The Emporia Gazette

February 14, 2012

• Headlines
• Sports
• Forums
• Weather
• Classifieds

• Help
• Log in
• Home

• E-mail story
• Post a comment
• iPod friendly version

THERE IS NO DOUBT that — in Lyon County — much of the interest is next week’s election centers on the two ballot questions on county governance. The Gazette has received more letters on those questions than on all of the local and state races combined.

Question No. 1 is whether the Lyon County Commission should be expanded from three members to five.

Question No. 2 asks whether Lyon County should hire a professional administrator to handle the day-to-day operations of the county.

These are separate questions. A “Yes” vote on one does not require a “Yes” vote on the other. Come Nov. 8, the county could be looking forward to a larger commission with a county administrator, a larger commission without an administrator, a three-person commission with an administrator — or business as usual.

Supporters of the questions say that expanding the commission and hiring an administrator will cost the county money but, in the long run, will save money by increasing the efficiency of county administration.

Opponents of the proposal say that the eventual savings are not likely to equal the costs of the changes. Other objections raised are that the proposals are structured in such a way that if the changes in county government proved to be a burden rather than a blessing, undoing them would be difficult. Also, some opponents see the proposals as an urban power grab engineered by the Emporia Area Chamber of Commerce to water down rural residents’ influence in county government.

Both supporters and opponents are passionate about these issues. In the middle ground are a great many people who are still trying to make up their minds.

The Gazette’s positions on the questions are these:

The county commission should be expanded as a matter of simple mathematics. Two years ago, a fight over zoning in the commission brought to light a state law that says that to approve a zoning change opposed by 20 percent of the neighboring landowners, a county commission must muster a majority of at least 75 percent of its members. With a three-person commission, there is nothing approaching a 75 percent majority available. If two members of the commission favor a zoning change, they represent 66 percent of the commission. That gives one commissioner veto power over the majority.

In a five-member commission, one vote is only 20 percent of the total. Two commissioners would be needed to derail a disputed zoning issue.

The county administrator proposal is not as easy a call. The position of county administrator is often compared to that of city manager, but there are important differences. City managers have authority over all city departments. County administrators have little authority over elected officials who run county departments. That does limit the effect an administrator can have on county spending and operations.

That said, what an administrator can do is provide continuity in county government — continuity that is lost as elected officials come and go. Over the years, zoning policy in Lyon County has been interpreted and reinterpreted by succeeding generations of commissioners. Commitment to county planning has often lasted no longer than one commissioner’s term of office. The result has been unfairness and confusion.

Hiring a county administrator is not likely to result in the discovery of millions of extra dollars for county services, but it is likely to help the county take a rational and consistent approach to growth and development — something that is as important to owners of agricultural land as it is to property developers.

The Gazette suggests a “Yes” vote on each of the questions.

The Editorial Board