the average county in the State.
13. Ibid.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE XXXIV
SCHOOL HYGIENE*
No. Children Enrolled
5,985
86
Per Cent Inspected
No. with Defects
3,723
Underweight 10$ or more
1,375
Defective Teeth
2,755
Defective Vision
679
Defective Hearing
84
Defective Throats
1,211
Unvaccinated at Opening of
School
623
No* Crippled Children
14
Vision Corrected
158
Teeth Corrected
868
Throats Corrected
117
Weight Corrected
456
Successfully Vaccinated
3,584
Immunized Against Diphtheria
2,943
Number of Five Point Pupils
1,483
^Virginia, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Annual Report, (School
Year 1937-38), p. I k .
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER X I I
DEPARTMENT OF LAV ENFORCEMENT
Introduction
No attempt will be made here to trace the very long and interesting
history of the office of sheriff. In general, the importance and
prestige of the office has suffered a continual decline.^The Constitution of Virginia provides that a sheriff shall be
elected by the people for a term of four years.2 The Optional Forms' i:'
Act of 1932 made no change in this respect. Several provisions of the
act, however, have an important bearing an the office. Most important
of all, the fee system as a method of compensating county officers was
abolished and the Board of Supervisors was given the general power to
select the subordinate personnel and fix their compensation.3 The Board
of Supervisors also- fixes the salary of the Sheriff. This makes it
possible for the Board, of Supervisors to provide for as much policing
work, as opposed to the other duties which the Sheriff must perform, as
it deems necessary. In summary, the new system of government has brought
the office of the Sheriff and the functions of policing and investigating
more under the control of the Board of Supervisors. The Sheriff is also
made responsible to the County Executive in matters of purchasing,
budgeting and the collection of fees which are paid into the county
treasury.
Organization and Functions of Sheriffls Office
The Optional Forms Act of 1932 contains the following provisions
relating to the Department of Law Enforcement:
The department of law enforcement shall consist of an attorney
for the Commonwealth and a sheriff, and their assistants, deputies
and employees.
The attorney for the Commonwealth shall exercise all the powers
conferred and perform all the duties imposed upon such officer by
general law, and shall be accountable to the board of county
supervisors in all matters affecting the county and shall perform
such duties, not inconsistent with his office, as the board of county
supervisors shall direct. He shall be selected as provided in
section twenty-seven hundred and seventy-three-n twenty.
The sheriff shall exercise all the powers conferred and perform
all the duties imposed upon sheriffs and constables by general law.
He shall have supervision and control of the police force of the
county, which may be appointed pursuant to section twenty-seven
1. Bruce Smith, Rural Crime Control, Institute of Public Administration,
1933; Chapter II.
2. Constitution of Virginia, Sections 110 and 112.
3. Virginia, Acts of Assembly. (1932), Chapter 268, Section 2773-n 25V
and Section 2773-n 7’. See also Code of Virginia, (1936 ), Section
3316'(5) on powers and duties of the Compensation Board with reference
to county fee officers and their deputies.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 142
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
hundred and seventy-three~n seven, and the custody, feeding and
care of all prisoners confined in the county jail. The policemen
herein provided for shall have such powers aB special policemen
provided for hy general law. He shall perform such other duties
as may he imposed upon him hy the hoard of county supervisors.1*’
This section specifically brings the Sheriff's office under the
control of the Board of Supervisors. Provisions of general law give
the Sheriff important duties as the executive officer of the Circuit
Court and the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. The Sheriff's
duties with respect to the. courts involves attendance on their oessions,
executing court orders, summonsing witnesses and many other such duties.
At the present time the personnel of the Sheriff's office consists
of the Sheriff and six deputies. One of the deputies acts as jailor
and storekeeper of the .county warehouse. Since the adoption of the
County Executive form the Board of Supervisors has added deputies to
the Sheriff's staff to increase the policing work of his office.
There are several questions to which one would like to know the
answer regarding the changes which were made in the status of the
Sheriff's office in Albemarle County. What effect did the change
from the fee system of compensation to a salary system have on the
performance of the Sheriff's duties? Has the change tended to make
the Sheriff and his deputies less perservering in serving papers now
that the- fees therefrom are paid into the county treasury rather than
to the officers as a part of their compensation? Has it meant that
the Sheriff and his deputies are less apt to neglect their policing
functions than under the fee system? Has the change had any effect
on crime rates? Recorded data which could he used to answer these
questions is very scanty. As figures on county appropriations for
the Sheriff's office show there is little douht hut that the policing
side of the Sheriff's office has heen hrdadened and strengthened,5
In 1937, county officers traveled an average of 5,594 miles per
month in patrolling the county and making investigations. This
involved an estimated average of 428 hours per month or 14 hours per
day of patrolling.° Officers -are on duty at the courthouse 16 out of
the 24 hours of each day and are subject to call at all times at their
homes. In comparison with other Virginia counties and rural areas,
this seems to he a very good record for rural police work.
Financing the Sheriff's Office
Table thirty five shows some interesting changes in the administration
of the Sheriff's office. The part of the cost of the office paid out of
funds raised hy the annual county levy has increased from $ 1,900 in
4T Ibid. Section 2775-n 14.
5. Infra, table thirty-eight.
6 . County of Albemarle, First Annual Report, (For the year ended June
30, 1937), 27.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
Page 143
1936 and $4,438 in 1937 to $5; 146 in 1938. This increase in county
appropriations io attributable to two causes. After 1936, the City
of Charlottesvilie, which until that time had placed its prisoners in the
county jail, assumed the duty of caring for its own prisoners and
consequently the County lost several thousand dollars profit which it
had made in caring for these prisoners. Also, the County is spending
more on salaries for deputies then formerly. Even now the County pays
less than half of the cost of maintaining the Sheriff's office. In
1938 the County appropriated $5;146, $3,546 was collected from county
citizens in fees and the State contributed $4,105. The Sheriff's salary
has teen fixed at $5,000 ty the Board of Supervisors.
