vision2020
Re: optional form of Co. govt.
Thank you, Steve. Your thoughtful and balance analyis of this topic is
useful. Lori Keenan
>DATE: 10/27/98
>TO: CITIZENS OF LATAH COUNTY
>FROM: STEPHEN C. COOKE
>RE: PROPOSAL RE. COMMISSIONER-MANAGER FORM OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT
>The ballot proposal on the optional forms of county government before the
>citizens of Latah County is a choice between the status quo (the
>Commissioners + six "row officer") and the (Commissioners + manager w/
>appointed row officers) form of county government. The voter must choose
>one or the other.
>Under the current "Commissioners plus six" system of county government,
>three elected county commissioners (Tom Spangler, Harry DeWitt, and Loreca
>Stauber) are responsible for the general governance of the county including
>policy and administrative processes. The six other elected officials
>(sheriff, prosecuting attorney, coroner, assessor, clerk, and treasurer or
>"row officers") are responsible for the administration of their respective
>departments and carry out the duties prescribed by law.
>Eight of the nine members of the Latah County Optional Forms of Government
>Study Commission are recommending the Commissioner-manager form government.
>The majority of the Study Commission has proposed that the three elected
>commissioners appoint a county manager. The Commissioners would take care
>of policy matters and the manager would handle the administrative duties
>and appoint the Clerks of the Commission and Court, the Treasurer-Assessor,
>Sheriff, Coroner, and Civil Attorney. The Prosecuting Attorney would still
>be an elected office.
>The majority of the Study Commission believes these changes are needed for
>the following reasons. First, the clear lines of authority of the
>Commissioner-manager form of government would resolve conflicts within
>county government. Second, the Commissioners could focus on broad policy
>issues and leave administrative details to the manager. Finally, the
>appointed officials would be responsive to the citizens since the County
>Commissioners could fire them without waiting for an election.
>. I would suggest the following criteria when thinking about the Optional
>Forms of Government proposal. The principles of democracy that make sense
>to me include the following. First, majority rules should be balanced
>against the protection of minority rights. To promote majority rules, there
>should be a balance of elected and appointed officials as a means of
>combining political values with expert skills. The rights of the individual
>should be protected against undue government intrusion. The best way to
>protect minority right and those of the individual are to separate and
>provide checks and balances in the judicial, legislative and executive
>functions of government.
>The Commissioners + six row officers form of government co-mingles
>legislative with executive powers in the role of the commissioners. The six
>row officers provide some balance between the executive and legislative
>functions however. The absence of a single person responsible for overall
>administration results in a common property problem. This is the key
>problem that the suggested Commissioner-manager form of government is
>trying to address.
>There are a number of compounding effects from recent events and state
>requirements. The recent problems in the county sheriff's office suggest a
>need for a way to provide for over all direction of county government.
>Also, the recall effort for Commissioners who tried to raise Commissioner's
>salaries suggests that the voters do not what the Commissioners to be full
>time administrators. The State's Open Meetings law prohibits any two of the
>Commissioners from talking to each other since it would constitute a
>majority (supermajority of the members). Finally, the Term limits law
>require a turnover in professional staff that would leave the county
>looking for qualified personnel at the highest and most technically trained
>levels of county government.
>The proposed Commission-manager form of government would reduce the number
>of elected officials at the county level from 9 to 4. It would increase
>majority rule, while reducing minority rights. With only three
>Commissioners, one party would always have a super-majority. The
>streamlined effect would make it possible to go in one direction much
>faster. How will minority rights be protected? The executive function would
>not be accountable to the electorate. Power for the legislative and
>executive would be answerable to two Commissioners, who have sufficient
>power to make all decisions.
>The Study Commission's proposal is good at promoting majority rule and poor
>at protecting minority right. It is my opinion, the Achilles heel of the
>Study Commission's proposal is that it keeps the number of county
>commissioners at three. More Commissioners are needed to reflect the
>diversity of opinion of the community and thereby protect minority rights.
>With the additional two or five commissioner, individual members would have
>the added advantage of being able to discuss county business with each
>other and not violate the Open Meeting law. If the current system is an
>extreme of keeping too many officials elected and to few appointed (9
>elected, 0 appointed) then the opposite can be said of the Study
>Commissions' proposal (4 elected, 7 appointed). I would suggest more nearly
>a balance of elected and appointed officials, i.e., 6-9 elected and 6-7
>elected. If the manager were changed to an elected executive then the
>division of power between the executive and legislative would be complete
>My reading of American history suggests that you can trust a well informed
>electorate to make the right decisions. A democracy works because we are
>smarter as a group than we are as individuals. Until we have a proposal the
>takes advantage of the strength in numbers in decision making by expanding
>the number of County Commissioners to five or seven, I would recommend that
>we stay with the current Commissioners plus six form of county government
>in Latah County.
>
>
>
Lori Keenan, Director
Latah County Library District
110 S. Jefferson Street
Moscow, ID 83843
tel: (208)882-3923
fax: (208) 882-5098
e-mail: lkeenan@norby.latah.lib.id.us
Back to TOC