Everyone has a story. For far too long, I’ve let my story be told by other people. Now is the time for me to set the record straight.
I was elected to serve on the County Board in 2010. There were challenges, even then. Department heads spent money that wasn’t budgeted – and asked for more.
The Board also regularly “adjusted” the previous Chairman’s responsibilities. These choices were reactive, serving as slaps on the wrist not fundamental reform.
After four years improving our public safety system, I focused on reforming county government. Board members often complained about “last minute” votes where we also wouldn’t get information until hours before a meeting. The Open Meetings Act requires that the public has 48 hour notice before a board votes on something, without requiring information be provided in advance.
I thought the Board should have enough time to make good decisions. I also believed the Board should have all the information before voting. Lastly, county government needed to be transparent.
The Board used the Rules of Order and Procedure to manage its oversight and sometimes, the Chairman’s responsibilities. I believed relying on the Rules wasn’t transparent and could cause confusion for new board members, a new chairman, or a new county administrator.
2016 introduced a perfect storm of all three. A lame duck administration made reform possible. The prospect of a new administrator and new caucus leadership made it essential.
Reforming county government was my top priority.
After a year of research and discussion with my colleagues, other county officials, and former board members, I was ready. Many of us had served for years. We knew how challenging county government was. We also knew how hard it would be to reform.
That was when I discovered I would have an opponent in the fall election. If you’ve never run for office before, political campaigns are all-consuming and overwhelmingly draining. It would be next to impossible to campaign and write reforms at the same time.
Thankfully, I wasn’t alone. Eli Nicolosi agreed that our county government needed reform. He offered to help me work on the project. By August, there was a draft.
The first draft was not well received. Both candidates for Chairman opposed it. Some accused me of trying to take power away from the Chairman and give it to the Board.
After several meetings with Board members, I got to work on rewriting the reforms. It’s easier to fix something than it is to start from scratch. In a month, I presented reforms that would solve the three challenges of time, information, and transparency.
They required Committees take two weeks to review all the information before sending it to the full Board. They required that departments provide regular performance dashboards so everyone knew how the department was performing. The Board would postpone voting on additional funding requests for any department until the department had provided the information.
They recommended appointments and department head personnel be reviewed by the relevant standing committee. I recommended eliminating the “veto” because it had never been used.
The idea was to create a transparent process that was less subject to changing personalities or shifting political alliances.
My reforms weren’t criticized because they were bad. They were criticized because some board members wanted to give the new Chairman a chance.
Here we sit, two years, two administrators, and multiple legal actions later. I’m writing now because the solutions being suggested aren’t solutions. A County Executive means another elected official with the power to sue and stop budget cuts. As Dr. Thurmeier discussed with Next Rockford, its less preferable to a County Administrator when it comes to long-term planning.
I don’t support an appointed Chairman because our County is too big for a part-time job. And I don’t support the status quo.
I support reforms that give the Board more time and information to make better decisions. I support reforms that make county government transparent. They don’t need to be my reforms. They just need to be reforms.
I also believe the next Board should return the responsibilities of the Chairman while keeping unfiltered access to information. The Board should increase the threshold to change the responsibilities of the Chair to a ¾ vote of the Board.
It’s time to turn the page. We can have a better County government that’s both flexible and trustworthy. I’ll be supporting candidates with the right temperament and experience who are focused on doing just that.