TABLE XXXV
EXPENSES AND REVENUE OF SHERIFF'S OFFICE ALBEMARLE COUNTY*
REVENUE:
1228
CO
Total Revenues
tHtov
Board of Prisoners
State
City & Town
Federal
0
Fees Collected
1,900
1936
5,146
371
535
336
2,339
2,334
3,546
4,30
7,323
5,461
6,174
3,940
3,887
6,015
4,44o
181
5,039
1,719
27
4,105
15,410 13,477
9,394
EXPENDITURES:
1931
Old Form
1932
1933
2
118
14,875 13,559 12,919
1936
New Form
1938
1937
Personal Services
Sheriff
Deputies
1,548
2,605
1,972
2,160
2,864
2,252
3,000
4,980
3,000
5,017
3,000
4,980
Maintenance of
Prisoners
7,572
6,012
3,311
4,424
2,947
2,339
Other Expenses
1,080
1,172
966
2,470
2,594
2,600
15,410
13,477
9,394
Total Expenditures
14,875 13,559 12,919
*Figures for the years 1931; 1932 and 1933 were taken from, Statement
of Receipts and Expenses of Fee Officers. Biennial Report 1931-1932
and Biennial Report 1933-1934 . passim. Figures for the years 1936 , 1937
and 1938 were taken from. County of Albemarle, Proposed Budget (19371938. 1958-1959. 1959-1940). passim.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
]
|
]
I
j
j
j
i
New Form
Ht-d-
County Appropriation
Old Form
1932
1933
1951
1,410 1,305 1,230
j
f
Page ikk
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
The Auditor of Public Accounts has recently issued a report described
as, "the first real endeavor of the Commonwealth to investigate the
financial activities of the offices of the sheriffs and to assemble
information of the character presented..."? A representative of the
Auditor's office went into each county to instruct sheriffs in financial
record keeping and to check up on the use of the accounting system
instituted in 1936. "Of the 100 sheriffs: 8 had very complete records,
3 had complete records as to the income and expenses for their individual
activities but not those of their deputies, 60 had records in the form
of memoranda composed to a large extent of estimates rather than actual
figures, and the remaining 29 had maintained no financial records at
all; "8 Albemarle would be classed as one of the counties which had veiy
complete records.
. Since the Sheriff in Albemarle County pays into the county treasury
all the fees which he collects, rather than retaining them as a part of
his compensation as in other counties, he has to keep somewhat different
rocords. As fees are collected they are placed in a small envelope
showing the date, amount collected, from whom received, by whom received
and for what purposes they were paid. For state purposes these data are
posted in the Sheriff's cash book, prescribed by the Auditor of Public
Accounts.9 For county purposes two sets of records are maintained, one
for criminal work and one for civil work. Fee collections are posted
on these two sets of records. Money accruing from the collection of
fees is turned into the county treasury at regular intervals.
On or before November first of each year,- the sheriff is required
to file with the Compensation Board an estimate of anticipated expenses
for the next calendar year. The Compensation Board then makes allowances
for the sheriff's expenses, prescribes the number of deputies he shall
have and the amounts of their salaries.^ Within a certain time the
Board of Supervisors may petition the Compensation Board to reconsider
its decision and as a final resort may carry its grievances to the
Circuit Court. Once the Compensation Board has made its decision on
allowances and it becomes final the sheriff is not supposed to exceed
these allowances. If he does exceed the allowances, as 89 of the 100
sheriffs did in 1937, the Compensation Board may refuse to consider the
amount of excess in paying the State's part of the expenses of the office.
At the present time the Compensation Board has set $6,000 as the total
allowance for the expenses of the sheriff in Albemarle County. Any
amounts collected in fees, commissions, etc. in excess of $ 6,000 must be
paid into the state treasury. Actually the fees collected in the County
do not exceed the amount allowed and no excess fees are paid into the
state treasury.
7. Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, Report on Special Study of the
Financial Transactions of the Offices of the Sheriffs of the Commonwealth of Virginia^ (For the Calendar Year 1937), p. 3
8 . Ibid 6 .
9. For a detailed description of the Sheriff's system of records see:
Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, Manual.of Procedures for the
Preparation of Records, For use by Sheriffs and City Sergeants, (1939),
passim.
10, Code of Virginia. (1936), Section 3516.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page -^5
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
Criminal Records
Much Letter financial records have been maintained in the Sheriff’s
office in Albemarle County than in the average Virginia county.
Records for information essential to modern crime prevention and
detection are now being instituted for the first time. The methods of
record keeping in the past indicate the emphasis which has been put on
the fee collecting side of the Sheriff's duties and the neglect of the
"policing" and preventive side of his duties. The Sheriff's records
have for several years provided space for the recordation of information
necessary in crime detection, yet because of neglect on the part of
deputies this information has been very inadequately recorded, making
it very difficult to classify crimes and trace the rate of their
occurrence. In cooperation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
the County is beginning to maintain more adequate criminal records.
The uniform classification scheme being established throughout the
Country has been adopted and in a short time it will be possible to
compare crime rates in the County with those in other jurisdictions which
keep similar records.1J
An attempt was made to apply this uniform classification scheme
to the records in the Sheriff's office for 1938. The result is given
in the following table. Figures in this table represent offenses
which resulted in arrests and not "offenses known to the police".
