PAGE 8 - INTER-COUNTY LEADER - NEWS SECTION - A - MARCH 21, 2012
COMMUNITY
VIEWPOINTS
SEND YOUR VIEWS AND FEEDBACK TO: INTER-COUNTY LEADER, BOX 490, FREDERIC, WI 54837 OR E-MAIL the-leader@centurytel.net
The next logical step?
• Joe Heller •
It’s good to see the issue of county board size coming before Polk County voters in the April 3 election - and that the results will be binding. Hopefully the decision is being made by an informed public. This isn’t a complex or even substantial proposal, lowering the size from 23 to 15 supervisors, but there are certainly arguments - strong positions on both sides - which may have the heads of some voters spinning. It appears that county board size is somewhat nebulous. How else can Burnett County, with a population one-third the size of Polk County, have essentially the same number of supervisors? (21 for Burnett, 23 for Polk). Some insist democracy is better served with more representatives - others claim is creates more expense and wheel-spinning. And some ask, “what about representation?” Aren’t constituents better served when they know their supervisor personally or feel their spokesperson is a part of their “local community?” Is that important? How many contacts - outside of the high-profile, controversial issues that pop up once or twice a year - does each supervisor get from constituents each month? And how many contacts come from the same local government zealot? We love tradition, and there’s an argument that the size of county boards is just that, harkening back to the day when a constituent didn’t want to make a long-distant phone call or take a full morning to travel to visit with his or her supervisor and view all the maps of the latest county project, not just the one that got in the local newspaper. Obviously technology has drastically changed how government representatives are able to interact with their constituents - although it seems some voters still take umbrage with the mere mention of Internet and e-mail or feel they need that faceto-face interaction without the Webcam. If the issue is cost savings, there are valid arguments that members of a smaller board would need to spend more time at the job. But the argument citing issues that come before the county board are so complex that they require long periods of study, is frail. The fact that Polk supervisors ranked gopher bounties the lowest on a list of priority items is reassuring but the knowledge that it took a new administrator to realize the county had been paying bounties long after legislation had repealed their obligation to do so, is telling. Simply put, good administrators increase efficiency and, in bringing the critical information before committees, make a huge difference in how deep supervisors need to delve to properly study those matters. Perhaps the referendum proposal itself is too weak. In St. Croix County voters decided by a 3-to-1 margin to lower their county board size from 31 members to 19 members. Those 19 members will represent 80,000 voters. Polk’s current 23-member board represents less than half that number of constituents. The jury may still be out on that county’s experiment - but will their county government collapse or voters feel slighted under the new configuration? Unlikely. If so, those voters can follow suit of at least one county in Wisconsin that reduced its size and then turned around and went back to their old system. A gold star for their bravery, perhaps, in making both changes. Voters want quality and not just quantity, in their representation. Someone who doesn’t necessarily parallel their lifestyle or vocation but rather someone who has no agenda, political or otherwise, who can lend an open mind, intelligence and fiscal responsibility in making decisions on behalf of his/her constituents and the Views expressed on these pages do not necessarily reflect the views of management or board members. county as a whole. Putting this issue to a referendum vote, unfortunately, didn’t come at the bequest of the county board itself, but rather from a single, former supervisor. As a rule, here and across the state, incumbent supervisors are not lining up to sign a • Where to write • petition to reduce the size of the board they serve on - and that fact alone, perhaps President Barack Obama Rep. Erik Severson Sen. Robert Jauch unfairly, has to tint the arguments made by incumbent supervisors to keep their 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (28th District) (25th District) present board intact - even though they have made strong points in their letters Washington, D.C. 20500 Room 312 North Room 415 South, State Capitol and the forum presented by the Leader last week. www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ State Capitol P.O. Box 7882, Madison, WI Our local county boards have made great strides - and some bold ones - in imMadison, WI 53708 53707 proving efficiency and in “working smarter, not harder,” in making good decisions Gov. Scott Walker 608-267-2365 • 888-529-0028 Sen.Jauch@legis.state.wi.us Wisconsin State Capitol FAX: 608-282-3628 for the county. Madison, WI 53707 rep.Severson@legis.state.wi.us Sen. Sheila Harsdorf Will voters follow suit by approving a board reduction? transition@wisconsin.gov (10th District) It stands right now as the most interesting issue of our local spring election. Rep. Roger RIvard State Capitol, P.O. Box 7882 Congressman Sean Duffy (7th District) 1208 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 202-225-3365
(75th District) State Capitol Room 307 North P.O. Box 8952, Madison, WI 608-266-2519 • 888-534-0075 rep.rivard@legis.wi.gov
U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl 330 Hart Senate Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20510 715-832-8492 senator_kohl@kohl.senate.gov
U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson 2 Russell Courtyard Washington, D.C. 20510 202-224-5323
• Web poll results •
Madison, WI 53707 608-266-7745 • 715-232-1390 Toll-free - 800-862-1092 sen.harsdorf@legis.state.wi.us
Rep. Nick Milroy (73rd District) Room 8 North, State Capitol P.O. Box 8953, Madison 53708 rep.milroy@legis.state.wi.us
Last week’s question
To take part in our poll, go to theleader.net and scroll down to the lower left part of the screen • See front page for this week’s question
T H E
Editorials by Gary King
• Letters •
Path of open communication
The state of Wisconsin recognizes the importance of having a public informed about governmental affairs and that a representative government of the American type is dependent upon an informed electorate. It is declared to be the policy of the state that the public is entitled to the fullest and most complete information regarding the affairs of government as is compatible with the conduct of governmental business. Information must be accessible so citizens, as responsible members of a democratic community, may be aware of, understand, respond to and influence the development and implementation of policies, programs, services and initiatives. The government's obligation to reach out and communicate with citizens is concomitant with the right of citizens to address and be heard by their government. In a democracy, listening to the public, re-
I N T E R - C O U N T Y
searching, evaluating and addressing the needs of citizens is critical to the work of government. The government must learn as much as possible about public needs and expectations in order to respond to them effectively. I want to commend the Luck Village Board for the way they conducted the March 14 board meeting. They were receptive and open to all the comments made by the public and during their business portion of the meeting, there was open discussion amongst the board members in relation to what action they needed to take in regards to the proposed ATV park. The dialogue between citizens and their government must be continuous, open, inclusive, relevant, clear, secure and reliable. Communication is a two-way process, and I want to encourage all to continue down this path of open communication. Rebecca Rowe Luck
L E A D E R
I S
A