Change is a hard sell

It wasn't the loud applause commissioners might have hoped for when the curtain closed on their formal announcement.

More like a shower of rotten tomatoes and the trumpeting of insults and ballot-box threats.

At issue is last week's 2-1 vote by Kootenai County commissioners to let voters decide this November if they want a significantly altered form of county government. Judging by the reaction of outrage by Press readers, the commissioners could hardly have conjured up a more poorly planned proposal.

We disagree. We think the proposal - parts of it, anyway - make a lot of sense and would absolutely streamline government. But we would agree that much more information must be clearly communicated before voters will be able to separate their vocal chords from their hot collars.

Jai Nelson was in the minority of the 2-1 vote but she made it clear that she has little trouble with the proposal to hire a county administrator. She disagrees with fellow commissioners Todd Tondee and Dan Green that a more controversial component of the plan - empowering the administrator or manager to appoint several positions that now are elected by voters - should be lumped into the same ballot measure. She believes combining them dooms both, and so far, the people we've talked to vehemently agree.

For several years, this newspaper has supported the idea that if it can be done without increasing the overall budget, the county would be well-served by hiring a competent manager. One way to do that would be to lower the commissioners' pay, perhaps even making them part-time positions. There has not been enough open discussion of this key point. If the commissioners do have a detailed plan about savings to taxpayers, they haven't adequately enunciated it.

The idea of allowing the manager to hire a coroner, a treasurer, an assessor and a county clerk is such a dramatic departure from status quo that it has shaken up voters who already were frustrated because they felt their voices weren't being heard. Anybody remember something about a possible recall election here recently?

The very suggestion of taking away a voting right that had been an entitlement for years jeopardizes the whole ballot measure. And that's a pity because from a strictly analytical perspective, people should be able to rationally discuss the pros and cons of bipartisan elections for jobs that have little place in a political world. Why should anybody wanting to do one of those four jobs have to claim a political party and spend valuable time and money campaigning? How relevant is it that the coroner is a Republican or a Democrat?

With less than three months to election day, the need is great for better communication. We'll provide space for the commissioners to explain exactly what passage of the ballot measure would accomplish, what impact it would have on taxpayers, and why these changes would be beneficial to all county residents. Then perhaps we can have an election that is ruled by reason.