County Government transition

[Kenneth Gallant <gallantk@uidaho.edu>]

Bob Hassoldt probably should run for the legislature, because he certainly
writes more clearly than the legislators who wrote Idaho Code 31-5006,
which says, and I quote, "The development of the plan [for transition to
the optional form of county government] shall initiate within thirty (30)
days after the optional form is approved by the electors and shall be
completed within six (6) months."

Now I read that to mean that the plan has to be complete within six months
of its initiation (seven months after the election), and Bob reads it as
six months after the election, and while I think I am right, his reading
is reasonable.

The folks who support reform don't say the transition provisions are
perfect--but that the long term benefits of the plan are worth the blips
of the transition.

By the way, I hope if Marilyn Howard and Shirley Ringo get to Boise from
the Moscow
School system, they will rap the
knuckles of whatever legislator wrote that sentence:  ". . .the plan shall
initiate . . ."--as though the plan initiated without any human
intervention whatsoever!

 Kenneth S. Gallant
Moscow, Idaho 83844-2322 USA
208-885-6541 (phone)
208-885-4628 (fax)
gallantk@uidaho.edu

On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Bob Hassoldt wrote:

> Ken, You don't have to respond to this but I do have some concerns about your reply to my original arquements against adopting the new form of county government.
> 
> 1.  I do not believe that the county will have the same success(?) That the city of Moscow has in retaining their city supervisor. Currently the city supervisor earns about $74,000/year. The county is not going to be able to match that salary level. I believe that $50-60K is about the maximum that the county will be able to pay. That level along with no moving assistance or housing allowance is not going to be sufficent to retain a manager for more than the previously stated 18-36 months.
> 
> 2.  Since we both agree that either system of government requires knowledgeable commissioners, the question then revolves around the authority of the commissioners and their control of the row officers. The problem I have with the manager form is that the row officers will be hired by the manager, "with the advice and consent of the commissioners". This system can easily lead to the cronyism that has taken place in the city of Moscow in the past.  This is not going to be the efficent government that proponents of change are advocating. I think that for clear lines of authority each commissioner could be assigned responsibility for certain department heads to report to. This would allow delegate the work load and responsibility to all three commissioners which should be the case now but isn't.
> 
> 3.  I want to thank you for pointing out my error in the time frame of adoption of the new form of government. As I read Idaho Code. 31-5006 however the development plan must be initiated within 30 days after the election and the entire process completed within 6 months of the election not the possible 7 months that you had stated. The problem that Latah county faces is that the current commissioners have not budgeted any money for the change.  A budget adjustment to cover the costs of a manager search, salary, ofice expenses, etc. is going to require a 30 day public notice. This is going to cut into the 6 months implementation time and that is assuming that the public goes along with the proposed budget change. The other problem is that two months into the process, theoretically two new commissioners could come on board with no knowledge of the work done to that point. (Hopefully that won't be the case but it could happen.)
> 
>    I appreciate all the work that you and the study committee has done on this project. Given the smal size of our county though I really believe that the current form of government will work if the populace will take the time to scrutinize commissioner candidates now and in the future.
> 
> Bob Hassoldt
> Kendrick
> hassoldt@moscow.com
>