TABLE XXXVI
CRIMINAL OFFENSES
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, 1938*
(Number and Rate per Thousand)
Murder
Manslaughter
Rape
White
Number Rate
2
-.09
2
.09
•
■
.lit
3
Colored
Number Rate
.it8
3
3
.lt8
Total
Number Rate
.18
5
2
.07
6
.22
67
2 .U8
I .29
It. 92
Robbery
Assault
lf5
2,16
Burglary
19
.91
Larceny (All amounts) !
25
1.20
27
^.33
23
52
112
236
5.39
21
86
3.36
133
22
It
3.53
.6lt
1.92
Auto Theft
Drunkenness
All other
322 11.93
11.37
13.79
Note: Figures for population are taken from the 1930 census.
census gives the population as, white 20 ,7 ^9 , colored 6 ,232 ,
total 26 ,981 .
* Compiled from Records in the Sheriff 13 Office.________________ '
11. International Association of Chiefs of Police, Committee on Uniform
Crime Records, Uniform Crime Reporting, (Second edition, 1930).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
Page 146
This table indicates that the rate for each offense listed, except
drunkenness, burglary and manslaughter is higher among negroes than
among whites. Another striking thing about the Sheriff's criminal records
is the frequency with which certain family names appear over and over
again.
The County Jail
The Sheriff is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
county Jail. The actual management of the Jail is performed by a deputy,
the jailor, who lives on the premises., The Jailor also runs the county
warehouse and acts as storekeeper.
There are defects in the jail which could be remedied. Although
men and women are segregated, there is no matron to look after female
prisoners. 12
Table thirty seven presents data on the operation of the jail.
TABLE XXXVII
OPERATION OF TEE JAIL*
Prisoner Days
Federal State Other
1936-37
110
1937-38
217
6,591
^
Total Income,
Commissions, etc.
6,434.12
1936-37
1937-38
6,890 2,496
4,372.35
Total
9,496
6,812
Total Expenses
Food, Salaries.
3.030.04
2.307.05
Net
Profit
3,4o 4.o 8
2,307.05
* Compiled from Records in Department of Finance <
The table shows that the County realizes a profit of several thousand
dollars on the operation and maintenance of the jail. Prior to the
abolition of the fee system as a method of compensating county officers,
profits on the board of prisoners constituted a primary source of income
for the Sheriff. These profits are now paid into the county treasury.
12. A detailed description of the Albemarle County jail may be found in:
Hoffer, Mann and House, The Jails of Virginia, etc., University of
Virginia Institute for Research in the Social Sciences, Monograph
No. 16, (1933), PP. 44-49.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
Page Ik-J
Conclusion
As presented to the General Assembly, the Optional Forms act
made the sheriff an appointive officer.15 So far as the functions
performed by the sheriff are concerned, there is certainly more reason
for the office being appointive than elective. There are innumerable
ways the sheriff could use the prerogatives of his office to gain
political ends in making arrests, collecting fees and in other ways.
Fortunately in this respect the Sheriff of Albemarle County has now,
and has always, had little or no opposition and therefore he has
perhaps not had the same temptation to let "politics" mix with his
administrative duties. In fact, the Sheriff himself seems to attempt
to be as non-partisan and non-factional as the necessities of standing
for reelection will permit. In the campaign of 1935; be did not play
an active part on either side on the grounds that whichever side won
he would have to work with the successful group.
There is little doubt but that the adoption of the county
executive form of government has resulted in a strengthening of the
policing aspects of the Sheriff's functions. There seems to be much
room for improvement yet. The average annual salary of the deputies
in the Sheriff's office is $1,2000. Such a low salary does not
attract men with the education and ability which the duties and
responsibilities of police officers require.
13* Virginia, Commission on County Government, Report to the General
Assembly of Virginia, (Senate Document No. 3; Dec., 1931), p. 97*
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER XIII
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY OFFICERS
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
Only summary treatment will be given the following county officers:
Commonwealth's Attorney, County Clerk and Farm and Home Demonstrators.
Although all of these officers are very important locally in their
fields, the Commonwealth's Attorney and the Farm and Home Demonstrators
are not strictly speaking county officers. Most of the functions
performed by the County Clerk at the present time are in connection
with the county courts. Table thirty-eight presents figures on the
office of Commonwealth's Attorney.
Changes in the Status of the County Clerk's Office
In so far as Virginia counties could be said to have had
"county managers" it has usually been the county clerks who have served
in this capacity. County clerks have been clerks to the boards of
supervisors as well as clerks to the circuit courts. While serving
as clerk to the board of supervisors the clerks naturally became
associated with problems of over-all administration and in some cases
clerks would in practice function as "managers" for the whole county.
The fact that the duty of drawing up the annual county budgets usually
devolved upon the county clerks contributed to their importance as
county administrators. The degree of importance which the clerks
assumed as general county administrators depended largely upon the
personality of the individual clerks and the policies of the boards of
supervisors. Clerks have not been given any general grant of power
as county administrators by statutory enactments which were state wide
in their application. Perhaps another consideration may have
contributed to the importance of the clerk as county administrator and
county policy maker. This is the method of selecting the clerk and
his tenure. The popular election of clerks has made them one of the
"big five" officers who go to make up the so-called "courthouse ring".
The clerks' term of office is eight years while that of the other
officers is four years. Consequently, the County Clerk, next to the
County Treasurer, has been in a position to become politically the
strongest of the county officers.
