Commenters on another post have begun an interesting discussion. Kootenai County, Idaho, has an elected three-person Board of County Commissioners. Should their number be expanded? Should they be replaced by an appointed and hired County Administrator? Should there be both an elected Board and an Administrator? What should Kootenai County residents consider in deciding what form of county administration will work best for Kootenai County in 2010 and beyond? I’ve brought forward most of the comments from the other post.
John, you know I appreciate your point of view and comments. What are your thoughts regarding the possibility and/or necessity of the county hiring an administrator?
Regarding Dan English, I simply cannot understand why Dan refuses to permit an officer or officers of the court to review absentee ballots and absentee envelopes.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — May 6, 2010 @ 12:58 pm |Edit This
Susie, I’ve always been a proponent of hiring a county administrator. It’s not because the Commissioners aren’t doing a good job, it’s more to maintain continuity over time as the BOCC changes. If you look back at the 2000s, there was a lot of turnover in the Commissioners’ office. When you have a constant learning curve with new Commissioners, you lose an edge of efficiency, and it is very tough on staff.
Too, it removes the partisanship from the management of the County, the D vs. R thing can be detrimental to the interest of best serving us.
Lastly, it would free up the Commissioners to spend their time on long-range planning, something that is tough to do when you’re up to your neck in alligators.
Although no one has asked me, to help pay for the administrator, I would favor five part-time Commissioners, four of whom would be chosen by the electorate of each of the four highway districts and one that is elected county-wide. I think that system would best insure the interests of all resident, especially those of us who live in the southeast part of the County. A Commissioner representative from the Eastside Highway District, for example, would I believe better know the challenges we face and what we need to move ahead.
Just my two cents worth.
Comment by JohnA — May 6, 2010 @ 5:08 pm |Edit This
John, thanks for the response. I agree with the thought of a professional administrator and five part-time commissioners. It certainly makes sense to elect one from each of the highway districts for the best representation.
I would like to see others contribute their opinions on this topic.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — May 6, 2010 @ 5:59 pm |Edit This
Too, it removes the partisanship from the management of the County, the D vs. R thing can be detrimental to the interest of best serving us.
Not that there’s been any D interest recently.
Comment by Dan — May 6, 2010 @ 8:17 pm |Edit This
Susie, I know it’s not the topic of this thread, but County governance is really an important issue. Since I worked there 19 years ago, the county has grown to the point where a different structure might benefit its residents.
Again, I am not saying the current officials are in any way deficient in their management of the county. I’m just suggesting that a discussion on this issue may be topical, with the elections of several of them coming up.
Maybe if we get more discussion on this topic, one that might actually shape the future of our great county, we can get a ground swell of support for a change.
Comment by JohnA — May 6, 2010 @ 8:18 pm |Edit This
Dan: Not that there’s been any D interest recently.
You’re right, Dan. But, it hasn’t always been that way. It just seems like it with the dismal effort put forth in recent elections by the Dems.
Although I’ve said the county elections shouldn’t be partisan, since that’s our setup we have to live with it. So, the best way to get decent discourse on issues of local issues is for both sides to engage in the process, both in May and November.
Maybe we’ll get there soon.
Comment by JohnA — May 6, 2010 @ 8:24 pm |Edit This
Ken Thompson is a professional government administrator who was the Administrator for the City of Coeur d’Alene. I would like to know his thoughts on this issue. I would also like to know Tom Taggart’s thoughts on this issue.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — May 6, 2010 @ 10:06 pm |Edit This
I do not like the idea of a government administrator. The rural county will likely be governed (administrated) by a city thinking person.
I would like to see 5 commissioners and have no gerrymandering to lessen the voice of the rural area. Having two commissioners being elected out of office at the same time is horrible. The last time this happen the exiting commissioners took retribution on the rural area in their exiting decisions.
Comment by citizen — May 7, 2010 @ 7:27 am |Edit This
I would dearly like to see term limits for Commissioners, Mayors and City Council members. Certainly our biggeat problem lies with people who just don’t bother to vote. While I believe that there is absolutely no excuse for not voting (okay, if you’re in a coma). I have heard, ad nauseum, “what difference does it make, nothing changes here, why bother”. Term limits would certainly cut down on the arrogant entitlement we see now. And here is a concept, it might actually put the’public’ back in public servant.
Comment by rochereau — May 7, 2010 @ 7:57 am |Edit This
Citizen, I prefer a thinking city person. We don’t have too many you know, at least that think like me
Comment by Gary Ingram — May 7, 2010 @ 8:14 am |Edit This
Comment by Bill — May 7, 2010 @ 9:22 am
We have had some thinking city people as commissioners in the past and they think like city people. The rural people got scr##ed.
Comment by citizen — May 7, 2010 @ 10:59 am
citizen,
Is it possible, then, to even have one person as a County Administrator who would not dissatisfy either the “city” or “rural” people? If in Kootenai County there is a difference between “city” and “rural” people, how do we reconcile that difference in county government?
Comment by Bill — May 7, 2010 @ 1:06 pm
It is a problem. The city folk can have a voting role in governing the rural areas, but the rural areas have no voice in city affairs.
Many forces in the city would just as soon turn our rural corridors into shopping centers thus ending rural life and rural zoning. Our commissioners, past and present, have shown disinterest in the will of the rural community with many zoning decisions.
I do not expect most of you on Open CDA to follow the rural situation as it will not affect you until the county side is gone. I find it interesting that rural people follow city issues far more than the reverse, and yet city residents often control our fates through votes or indifference.
Comment by citizen — May 7, 2010 @ 7:55 pm