Cook County Commissioners expected a quick organizational meeting on Tuesday, January 4, 2011. However, instead of simply divvying up committee and board assignments, the board had impassioned debate over possible changes to the way public comment to the county board is accepted.
Following the board and committee appointments, County Attorney Tim Scannell suggested adding public comment period to the agenda at the start of each county board meeting to reduce the amount of public comments during the actual county board meeting. Scannell said he had heard from citizens frustrated that public meetings are held and recommendations are made, then changed, by the county board. “The county board meeting is not necessarily a time to take public comment,” Scannell said. “That is what public meetings are for.”
Commissioner Jan Hall said, “I’ve been asking for this for four years. It would end the constant back and forth dialog.”
“I disagree entirely,” declared Commissioner Fritz Sobanja. “This is one of the only forums where as conversation goes along, new facts surface. This is the only place where citizens are allowed to give feedback. You’re trying to be efficient, but you’re driving people out of the system.”
New Board Chair Jim Johnson attempted to steer discussion to the agenda topic of possible board “work sessions,” but discussion on public comment continued. Scannell said, “I totally agree that the public should be heard. I know that your constituents have access to you and you articulate their concerns well. I would just strongly advocate that when you’ve had a public hearing, you don’t have another public hearing here. If you do, you undermine the public process.”
Hall questioned how the public would accept such a change. She said as the county board representative on the planning commission, she frequently hears citizens at those meetings say they don’t agree with the planning commission decision and they will fight it at the county board.
Planning & Zoning Director Tim Nelson agreed. “I’ve been specifically told, ‘I’m not coming to the planning meeting because I can take it to the county board.’”
“That’s not the way it’s supposed to function,” said Scannell, but he conceded that if a change were made, public education would be needed.
New Commissioner Sue Hakes noted that everyone wants the public to have a voice. She said she supported adding time at the start of each meeting to allow the public to comment, not just on matters on the board agenda, but any county issue. However, she added, “I think from time to time, we could still call on the public to seek more information.”
“I’m just trying to rejigger the way the public interacts with the board,” said Scannell. “I think this might be fairer.”
Chair Johnson again introduced the topic of county board work sessions. Sheriff Mark Falk said he was the one to introduce the idea of work sessions. He said work sessions have been used successfully in other counties as they can be scheduled to address complicated issues that can’t be covered in a regular board meeting. He said it might be beneficial as the county moves ahead with its new ARMER communication system. “I think some good discussion could take place without the restrictions of an agenda. And I wouldn’t have to meet with each commissioner separately.”
Attorney Scannell said the format could be useful during the budget process because it would allow the entire board to meet with several department heads at the same time for in-depth budget discussion. Public Health & Human Services (PHHS)Director Sue Futterer said work sessions would be “invaluable” as the county faces PHHS redesign. Planning Director Nelson said this format was used during the subdivision ordinance process. He said it was helpful to have all the parties together without the time constriction of the agenda.
Nelson added that during that process, the commissioner’s room was set up with a large table for participants with chairs around the periphery for observers. Board Secretary Janet Simonen said this wasn’t an “entirely new idea.” She noted that the board often schedules an afternoon session if matters cannot be handled in a regular board meeting, such as recent discussion of the future of Superior National at Lutsen.
Commissioner Sobanja agreed and brought up what could possibly be the first county board work session topic— communication towers. “I’ve had a number of calls regarding the tower in Hovland. We need a work session to discuss this—there is an encyclopedia of information to look at regarding this. Is it a good idea to put these towers in the woods? Do they need electricity? Do we need a coordinator for towers? We need a workshop on this!”
The board reached a consensus that work sessions may be helpful. Chair Johnson and the county attorney will discuss the best way to schedule work sessions. . In other business, the county board passed a unanimous motion designating the Cook County News-Herald as its official newspaper for 2011. The
News-Herald rate increased slightly from the 2010 rate, from $5.75 per inch to $6.75. The board also designated the Cook County web page as an official publication for information that does not have to be published in the official newspaper. . According to MN State Statute, the county board must appoint a county agricultural inspector each year. As it has in the past, the board assigned the ag inspector duty to the county highway department engineer. David
Betts will act as AG inspector and will receive the same annual salary as was approved in 2009—$6,000. . The board agreed to leave the reimbursement for meals during county travel the same as it was in 2010, which is $10 for breakfast; $12 for lunch and
$15 for dinner. . A public hearing was held to accept comment on proposed changes to the fees at the Cook County Community
Center and for parking at county landings. The major change approved was an “after-the-fact” variance fee of $300
Planning & Zoning Director Tim
Nelson said the fee would be assessed if, for example, someone built a structure too close to the property line, without obtaining a variance. “This gives that individual the opportunity to pay this fee rather than having to tear the structure down.”
Leave a Reply