OFGSC: fact or opinion

As study commissioners refine their recommendation to change the Kootenai County government, some members question whether their decision is based on fact or emotion.

Since convening in May, the Optional Forms of Government Study Commission have gathered information on the structure and operations of the Kootenai County regime to see if it best serves constituents.

On Wednesday, the nine-member commission tentatively approved a summary of what they recommend changing and keeping. The group anticipates publishing the document online next week. Recommendations include:

• Increasing the number of county commissioners from three to five, narrowly passed by OFGSC members in a 5-4 vote on Nov. 3
• Hiring a commission manager, approved in the same 5-4 vote
• Continue electing the assessor, clerk, coroner, prosecuting attorney, sheriff and treasurer

All recommendations are allowed under Idaho Code 31-5001.

During the last OFGSC meeting on Nov. 17, the commission members listed their perceived strengths and weaknesses of the current government and proposed alternatives. Documentation of the OFGSC comments is available online at kcgov.us/970/Optional-Forms-of-Government-Study-Commi.

Since the recommendation to change passed by a slim majority vote, commissioner Dave Levine felt that many advantages and disadvantages of the two forms were contradictory. Specifically, items like cost, accountability and access to elected officials were considered both strengths and weaknesses.

Instead of gathering a consensus on the pros and cons, Levine suggested creating a majority and minority narrative for the final report. Commissioner Phil Ward and numerous study participants objected to Levine's idea, contending the distinction could further divide the group.

"I don't want us to be pitting one against the other," Ward said.

After reviewing the pro-con list from Nov. 17, commissioner Kurt Andersen said he found a "mixture of facts, opinions and ambiguous claims." Without an absolute understanding of "what will happen," Andersen considered certain statements "an opinion."

"If we write a report that has your opinions and my opinions, that is not very good guidance," Andersen said. "It's not that I'm critiquing your opinions ... But I think to the extent that we can bring evidence to bear, I think it strengthens the report."

Inserting opinion would "lend itself to a dangerous factor," commission vice-chair Brian Cleary said. Ideally, Cleary felt the final report should contain an explanatory narrative with substantiating evidence.

Commissioner Kristen Wing agreed with Cleary, adding that the opposing groups would likely be "very active in trying to put down" the other side. Throughout the study, Wing said she has found studies with "concrete things that don't bring in emotion."

"Since we all have our biases and filters ... I think we have to be honest about both," she said.

To best serve residents, who will "ultimately have to vote" on the recommendation, Levine suggested that the commission still produce a more in-depth analysis in the final report.

"The most helpful thing would be to provide some context of how we came to these different conclusions," he said. "We can do it in a way that provides valuable feedback to the public."

Commission members agreed to review their comments and prepare "draft narratives" ahead of next week's meeting.

Andersen divided those narratives based on:

• Facts

• Items that need substantiating

• Things that would not change between the current and alternative forms

• Comments that are ambiguous or still unknown

A public hearing on the OFGSC is tentatively set for Jan. 19. OFGSC members will not meet Dec. 22 and Dec. 29 for the holidays.

The study group's final report will go to commissioners for approval. If the document recommends changes, county voters decide its fate during the May 2022 general election.