You wrote that “bureaucracies want to expand. It’s their life blood.” Not really an argument at all, is it?

You wrote that “it would make the county that much bigger and that much more important.” How much more important? Falls Church’s population makes up just 0.14% of Virginia. Arlington’s population would increase by just 5.5% if it conglomerated Falls Church, and its statewide representation would be unlikely to change in any meaningful way.

You wrote that Falls Church is “a very desirable community.” This is all relative; a person living off Foxhall Road might not find Falls Church “desirable” in the least. And of course we’re talking not about where people choose to live in this discussion, which is what this “desirable” adjective usually describes. We’re talking about whether swallowing the entire municipality makes sense.

You wrote “we’re already linked with Arlington: we use their courts… we use their fire and law enforcement services… we use their transportation service to run GEORGE bus; etc.” None of which are reasons why Arlington should seek to incorporate Falls Church. In fact, these are good reasons why Arlington should seek to preserve the status quo, as I’d be surprised if the County were not compensated by Falls Church for these services.

Your list actually has but one element: water. But Arlington gets its water from the same place Falls Church does – the Washington Aqueduct. So why would Arlington covet Falls Church’s water? Unless there’s a controversy about shares coming from the aqueduct (a la the Colorado River), this factor – Falls Church’s big attraction – is immaterial to Arlington.

The more specific question is: how would such a combination benefit Arlington’s voters?

GEORGE SOUTHERN RESPONDS: I would refer the writer to the earlier comment by John Bennett (above) which references strong support for this concept from Paul Ferguson, currently the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Arlington County and the City of Falls Church, and who was a member of the Arlington County Board for 11 years, during which he was Chairman of the Board several times, most recently in 2007.

And please — these dialogues are so much more meaningful when people identify themselves!

Comments on this article are now closed.

POSTSCRIPT: Readers have let me know I was wrong to close the comments. In my defense, even a town meeting has time limits. But, due to popular demand, comments have been reopened!

It would also assist us in having a better quality school system that would offer a wider diversity of classes and activities for the students who need more competition and choice in the arts, sports, languages and sciences.

I know everyone thinks I’m biased and I am. I love living here. I love our scale, but the reality is we are inefficient, expensive to run, and politically ineffective. Criticise me if you must. I can take it. I would be happy to discuss with anyone.

We have tremendous assets (I suppose I’d better say “including without limitation”): a unique and attractive location, fifty acres of land at the WFC Metro, our water system, and a culture of devotion to education that continues to support world class schools. Our greatest asset may be the people who continue to be attracted to what this City has to offer, and while the challenges are significant, my money is on our ability to overcome them.

We would have likely stayed in Arlington if we had been able to find the kind of condo we were seeking in the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor, but, at least during the time we were looking, we could not. Having made the move to Falls Church, we greatly appreciate its small-town character in terms of ability to walk to things we need, access to mass transit, etc. It’s a good place for an active retiree to live.

We can appreciate that the smaller schools of Falls Church are a positive for many people. Because we are now empty-nesters, this is not as important to us as it once was, though we can appreciate the role of good schools in keeping property values strong.

I think it’s an interesting issue worthy of more discussion and analysis.

(EDITOR’S RESPONSE: Our understanding is that our City Manager has recently relocated inside the City, in conformity with his job requirement.)

I respect George’s well thought out arguments, but I knew what I got when I moved here and I was willing to pay for it. I still am. If it takes higher taxes, then that’s what it takes – but there had better be a well thought out reasoning behind it. No one wants to pay more in tax, but given the choice of joining Arlington or Fairfax, or staying here with our independence, I’d bet people will continue pay to stay.