University of Virginia Library

Report Traces Methods Of
State Administrative Change

One-shot changes, special commissions,
continuing reorganization programs
periodically built into the administrative
structure and, now, a permanent commission
— all are ways Virginia has brought
about administrative reorganization in
state government.

These methods and their effectiveness
are traced by Weldon Cooper director of
the University's Institute of Government,
in the March 15 issue of the University
News Letter.

The significant results of all four
methods amount to saying, "There is not
one way to achieve reorganization," notes
Mr. Cooper.

Two of the most important single-shot
changes, he says, are the Executive Budget Act
of 1918, which made the governor the State's
chief budget officer and set the budget pattern
still existing, and the Personnel Act of 1942
which made the governor chief personnel
officer.

Special Commission

Among the special commissions aimed at
reorganization, the University political scientist
cites the 1927 Committee on Consolidation and
Simplification in State and Local Governments.
With this commission's employment of the New
York Bureau of Municipal Research to prepare
a comprehensive report on State government
organization and management came recognition
that "a plan of organization could not be
prepared by the appointment of a commission,
the conduct of public hearings and the drafting
of a report," Mr. Cooper observes.

With its "extremely broad view of 'organization
and management,' " the report was
significant because its preparation indicated
"that reorganization was no longer a matter
solely for lay consideration" and "because its
approach . . . indicated that reorganization was
something more than the shuffling of boxes on
an organization chart," he says.

In the early years, the attitude seemed to be
that reorganization was "a one-time job which,
when effected, could be retained for a
considerable time by a vigilant governor and
General Assembly pledged to upholding the
banner of efficiency and economy," says Mr.
Cooper.

In 1938, however, the governor assisted
continuous reorganization to the budget division
which brought several important organization
and methods studies.

Discontinuing that arrangement, Governor
William Tuck appointed a "Chief of Staff for
Reorganization" in his office to follow up the
legislature's reorganization proposals and make
studies for the governor.

Separation of reorganization from the
budget office continued with Governor John
Battle's appointment of an executive assistant
for reorganization in his office. This ended
when the assistant left the State service.

A new approach came in 1958 with the
establishment, by statute, of the Commission
for Economy in Governmental Expenditures.
Restricted to legislature members, the commission's
reports have lacked the scope of earlier
special commission reports. However, the
creation of the Office of Administration in the
Governor's Office in 1966 and the Department
of Purchases and Supply in 1958 illustrates the
importance of the commission's work, Mr.
Cooper observes.

Infrequent Intervals

Summing up the various methods of
reorganization, Mr. Cooper notes that the
special commission seems to have "a definite
place . . . at infrequent intervals."

And he suggests "an outside lay review, with
technical assistance, of the State's organizational
structure every 20 years."

While the real effectiveness of the Commission
for Economy in Governmental Expenditures
cannot be judged yet, Mr. Cooper suggests
that it could eliminate the need for special
commissions.

But he finds this unlikely since it has no lay
representation. And he says, ". . . the small
appropriations which have been made to
support its work since 1958 seem to indicate, at
least up to 1970, a gubernatorial and legislative
preference for limited studies of a specific
nature."

Budgeting Methods

Mr. Cooper also notes that while in Virginia
practice reorganization has been in the
Governor's Office, as a separate unit or as a part
of the budget division, "Separation of organization
and methods from budgeting tends to
ignore the facts of administrative life. It is not
the reorganizer who sits in the middle of the
administrative stream; it is the budget director.
Sooner or later, in one form or another, all of
the major and many of the minor decisions are
made by or through the budget office," Mr.
Cooper observes.