The adoption of the county executive form of government has had
the effect of reducing the importance of the office of county clerk
in Albemarle County. All county functions in connection with budgeting
and fiscal management have been taken over by the County Executive
who acts for the Board of Supervisors, Also, in pursuance of power
granted to it by the Optional Forms Act, the Board of Supervisors
has appointed the County Executive's secretary to serve as its clerk
instead of the County Clerk. 1 Although the County Clerk remains
popularly sleeted, and serves for a term of eight years, the office
1. Virginia, Acts of •Assembly, (1952), Chapter 368 , Section 2773-n
16.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
■Page 150
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY OFFICERS
is in practice inferior to the present position of the Board of Super­
visors in so far as policy determination is concerned. The Board of
Supervisors fixes the salaries of the County Cleric and his subordinates.
Judging from the experience of the Henrico County Board of Supervisors
the County Executive and the Board of Supervisors have no general power
of direction over the operation of the Clerkk office and do not have the
power to choose the employees of the office,2
Table thirty-nine presents
of the Clerk's office. Whereas
to help pay the cost of running
the County has made a profit on
figures on the receipts and expenditures
formerly the County appropriated money
the. office, for the past few years
the office.
General Conclusions
While it iB recognized that objective standards for measuring forms
of government— or indeed, particular functions of government— are
either non-existent or very imperfectly formulated, an attempt will be
made in this concluding section to point out what appear to the
author to be the weak and strong aspects of the county executive foim
of government as it has operated in Albemarle County, Some of the
implications for the state-wide problem of county reform drawn from
Albemarle's experience will be alluded to.
Political Considerations
The "old order" which existed in 1933 and. previously in Albemarle
County has been described as an antiquated system, a manifestation of "the
"conservatism" and "antipathy for change" which is said to be characteristic
of political life in Virginia. The leaders in the political life of
the County, the "Courthouse -ring", were all honest and respected
citizens to whom other citizens had become accustomed to look to for
leadership in the conduct of the County's government. General apathy
among the citizens and the easy and repeated successes of the
"Courthouse ring" at the polls seem to have had a deadening influence.
While the importance of counties as self governing units of government
was being constantly diminished through state centralization, local
county officers were content to "stand on their records"— no positive
and forthright movement for the maintenance of local self government
existed in official circles. The "Courthouse ring" seems to have become
such a closed corporation that the trees obscured the wood. It did not
conceive that there was anything wrong with the County's government
as it was operating it. Naturally, some of its members branded the
reform movement and the proposed new form of government "academic",
"theoretical"and "dangerous". It seems doubtful also if any change
in the form of government, even one which did not involve the
politically objectionable abolition of elective offices, would have
2, See, M. W. Puller v. Board of Supervisors, Circuit Court of the
Tenth Circuit of Virginia, Volume 32 Chancery .Orders page 391*
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ON
rH
t-
O |NO
O On
CM
-d - -dO
KN
-d-
• •
»%
NO
ON
V - KN
-d - -d"
On
ON
NO
co CO
KN
KN
NO
ON
O INO
O ON
ON
ON
NO
CM H
d
•
KN
On
H
NO
KN
ON
H
«
KN KN
rH CO
*\
•
*
-d
TABLE XXXVIII
*\
KN
On
tv
•>
KN
ITN O
ITN
ON Q
CV1 NO
H
•
KN
V• O4
in o
KN
*
■N
C—
CM
H
-= r
co
KN
On
rH
IV
KN
ON
rH
NO
KN
ON
rH
KN
KN
ON
rH
KN
CQ
O O
in
O•
•
-it 0
CM
KN |
ON
0'S
H
O O
ON O
1—I
•
•
H O
CM Q
O M5
KN
ON
H
0 O
0 in
*
•
ON
CM NO
V
•v
in
H
d
O O
O ON•
LIN|NO
CM -dH IV
CM
KN
ON
rH
CO
CM
ON
•
-4*
NO
rH
rH
CM
O
KN
ON
0
•
c—
iv
in
•
d
»\ o
•
KN
KN
IV
•4*
rH
CM
CM
ON
d
O
f—1
O
IV
*\
•
On
H
*N
•
CO
KN
|C0
KN
ON
00N
co
£C—
H
rH
KN
O
O
in
V»
O
O
CM
0
CM
CO
rH
CM
o
o
o
IV
•
ITN
f-
O
ITN
ITN
ON
NO
NO
•
ir\
ON
IV
KN
o
o
H
kn
ON
o
o
ON
NO
NO
-d8
O
ON
•
ITN
•
■d-
T—
KN
fi
m
at
<D
© >S
O
i- H
©
H
S
O
-p
CO
-P
£
<4
H
cd
C
O
m
a
CO +3
0
•
§
§
at a)
to
•H
£
aj
•P
CO
PH
<5
W H
UH
0 K)
-P
-p
O
O EM
nd
0
§*
:§ §
•P
©
O
"S
© -H
•H
CO
to
H
0
O
•H
£
£
O
o
•P
O
0
rH
rH
O
O
at
0
0
(h
at
-P
&0
o
©
Ph
rH
cd
-p
(XXXIX) following).
