“Out of the Frying Pan, and into the Fire”
A Public Comment from Mark McKelvey
To the Governance Committee

To the Members of the Governance Committee,
If I were a teacher grading the Governance Committee’s final report, I would give high marks for the first part of its charge. The committee has carefully and thoroughly bolstered the argument for a County Administrator, furthering the discussion for Coos County to move in that direction. I applaud its recommendation to the Board of Commissioners (BOC) to “engage the general public, County department heads, and employees in a vigorous discussion about the different governance and administrative management choices” we have at our disposal.

This report reflects the suggested procedure for a change of governance by the Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) in its “County Home Rule Papers.” The AOC recommends a 16 step process. We are on step 6. Even though Coos County is not pursuing Home Rule, I think we are well-advised to follow that process in changing our governing structure. I commend the committee for its invaluable contribution therein.
However, as to the matter of the Board of Commissioners itself, the committee has failed to accurately answer a key question; that is:
What makes the three elected commissioner positions so demanding and so much different from the dozens of other important elected offices in Coos County that are part-time and uncompensated that the elected commissioner offices warrant the positions being full-time and with three full-time salaries?

The committee looks to local boards for appropriate models. But comparisons to other county boards invite a false analogy. These boards do not have the scope or scale of the BOC. In fact, if all the county’s city councils, port commissions, school, hospital, airport and community college boards were all lumped together under one body, it would still be three departments shy of the BOC’s purview.

A more appropriate analogy is found in the nineteen other General Law County Commissions in Oregon. Sixteen of them employ full-time commissioners. As an “agent of the state,” county government delivers vital services in public safety, public health, transportation, natural resources, land use, economic development, and other critical community needs like elections and tax collection. The impact of the BOC on each of the county’s 63,000 residents is fundamental, deep, and wide. No citizen is unaffected by the BOC and its decisions.
But the distinction of the BOC from other county boards is greater than that. Coos County’s governance system was no more designed for the Nineteenth Century, as the committee suggests, than the U.S. federal government was designed for the Eighteen Century. Each model has been modernized several times by amendment to meet the changing needs of a growing, industrialized society. Coos County was last modernized in 1973 when General Law Counties were granted “all powers over matters of county concern that it is possible for them to have under the Constitutions and laws of the United States and of the State of Oregon.”

No other board in Coos County has the authority, the responsibility, or the powers to act that the BOC does. It bears repeating: the BOC has the full power and authority of the U.S. Constitution and the State of Oregon. Indeed, as the committee notes in its report: “Oregon counties have a greater degree of local discretionary authority than counties in any other state,” according to a U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. This is the correct answer to the question above. The BOC is fundamentally different from any other county board. It is serious business. And it requires serious attention, the kind only full-time commissioners can provide.
Furthermore, the proposed structure (5PT w/admin) does not meet the goal of giving commissioners more time to deal with policy, politics, visioning, and goal-setting. While it does remove administrative responsibilities from the BOC’s plate, it also reduces the amount of time it has to work. At best, this is a push.

One might ask, is it reasonable to expect a volunteer part-timer to travel to Salem, Portland, Washington D.C, and elsewhere to lobby on Coos County’s behalf?

Indeed, the issue of improved representation becomes something of a red-herring when it is considered that five part-time commissioners will actually work less than three full time commissioners (100 hours as opposed to 120 hours, respectively.) It is easily argued that the “representation ratio” actually goes up, not down. While it might be better to have more representatives, it will make little difference if they are unavailable most of the time.

Finally, a change to five commissioners does not insulate the BOC from violations of public meeting law (PML). In fact, the very board Judge Gillespie found in violation of PML was a five member board, and it was precisely the commissioners’ ability to talk in pairs that led to the malfeasance. What’s more, it is erroneous to claim commissioners cannot talk to one another. Commissioners may discuss among themselves anything that “does not deliberate towards a decision.” They can set agendas or plan schedules – in an elevator, if they wish. The example of a PML violation in the committee’s report is actually in fact perfectly legal and appropriate.
(I would add that carving the County into wards is a divisive proposal which would inevitably pit one part of the County against another. We need to be fostering improved cooperation and greater County unity, not sub-dividing it.)

In sum, I agree with the committee that Coos County is a complex, complicated, multi-leveled, broad-based organization. This is a strong argument for adding a County Administrator. But as such, the County cannot be governed effectively by commissioners who afford it only part-time attention. I agree that our current governance has flaws and can be improved. But a five member part-time board is even more flawed, and frankly detrimental to our county. Bill Penhollow of the AOC has flatly stated that part-time commissioners are “less dedicated, less involved, less knowledgeable, less responsible, less accountable, and have less buy-in” than their full-time counterparts. He adds, “They do have more excuses.”

I would advise the committee heed the warning given by the AOC in the “County Home Rule Papers”:

It is a common perception that in these forms of county government, the job of the elective governing body is to make policy, and the job of the administrator or manager is to carry it out. While there is substantial truth in that perception, there is in fact no “bright line” between policy and administration. County managers and administrators participate in policy development by advising the governing body about policy options and making recommendations regarding specific county policies. Conversely, elected policy makers participate in county administration and management by oversight activities, handling citizen complaints, approving contracts and intergovernmental agreements, suggesting management changes, and above all in evaluating the performance of administrators and managers and in making decisions to retain or terminate their services.

I submit the chances of that “bright line” becoming further blurred only increase when the BOC is staffed by part-timers. When that occurs, representation of the people will be diminished.
Trading our current structure for the one recommended by the committee would be no better than “jumping out of the frying pan, and into the fire.” Let’s not substitute one sub-optimal structure for another. Let’s decide what is best for Coos County, and then figure out a way to make it happen.
Therefore, I would respectfully ask the committee re-think its recommendation of part-time commissioners.

McKelvey4Commissioner

The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the opinions of MGx.