D.C. Council Chairman-Elect John A. Wilson (D) won adoption yesterday of several of his proposals for restructuring the council, but failed to gain approval of his plan to assume personal control of the agenda at legislative sessions.

The council expanded the number of its committees from 10 to 13, permitting every member to head one, and reallocated some committee responsibilities, dividing the concerns of the present Housing and Economic Development Committee among three panels. The council also voted to meet once a month rather than twice and to adopt time limits on debate.

Wilson had said that the changes he proposed were designed to make the council more effective, productive and influential.

"I think we progressed quite a bit . . . . I think we did fine," he said last night after an all-day session of the council. The special administrative session is held every two years and its decisions are expected to be ratified by formal vote when the new council holds its first official session Wednesday.

In another of the changes adopted yesterday, the council voted to require that proposed legislation be accompanied by a detailed financial impact statement.

Of all the proposals, perhaps the farthest-reaching was the one that would have permitted Wilson to assume personal control of the agenda at legislative sessions.

It would have enhanced his bargaining power with the mayor by allowing him to single-handedly obstruct or expedite measures proposed by the executive branch.

Although he would have preferred that the proposal had been adopted, Wilson said, "I don't think {failure to win approval is} going to be a problem."

Under the new structure, Wilson said, his Committee of the Whole will be responsible for budget matters as well as the issues dealt with by the old Committee on Finance and Revenue.

Wilson had planned to put before the council a proposal to allocate the responsibilities of the Committee on Housing and Economic Development among three committees.

His plan would have created a new housing committee and a new banking committee. Economic Development would have been left with Charlene Drew Jarvis (D-Ward 4).

Jarvis is a two-time mayoral candidate and one of the most powerful members of the council. She has used her committee to exert influence over a wide variety of important issues, and some council members have been described as believing too much power and responsibility were centered in her panel.

As it turned out, a new committee on housing was created, to be chaired by Frank Smith Jr. (D-Ward 1). Jarvis said responsibility for labor matters, which also had been held by her committee, will now go to a committee headed by Harold Brazil, the newly elected Democrat from Ward 6.

Jarvis's restructured Economic Development Committee will retain responsibility for banking, and she said she would be assigned new concerns connected to economic development.

Other committees and their heads include Government Operations, Jim Nathanson (D-Ward 3); Human Resources, H.R. Crawford (D-Ward 7); Judiciary, Wilhelmina J. Rolark (D-Ward 8); Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, John Ray (D-At Large); Public Works, Harry Thomas Sr. (D-Ward 5); Education and Libraries, Hilda H.M. Mason (Statehood-At Large); Public Services, William Lightfoot (I-At Large).

Newly elected Linda Cropp (D-At Large) will head a new committee that will include dealings with Metro and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments; and the member to be elected from Ward 2 to replace Wilson will head a committee with responsibility for matters including efforts to achieve self-determination.

The restructuring proposals were intended to give the council a chance to keep a closer eye on the functioning of the government, Wilson said. "I want the council to do more oversight," he said. "With more committees you have the possibility of more oversight. Even changing the frequency of {council} meetings {from twice to once a month} allows more oversight," as well as more chances for residents to get involved, he said.

He said the financial impact statement would require detailed information about anticipated sources of revenue for proposals expected to cost more than $100,000. "It's one of the things I wanted to do for years," he said.