kn
NO
ON
•
ON
ON
On
(Same as for table
CO
O
Eh
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES OE THE CLERK’S OFFICE, ALBEMARLE COUNTY*
REVENUES
Old Form of Government
1931
County Executive Form
1932
1933
1936
County Appropriations
1 ,700.00
1,255.89
1 ,500.00
66.91
Fees and Commissions
Total Revenues
8 ,051.00
9,751.00
7,607.18
6,853.07
7.736.92
9.236.92
8,855.33
8,911.25
Excess of Fees and Commissions over Expenditures (Profit to the County)
1937
1938
9.380.38
8 .380.38
9.527.03
9.527.03
1,350.19
555.06
EXPENDITURES
25.00
9,751.35
25.00
8 ,853.07
5,301.63
3,910.29
25.00
9 ,236.92
5,099.92
3,900.00
911.52
8,911.25
3 .600.00
3.361.00
1,069.19
8,030.19
0 0
0 0
Other Expenses
Total Expenditures
5,086.99
5,751.08
*>
5,535.16
if,292.18
*<»
Personal Services
Clerk
Assistants
1 1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE X X X IX
1,051.97
8 ,881.97
* Conqpiled from data in, Statement-of Receipts and Expenses of Local Fee and Salaried Officers,
Reports of the State Compensation Board, (1933, 1935) and County of Albemarle, Annual Budgets
for the fiscal years ended June 30 , 1936, 1937 and 1938.
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY O FFIC ERS
Page 153
teen acceptable to the "Courthouse ring". The reform movement had to he
a citizens' movement, to some extent an insurgent movement, because of
the opposition of the local officials and the local Democratic party
organization.
These statements should not be construed to mean that with the
adoption of the county executive form of government people suddenly
became interested in county affairs and local political leaders thereafter
acted only with the public interest in mind. Such was not the case.
The movement which resulted in the adoption of the new form was more in
the nature of a sales campaign which gradually disappeared once the
product had been put on the market and accepted by the people. Changes
and shifts took place in the personnel of political leadership which
were not drastic or sudden but which were none the less.significant. The
strengthened position of the Board of Supervisors has, as intended, made
it more the focal point for policy determination. This resulted from
the abolition of two elective offices, the diminution of the circuit
court judge's appointing power and the realization of effective fiscal
control over all county officers by the Board of Supervisors because of
adequate assistance from a county executive.
Administrative Considerations
The unique feature of the new form of government is the provision
for a single chief administrative officer, the County Executive, who
acts as the agent of the governing body of the County and serves at its
pleasure. The creation of this office was intended to counteract some
of the weaknesses which resulted from the gradual multiplication of the
independent functional boards and agencies. Through the day to day
supervision by the County Executive the Board of Supervisors.was to
exercise control over all county officers and thereby obtain authority
commensurate with its responsibility as governing body of the County.
Because of the County Executive's position as agent of the Board of
Supervisors and' head of the administrative structure of the County he was
to act as the County!s representative to whom citizens could go for
information and to make complaints and suggestions regarding the governing
of the County, The County Executive in Albemarle has not been as
concerned with public relations as much as the County Manager in Henrico
County. In the first place, tbebe is no strong opposition to the new
form and the County Executive has not needed to be as active in interpreting
the new form to the people and defending it against critical opponents.
In the second place, faotors of temperament and personality may account
for the County Executive's disaspociation from publicity. The County
Executive has compiled only one annual report which was printod and made
available to the public. This is in contrast with the County Manager in
Henrico wbo has a national reputation for preparing attractive and well
arranged annual reports. The value of good reporting is intangible but
its presence is usually associated with progressive and wide awake
administration.
It is perhaps in the field of financial administration and budgeting
that the greatest improvements have been made under the new system. With
respect to the offices of the Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 154
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY O FFIC E R S
the operation of the new form seems to indicate that so far as the volume
and difficulty of the functions of the two officers are concerned there
was no excuse for their separate existence* One officer paid a salary
of $4,200 has done a better job administering the tax assessing and
collecting functions than was formerly done by two officers paid an
aggregate of over $9,000 per year. On principle, of course, there are
good arguments for separation of tax assessing and tax collecting
functions. Furthermore, there seems to be no evidence to indicate that
the County's government is less responsible or less solicitous in
hearing citizen’s complaints and wishes because financial affairs are
no longer directed by elective officers. On the contrary, there is
evidence to indicate that the county's financial affairs are conducted
more impartially and that what is commonly termed "passing the buck"
has been less prevalent than before 1934. In Albemarle as in most
Virginia Counties there is need for more scientific tax assessing
techniques. Equalization of real estate assessments is needed. The
installation of m o d e m tax maps and tax record cards such as those in
use in Henrico would be a great improvement. Personnel administration
as a technique of management has received little attention.
Effective budgeting and financial planning have been among the most
outstanding improvements of the new system. The County Executive now
proposes that certain expenditures be made in much the same way the
State's Governor submits a budget to the General Assembly which
contains his recommendations-. In the process of making proposals
the County Executive weighs the needs of the County with each other
and in the light of the County's resources. Budget preparation is
something more than a routine and clerical process of compiling
estimates. Also, under the new form of government there is no doubt
as to who is responsible for the execution of the budget as adopted.
The Optional Forms Act makes this the duty of the County Executive. As
the chief administrative officer of the County the County Executive
is in a position to exeroise constant control over expenditures and
see that the various operating departments live within the provisions
of the budget as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Purchasing
has been centralized under the new form and competitive bidding and
installation of facilities for quantity purchases have resulted in a
saving to the County.
If it be assumed that increased control over school administration
by the Board of Supervisors is desirable then progress has been made
in Albemarle County under the county executive form. In fact it has
been contended that the new form goes too far in this direction by
providing for the removal of the school board members by the Board
of Supervisors at any time. If the Board of Supervisors is going to
pass on school policies and scrutinize school expenditures in detail
it would seem logical to abolish the School Board and have the Board
of Supervisors serve as the School Board. However, the feeling
among school officials generally that such a change would tend to
bring "politics" into school administration may not be altogether
an empty fear. On the other hand it is argued that if the powers
and responsibilities of the boards of supervisors are increased
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY O FFIC ERS
Page
155
the people will elect men who will be less inclined to use
appointments to teaching positions as political patronage and
engage in other similar practices.
