LWV forum on optional form of govt

["Priscilla Salant" <psalant@moscow.com>]

Mike asked if someone on 2020 could report back to the listserv about the
committee's findings.  As a substitute, may I suggest the League of Women
Voter's forum on Oct. 28 (7:30 pm at the Community Center).  The optional
form of govt ballot issue will be discussed at the beginning of the forum,
followed by candidates who are running for local offices.   At least this
was the plan as of a week ago.  Can anyone from the LWV confirm this?

--Priscilla S.

----------
> From: curley@CYPHER.TURBONET.COM
> To: vision2020@moscow.com; Bert Cross <bcross@uidaho.edu>
> Subject: Re: Optional form of govt
> Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 7:38 AM
> 
> I have had the same thoughts about the number of commissioners 
> as expressed here.  However, I am considering  voting for the change 
> because I think that we can't very well push to have more 
> commissioners on the assumption that (a) we will thereafter obtain a 
> majority vote on the optional form of govt issue, and (b) that if we 
> do, having 3 commissioners will be a disaster.  And because I'm not 
> very happy with the current form.  Electing a sheriff and coroner 
> seems pretty crazy to me. 
> 
> While it may seem a bit chaotic or at least risky to change and see 
> what happens, I'm not confident that our collective expectations of 
> disaster and more egregious political infighting will prove accurate 
> either.  I am therefore, willing to "send a message" to the 
> commissioners changing our form of government with the hope and 
> expectation that they understand they can't duck responsibility by 
> pointing at some other elected official.  They either do the job as 
> the majority of us wants or we (a) vote them out or (b) increase 
> their number or (c) both.  I don't think we can build the bridge to 
> better government until we lay this foundation.
> 
> I too am guilty of not having participated in the process before the 
> report was issued.  The lack of public input causes me to wonder if 
> I were appointed to a committee if I would just want to make a report 
> after the first meeting, since once something is actually proposed 
> public input increases exponentially.  
> 
> And as long as I'm purging my soul today, I'll also confess to not 
> having read the full report.  Priscilla, if you're out there, this 
> sure looks like one of those issues about which the public could use 
> some education and information without having to ask Ken Gallant to 
> answer every question that's raised.  Maybe we could have several 
> people read the report and discuss the pros and cons--without 
> necessarily trying to "convince" anyone yes or no, but to provide a 
> balanced look at what the committee found was wrong with what we have 
> and how this might help.  Is this an issue we could or should 
> address??
> 
> Mike Curley
> 
> From:          "Bert 
> Cross" <bcross@uidaho.edu> To:            vision2020@moscow.com Date: 
>          Tue, 20 Oct 1998 10:10:45 +0000 Subject:       Optional form 
> of govt Priority:      normal
> 
> I've read the full report and listened to arguments pro and con and 
> have decided to vote against the optional form of county government.  
> The thing that bothers me most is still having only three 
> commissioners.  We have seen what havoc only two commissioners can 
> cause (look at Bonner County).  I would opt for at least five.  And 
> since their work load would be diminished, salaries should be reduced 
> to help pay the county administrator's salary.  We also might 
> consider making the commssion offices non-partisan.  The commission 
> would then be a policy-making body with the adminstrator carrying out 
> its policies.
> 
> The ironic thing in the current election is this:  If I vote for 
> assessor, county clerk, and county treasurer and then vote FOR the 
> optional form, I am then voting to rescind my three prior votes.  
> 
> I agree we need to fine-tune our county government and make it more 
> efficient and effective.  The county manager concept is generally a 
> good one.  More officers should be appointed rather than elected. But 
> we need to work out some of the bugs before we jump to this rather 
> drastic and sudden change.  
> 
> I also must plead guilty to failing in my own civic responsibility 
> when the study commission was seeking public input, as many of us 
> did.
> 
> Bert Cross
> 1448 Borah Ave.
> Moscow, ID 83843
> Phone: (208) 882-7660
> email: bcross@uidaho.edu
> 
> Mike Curley
> reply to: curley@turbonet.com
> 208-882-3536