About a "County Administrator"
More than two days of moving our household to Kalama has left me behind on all tasks, including still finishing up with the house we are leaving behind…
TDN reports that most commissioner candidates are in favor of hiring a county administrator. The arguments in opposition to a county administrator probably indicate a core difference between the two camps. One camp, apparently the incumbent camp, sees more government as the solution; the opposition camp sees the current government as failing in its obligations, consequently a change is required. That there are 9 contenders for two positions would seem to be ample evidence that something is not right.
We, the people, should resist the notion that a county administrator will solve problems. Since when does putting a non elected intermediary between the people and the bureaucrats solve a problem? Apparently the current commissioners are not able to manage the managers of the 35 or so departments, but they think that one CA will be able to do so?
I cannot come up with a good reason why we need a county administrator, but I can wonder about why the county commissioners want one. Here are some possible reasons:
The County Administrator (CA) will take pressure off the commissioners. The CA can be blamed when necessary for some problem or failure.
The current commissioners simply do not understand technology, so they are unable to make wise decisions.
Is this just an election ploy to shed guilt for the bad performance? After all, who can blame incumbents if the citizens do not provide them the tools to do the work?
It is quite clear that the concept of a county administrator is the same thinking that has crippled progress in this county. The basic problems are there because the continued growth of government is the problem. Adding one CA does nothing to address the problems, but it does add more bureaucracy and more cost. Vote wisely.