The outstanding change which has taken place in welfare
functions is the rapidity with which they have come under state
control in the past few years. This change was coincident with
the advent of federal and state subsidies and has meant increased
expenditures and more adequate provision for the poor and indigent.
The County has been more fortunate than the average rural
community in the State in having had an active health unit for a
relatively long period of time. The coming of federal subsidies
for public health work and increased state aid, if they are
forthcoming, may have the same effect in this field which they
had in public welfare— that is, increased state control.
The County's policing and crime prevention functions have
been strengthened under the new form of government. So far as
the Sheriff's duties are concerned there would seem to be more
reason for him being an appointive than an elective officer.
There is no,more justification for the popular election of a
county sheriff than for the popular election of city chiefs of
police. Although there is no evidence of conflict between the
Board of Supervisors and the Sheriff in Albemarle County there
may be need for a clarification of legal provisions dealing
with the policing functions of the County. The Optional Forms
Act gives the Board of Supervisors power to appropriate funds
for the maintenance of the police force and to appoint police
■officers on the recommendation of the County Executive. But the
general direction of the police force is declared to be the
duty of the Sheriff who because of his popular election could
assert his independence of control by the Board of Supervisors.
It would seem more satisfactory to give the Sheriff power to
hire and fire his own subordinates or else transfer the power
of general direction over the police force to the Board of
Supervisors and the County Executive. The appointment of a
chief of police by the Board of Supervisors to direct polioing
activities and the appointment of an officer by the judge of
the circuit court to take over the Sheriff's court work,
although politically inexpedient, would perhaps be the best
solution from the administrative point of view.
Some general comments on the phraseology of the Optional
Forms Act may be made. The provisions of the Act are not
altogether clear as to the duties and powers of the Board of
Supervisors, especially with respect to the powers of the Board
in budgeting, appointing county employees and fixing the
salaries of county employees. Two conflicting tendencies
seem to operate. On the one hand, the Board of Supervisors
operates on the assumption that the whole purpose of the Act was
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
156
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTY O F F IC E ®
to increase its power and give it more control over other county officers.
Consequently the provisions of the Act giving the Board power to pass
on expenditures of various county agencies, the power to appoint county
employees and fix their salaries and the power to set up a central
purchasing agent,are interpreted to apply to its dealings with all county
departments— the Clerk's office, Sheriff and Schools as well as the
Department of Finance. Opposed to this view are the phrases found
throughout the Act which provide that an officer "shall exercise all
.the powers conferred and perform all the duties Imposed upon such
officers hy general law, arid shall he subject to the obligations and
penalties imposed by general law". ■Under the provisions of the general
law it is doubtful, for example, if the Board of Supervisors can fix
teachers' salaries and require school purchases to be handled by the
.county's general purchasing agent.
In conclusion, with all its possible weaknesses, the county
executive form of government seems to be far superior to the old
form when considered in'the light of Albemarle County's experience
under both, Even if the new form had not resulted in savings to
the County in dollars and cents, which it undoubtedly has, the assurance
that it is more businesslike and impartial, more efficient and less
ridden with petty political favoritism, justifies the efforts of those
who fought for its adoption against large odds. It is proper that
Jefferson's native county was the leader in Virginia in improving
its form of government. It is disheartening that the progressive
spirit which improved Albemarle's government has not become state
wide in scope with a Jefferson as its apostle.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
General Works on County Government and Related Subjects
Bromage, A, W., American County Government, (N. Y: Holston House, 1935)
Chamberlain, B. P., 'Observations on Present County Government (of
Albemarle County), (Typewritten, 14 pp., 1933)
Chatters, C. H. and Hillhouse, A. M., Local Government,Debt Administration,
(New York: Prentis-Hall, 1939) 1
Fife, W. 0..'Can the County Carry the Cost? (Leaflet ^ pp., Reprints
of a Letter Sent to Editor of Charlottesville, Daily Progress. 1933)
Fox, E. L., •'Why the Delay in the Reorganization of County Government
in Virginia", Bulletin of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Vol.
XXX, No. 8, p. 32. ’
Garnett, C. M., Minutes of Meetings of the Albemarle Citizens League,
(Typewritten Copy)
.Gilbertson, H. S., The County, The Dark Continent of American Politics,
(New York: The National Short Ballot Organization, 1917)*
Goodnow, F. J., Politics and Administration, (New York: Macmillan, 1900)
Hiscock, I. V., Community Health Organization, (New York: The Common­
wealth Fund, Revised Edition, 1932)
Hodges, H, G., City Management, Theory and Practice of Municipal
Adminlstration, (New York: Crofts; 1937)
Hoffer, F. W., Mann D. M., and House, F. N., Jails of Virginia, (New
York: Appleton-Century, Institute for Research in the Social Sciences,
Monograph No. 16, 1933)
Hoffer, F. W., Counties in Transition, (University of Virginia Institute
for Research in the Social Sciences, Monograph No. 2, 1929 )
International Association of Chiefs of Police, Uniform Crime Reporting
(New York: Int. Assoc.' of Ch. of Police, 1929)
Jefferson, Thomas, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson,(Washington, D. C.:
The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1907)
Johnston, Frederick, Memorials of Old Virginia Clerks, (Lynchburg: J. P.
Bell Co., Printers, 1888 )
Kilpatrick, Wylie, Problems in Contemporary County Government, (University
of Virginia Institute for Research in the Social Sciences, Monograph
No. 8 , 1930)
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 158
B IB LIO G R A P H Y
Lancaster, L. W., Government in Rural America, (New York: Yan Nostrand,
1937)
Lutz, H. L,, Public Finance, (New York: Appleton-Gentury, 1936)
National Association of Assessing Officers, Assessment Principles and
Terminology, (Chicago: Nat. Assoc, of Assess. Officers, 1937)
Parron, T. A., Shadow on the Land, (New York: Reynal & Hitchoock, 1937)
Pinchbeck, R. B., Cross Currents of Opinion1 in Attempted Reform Movements
in County Government, (Charlottesville: Bureau of Public Administration,
pp. 11-15 in Proceedings of Twelfth Annual Meeting of Virginia Social
Science Association, April, 1938)
Ross, C. M., A Survey of Public Personnel Legislation and Administrative
Regulations, (University of Virginia, Report of the Bureau of Public
Administration, Series .B, No. 5, 19^0)
Smith, Bruce, Rural Crime Control, (New York: Institute of Public
Administration, Columbia University, 1933)
Snavely, T, R., Hyde, D. C f, and Biscoe, A. B., State Grants-in-Aid in
Virginia, (New York: Century, 1933)
Social Science Research Council, Committee on Public Administration,
Suggested Outline for Collaborative Studies, Appraisal of City Manager
Government (23 PP. mimeographed, Soc. Sc. Res. Council)
Spicer, G. W,, An Important Issue Before the Voters of Albemarle County,
(Leaflet, i pp., 1933)
-------, The Relation of Local Highway Administration to New
Trends in County Government, (Reprinted from Better Roads, 4 p p ,,
Jan. 1937)
---------- — — , "Obstacles to the Improvement of County Government",
Bulletin of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Vol XXX, No. 8 , p. 32.
• Stone, H. A,, Price, D. K., Stone, Kathryn, City Manager Government in
Lynchburg, Virginia, (Chicago: Public Administration Service, Chicago,
I939 )
-------, City Manager Government in Dallas, (Chicago: Public
Administration Service, Chicago, 1939)
-------- -— „— } City Manager Government in Janesville,(Chicago: Public
Administration Service, Chicago, 1939)
-------- -— _— f City Manager Government in Fredericksburg, (Chicago:
Public Administration Sehvi'ce, Chicago, 19395
Virginia Code of 1936, (Prepared under the Editorial Supervision of A.
Hewson Michie and Chas. W. Sublett, Charlottesville; Michie, 1936)
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
B IB LIO G R A P H Y
Page 159
Walker, G. E., Executive Form of County Government for Albemarle County,
Reasons Why You Should Vote Against It, (Leaflet, ^ pp; 1933)
-r- — — — -- } Warning I Stop: Study: and Learn before Casting Your
Vote on May 2nd, 19537 (Pamphlet, 13 pp., 1935)
Wingfield, J. R., Letter to the Editor of the Charlottesville Daily
Progress, (Leaflet, 4 pp., 1933)
Documentary Material
United States: (United States Government Printing Office)
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Census Reports, 1930*
Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime
Reports, 1930-1939•
Virginia: (Division of Purchase and Printing)
Auditor of Public Accounts, Reports on the Comparative Cost of Local
Government, 1925-I939 .
---} Manual of Uniform System of Accounting, For Accounts of
Clerks of the Courts, 1937 ,
—
--, Model for Reports on Audits of the Accounts and Records
of the Counties of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Fiscal Year
Ended June 30, 1937.
•, Virginia Accounting Code System, Effective July 1, 193&,
1936.
.
—
------ f Annual Report to the Governor of Virginia for the
Fiscal Year from July 1, 1930 to June 30. 1931.
-------------- , Manual of Procedures for the Preparation of Records
For use by Sheriffs and City SergeantB of the Commonwealth of
Virginia, February, 1939*
--------- ; Manual of Uniform System of Accounting, For County
Accounts, 1935•
— — -— -— , Report on a Special Study of the Financial Transactions
of the Offices of the Sheriffs of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 193B.~
Citizen^ Committee on Consolidation and .Simplification in State and ■
Local Government, 1927.
Commission on Simplification and Economy of State and Local Government,
Report to the General Assembly of Virginia, Jan. 192^.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page
l6o
B IB LIO G R A P H Y
Commission on County Government, Report to the-General Assembly of
jVirginia, December, 1931 •
:, Report on Progress in County Government, County
Consolidation and' the Fee System in Virginia and Other States, House
Document No. 9> 193^•
-------------- - A further Report on Progress in County Government
and County Consolidation, 1936.
} Report to the Governor and General Assembly of Virginia,
Summary of Findings and Recommendations, (Mimeographed, h3 pp. January,
19^0.
Commission to Suggest Amendments to the Constitution of Virginia, Report
to the General Assembly, March, 1927*
Comptroller, Statement of. Receipts and Expenses of Pee Officers for the
Calendar Years Ended December 31. 1927-28, Biennial Report of the
Comptroller to the General Assembly, I93O .
State Fee Commission, Statement of Receipts and Expenses of Fee Officers
For the Calendar Years Ended December 31. 1931-1932, Biennial Report
to the General Assembly, 1933.
Compensation Board, Statement of Receipts and Expenses of Local Fee and
Salaried Officers for the Calendar Years Ended December 31. 1933-193^.
Biennial Report to the General Assembly, 1935•
—
} Statement of Receipts and Expenses of Local Fee and
Salaried Officers for the Calendar Years Ended December 31> 1936-1937.
Biennial Report to the General Assembly, 1937 •
-------------- ■ibid., For the Years Ended December $1, 1937-1938,
HouseDocument No. 2,- 1939.
Department of Health, Public Health in the State and Counties of Virginia,
Prepared by J. F. Kendrick, 1939.
f Annual Reports. 1935-1938.
Department of Public Welfare, Biennial Reports, 193^-1938.
-------- -- — }
—
Progress Reports. July, 1936 -July, 1938
, Public Welfare Statistics. Jan. 1939-April, 1939.
} The Disappearance of the County Almshouse in Virginia,
Prepared by Arthur James, 1926.
—
—
—
--
, Social Service Manual. (Mimeographed, Currently Revised)
. Manual of Procedure, (Mimeographed, 7^ pp. )
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page l 6 l
B IB LIO G R A P H Y
Department of Taxation, The Growing Movement to Equalize Real Estate
Assessments in Virginia, Reprinted from an Article by J, H. Russell
in the Virginia Municipal Review, April, 1959*
— --- --- -— f The Tax Code of Virginia, As Amended in 1938.
} State-Wide Real Estate Assessment Survey As of 1938,
Special Release Prepared for the County of Albemarle.
-------
Annual Reports, 1926-1938.
Division of the Budget, Directions for the Preparation of County Budget
Estimates, .1929.
New York Bureau of Municipal Research, County Government in Virginia, 1927
Secretary of the Commonwealth, Reports to the Governor and General
Assembly of Virginia. 1915-1938*
State Board of Education, Annual Reports of the Superintendent of Public
Instruction, Vol* XXI, No. 3; Sept. 1938.
[
State Commission on Conservation and Development, Geological Survey,
Outline of Mineral Resources of Virginia, Bulletin ^7, Educational
Series No. 3*
State Planning Board, Report, March 31; 1935*
Haden v. Hamm, l6l Va. 93^; 172 S. E. 891 .
Lipscomb v. Nuckols, l 6l Va. 936; 172 S. E. 883 .
j
M. W. Puller v. Board of Supervisors of Henrico County, Circuit Court
of the tenth Circuit, Vol. 32 Chancery Orders, p. 391.
j
Scott County Board of Supervisors v. Scott County School Board, 169 Va,
213.
County of Albemarle:
County of Albemarle, Reports on Annual Audits of Accounts and Records,
(Prepared by the State Auditor of Public Accounts or by a private
auditing firm in accordance with specifications prescribed by the
State Auditor, 1932-1939).
— — ------ } First Annual Report, For the Year Ended June 30;1937;
(Mimeographed, 27 pp., March, 1938)
— —
} Proposed Budgets,(Mimeographed, 193^-19^0.)
--------- , Election Abstracts, (On file in the County Clerk’s Office
typewritten, I915 -I939 ,)
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 162
B IB LIO G R A P H Y
Department of Preventive Medicine and Bacteriology, University of
Virginia, A Survey of the Joint Health Department with Reference to
the Distribution of Service Rendered to the City of Charlottesville
and the County of Albemarle, (Prepared under the direction of Dr.
George M. Lawson, mimeographed, 36 PP* 19^0)
District Home of Albemarle, Alleghany, Augusta, Bath, Rockbridge and
Charlottesville, Annual Report for the Fiscal Year Ended December
31> 1937. (Mimeographed, 1938)
Joint Health Department of Albemarle,County and the City of Charlottesville,
Annual Reports. 1937-1938.
-------- Monthly Statistical Reports, (1938).
County of Henrico:
Public Administration Service, Chicago, Program of Personnel Administration,
(Prepared under the direction of Joseph Pois, January, 1937*)
County of Henrico (In Cooperation with the Works Progress Administration),
Real Property Survey, (Mimeographed, 10 pp. July, 1938).
Periodical Articles
Barringer,' B, P., "A Brief History of Albemarle County," University of
Virginia Record, Extension Series, Vol. VII, No. 2, 1922.
Henderson, Archibald, "Thomas Walker and the Loyal Company", Proceedings
of the American Antiquarian Society, New Series Vol. 4l, April 15,
1931-October 21, 1931.
Day, Willard P., "The Management of a County", Public Management, Vol.
XVII, No, 10, October, 1938.
League of Virginia Counties, Reports> No. 1, August, 1937 to No. 16,
May 1939 .
National Municipal Review:
Carson, J. J., "The Year 1930 in the History of Virginia Counties", 20:
197-200 .
Egger, R. A., "The Manager Plan Appropriate for Counties," 18: 237 '-24 l.
Heinrich, Jeffries, "County Reorganization Stirs Old Dominion", 22: 445-^8.
Jones, H. P., "Unrest in County Government in Virginia," 21: 133-134.
Pate, J. E,, "Virginia Experience with New Forms of County Government",
24: 265-266 .
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Page 163
.
........................
-
I
■
|,.M—
„
— ■—
—
Larson, Cedric, "Six Years of Managership in Arlington County Virginia,"
2 6 : 531-538.
Reid, Hugh, "Arlington County Adopts the Manager Plan," 20: 127-131.
Spicer, G. V., "Albemarle County Virginia Adopts the Executive Plan,"
22: 331-336.
— .------ .— — — ; "The County Manager Plan Proves Itself," 23: 505-51^.
— —
— —
— —
, "Spotlight on the County Manager Plan," 25: 65I-565 .
Tucker, R. H., "Planning for Improved County Government in Virginia",
21: 505-510.
R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
m(
.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
0
Размер файла
12 177 Кб
Теги
sdewsdweddes
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа