Pedersen Rocks the Mic: Evaluating the Lake County Commission Candidates

The four candidates for Lake County Commission addressed the public Tuesday night at the forum hosted by the local chapter of the American Association of University Women. (And of course they now address the world thanks to the wonders of YouTube!) How'd they do?

Scott Pedersen showed not just the advantages of incumbency and experience. Like many jobs, county commissioner is work that you don't really know how to do until you've done it. Pedersen has done the job in Miner County and now in Lake County. He has worked through the tax assessments and budgets and regulations at all levels that come up on the commission's agendae. Pedersen can rattle off figures on taxable property value, break down the distribution of each tax dollar among the taxing entities in the county, and cite various accomplishments of the commission not because he's studied extra hard, but simply because they've been drilled into his head through regular discussion as part of the job of commissioner. Pedersen grounds every answer in specific policy experience. Anyone else who wants to speak with such authority on county matters would have to spend a lot of time attending meetings, reviewing the minutes, and talking to county officials and citizens.

Eager reader (and new property tax payer! congrats!) Brett Kearin picks another important forum moment that shows why Pedersen is a good politician (and I use the word in a good sense):

When asked the question about what can be done for response time for rural Lake County residences - he took the time to turn around and ask if the residence had experienced any troubles personally. It did not feel that Pedersen was trying to make... any point by asking that question, but had general, honest concern about the question and wanted to do what he can to help the citizens that he serves [Brett Kearin, online comment, Madville Times, 2010.10.20].

Bingo. When Pedersen asked this question, he wasn't doing a Daugaard and trying to put a questioner on the spot. Pedersen heard a constituent expressing a concern, saw a chance to gain input that would help the commission do its job, and sought that input. We Web guys in particular love that kind of receptivity to citizen input. Pedersen has shown similar skill interacting with the public and managing community participation in big meetings like the discussion of the public access area at Lake Madison. Tuesday night, Pedersen showed that even in the midst of a campaign event, he's still doing the job he was elected to do.

Craig Johannsen also enjoys the advantages of experience and incumben—whoops! Wait a minute; Johannsen's not on the commission any more. He got beat in 2008. But as Rod Goeman has noted on these pages, Johannsen has indeed been running ads in the paper urging us to "Re-elect Craig Johannsen."

Is that fishy campaigning? "Re-elect" is generally the verbal purview of those in office. But technically (stretch that word out, say it funny, make some winky quote marks), Johannsen has been elected twice before. So electing him again would be re-electing him, even though he's not in office. I can find re-elect used in this same sense to describe Grover Cleveland's second swing at the Presidency when he defeated incumbent Benjamin Harrison*... and if it's on Wikipedia, it must be true, right?

Quibble as we may over Johannsen's word choice, Johannsen also brings a whole lot of board experience. In addition to ten years on the county commission, he's involved with a whole string of other committees, local governing bodies, and even the food pantry. He boosts his pitch by noting he's rented out his farm land and has even more time to devote to public affairs. He says if elected, he'll have an open-door policy: people can come to his house with county concerns, not to mention just calling or catching him on the street (hey, Craig! what about a blog?).

One more word choice note: Johannsen still speaks of the commission in the first-person plural: we. We hired a deputy... maybe Craig himself occasionally forgets he's not on the commission! Or maybe that we simply demonstrates Johannsen's sense that local government is us. The we that hires a deputy or increases taxes isn't just five guys in a room; it's we the people, all of Lake County.

Against these experienced commissioners, political newcomers Kelli Wollmann and Doug Erickson inevitably pale a bit in comparison. Both Wollmann and Erickson have valid experiences and perspectives they could bring to the county commission. Both are members of the board at Prairie Village, which operates as its own municipality. Wollmann was a stay-at-home mom for a long time before taking a special ed job with the school district this year. Erickson is a landscaper and handyman, and he emphasizes his thoroughly blue-collar background as a qualification for the job.

But purely on public performance, Wollmann and Erickson both came across as somewhat more tentative. That's understandable with Erickson: I've spoken with him before, and I know that public speaking is entirely new to him. Erickson has a pretty steep learning curve to become an effective commissioner... though that's true of lots of people who get elected to local government. Still, Erickson needs to sell himself a little better. He told Tuesday's crowd, "I'd much rather show you what I can do than stand up here and tell you what I can do." The problem with that is, in politics, you have to tell us what you're going to do. There is no way to show us what you'll do as commissioner until you are commissioner. And a big part of being a commissioner is articulating your vision for the county and explaining the rules you pass. Show us you can do that, and you can get elected.

Wollmann seemed a little more tentative than I expected, given her experience with public music performance. But performing music and talking politics in front of neighbors and reporters are two different cognitive tasks. She demonstrated a little extra insight into law enforcement based on her experience as the wife of a city policeman. She and Erickson both should look for similar personal experiences that they can translate into a discussion of specific county policies.

Now note, this evaluation isn't an endorsement (I'll roll out the Madville Times Voters' Guide 2010 next week). This evaluation is just my read of what we all watched Tuesday night. Your assessments are welcome, too!

*Perhaps we can find precedence for this usage on some old Grover Cleveland campaign buttons. Pat, can you help us out?

Poll: Wollmann, Pedersen Lead Lake County Commission Race

The latest Madville Times poll finds our humble Web audience favoring the lady and the incumbent in the Lake County Commission race. Asked "Whom do you want to elect to the Lake County Commission?", you voted as follows for the two open seats:

Craig Johannsen	25 (34%)
Doug Erickson	18 (25%)
Kelli Wollmann	48 (66%)
Scott Pedersen	37 (51%)

Votes: 73

Wollmann and Pedersen are the Republicans on the ballot, but party affiliation barely seems to register on folks' radar at this level. If the locals have any tea-flavored anti-incumbent sentiment, they certainly aren't exercising it on Pedersen, who is finishing his first full term on the commission. He's been a relatively active and visible commissioner, acting as point man on the new Lake Madison public access area and liaison to the newly formed county water quality committee. One might think all those Glenn Beck viewers in Lake County might take umbrage at local government actually doing things. Pedersen's topping 50% suggests otherwise.

None of the candidates has done much campaigning yet. Campaign webs haven't popped up for any of the candidates. I just saw the first Craig Johannsen signs pop up this weekend. Doug Erickson shook some hands at the Lake-Moody Democratic fundraiser a couple weekends ago. Other than that, not much shouting yet.

Worth noting: if there is any local anti-incumbent sentiment, Erickson may be the man to go after it. He tells me he's concerned with the treatment Charles Scholl from Winfred has received in his nuisance and zoning battles with the county. Erickson says he'd like to see more fair and uniform application of our zoning laws. That should lead to the following as question #1 for the candidate fora: "What's your position on creating a new zoning enforcement position for Lake County?"

More Local Polling: Pick Your Lake County Commissioners!

So many ballot boxes, so little time!

The latest Madville Times poll asks whom you'd like to elect as Lake County Commissioner. We get to pick two this year. Listed in the poll, in the order they appear on Secretary Nelson's candidates list, are Craig Johannsen, Doug Erickson, Kelli Wollmann, and Scott Pedersen. Pedersen is the only incumbent on the ballot. A lot of folks think Johannsen is an incumbent as well, which indicates how under-the-radar our county commission is: Johannsen served two and a half terms on the commission before being ousted in the 2008 election.

Poll runs until Saturday breakfast time, after which we'll talk results. Click your vote (remember, you can pick two!), and tell your friends!

Bohl and Giles Stand out in County Commission Candidates Forum

After Tuesday night's Chamber forum, one of the Lake County commission candidates said to me, "I hate this s---. I just want to do the job."

Note to all commissioners: this "stuff"—public forums, answering questions, taking the stage and laying out your ideas for the county—is a central part of doing the job. Tuesday night, Chris Giles and Dan Bohl showed they are the best at that part of the job. Of the five candidates, Giles and Bohl were clearly the most at ease at the podium. They offered the most thorough and most direct answers. Giles demonstrates solid confidence in the public spotlight. Bohl can be a bit of a screwball, cracking jokes regularly, but his humor shows he truly enjoys the business of campaigning and governing. And if I'm conducting interviews for a job (and that's what we're doing here), I'd like the interviewees to demonstrate confidence and a love of the job.

You can compare the candidates yourself by checking out the video of their opening and closing statements. In the Q&A, I found it telling that Hageman found a way in three of the four questions to say, one way or another, that he wasn't sure or didn't know or didn't have any thoughts on a given topic. Such Socratic wisdom isn't a great selling point for a candidate; voters generally prefer candidates to have at least some answers figured out before we vote for them.

On specifics, I do have to ding Bohl on his response to the question on health insurance for commissioners. He did answer directly—"No. For commissioners, no way." He said he would take the $3,600 the county gives commissioners who opt out of health coverage (good) and donate that money to the Madison Public Library (great!) and the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber of Commerce?! Dan, Dan, Dan—you have money to give, money you can help people in need with, and you give it to an organization consisting of the wealthiest individuals in town? Let's talk about some alternatives....

I was surprised to hear unanimous support for creating a county building inspector. Anderson and Hageman tried really hard to throw a lifeline to country folks who might not want bureaucrats to come snooping around their property or tell them how to build a shed. Anderson said creating the new position might not be feasible within our budget, and Hageman agreed with him that maybe we should just have a part-time inspector (Hageman's favorite words seem to be maybe and could be). But Johannsen and Giles talked about specific ways to make the position happen (increasing fees, partnering with the city, combining the position with other duties), and Bohl said the position would pay for itself in the long-run. So get ready for one more government official to get involved with your building projects.

On government openness, I was pleased to hear Bohl say we should move meetings to the evening, as the city does to make it possible for more working folks to attend. Hageman fretted that we might not be able to cover everything in the evening, but I notice the city and the school board manage to cover their agendae just fine in the evening.

I was also very pleased to hear Giles say that we need to "reduce and minimize" the commission's use of executive session. Hear hear!

Bohl and Giles gave the best answers at the forum. Johannsen's commission experience helped him keep up, although I was disappointed to hear him say on the health insurance question that he would "go along with whatever the rest of the board wants to do" (folks who go along with the crowd don't generally make the top of my voting list). Neither Anderson and Hageman sounded like they were terribly excited to be interviewing for the job.

I know some of you are thinking, "Oh, but that Cory, he just like big talkers. After all, he is voting for Obama." Quite right: I like a good speech. But speaking well in public isn't just "stuff" to be gotten done with; it's a key part of the job. It's how a politician demonstrates the skills, ideas, and values he or she will bring to the job. And Tuesday night, Chris Giles and Dan Bohl showed their skills, ideas, and values the best.

Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: County Commission!

Round III of tonight's Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: our Lake County Commission candidates! Here's a rough approximation of what Republicans Chris Giles, Roger Hageman, and Dan Bohl and Democrats Craig Johannsen and Gene Anderson had to say in the Q&A:

Question 1: What past experiences make you the best candidate for the Lake County Commission?

• Johannsen: Serving 10 years as commission gives me good perspective.
• Giles: In my past experience as Lake County States Attorney, I worked with different departments to help solve their problems, advised and observed the commission. Many people don't realize how complex county government can be, since they don't come into contact with all the parts.
• Hageman: I have lots of experiences, but “I'm not sure any qualify me for the job" [kidding!] In farming, I know what it's like to have floor pulled from under you and have to pull things together to make things work. I'm on church boards, corn producers, soybean producers, other ag associations in county.
• Bohl: If there's a problem I will talk it to death. [joke!] I can communicate with almost anybody. Last year I subbed for elementary P.E.: having lived through that day, I believe I can be a county commissioner (or run an insane asylum or be president: anything is possible!). I have experience as city commissioner, plus 33 years as coach and teacher. Most importantly, I love people, love helping people. You know that I listen, I respond. “If you can put up with my gab, I will help.”
• Anderson: Last two years on Lake County Zoning board has been great experience. I know what commissioners deal with. I'm on church boards, cooperative boards. There are things we can work together on.

Question 2: Given county budget restraints, how feel about offering health insurance to elected county officials?

• Giles: Lake County was one of first to offer this coverage. Many more counties offer it now. It's nice to make it available if officials want to be part; I don't think we should allow candidates to opt out and take the cash. That wasn't an option when I was states attorney; very few counties offer that option. It's not illegal or improper, but commissioners shouldn't get that option as part-time employees.
• Hageman: “I don't know if I'm for or against it.” Having a larger group is good for premiums. If funds are available, I'd agree with going along with it.
• Bohl: No. For commissioners, no way. I pay for my own insurance, I can handle it. I've said previously that if the policy continues, I will donate my $3600 opt-out money to the Madison Public Library and the Chamber of Commerce.
• Anderson: Health is a big budget item. I'd have to say no, given the way the economy is. There are better ways to use our tax dollars. Commissioners can handle their own health insurance.
• Johannsen: I was paying for my own insurance before I got the job. It does cost. I'll go along with whatever the rest of the board wants to do.

Question 3: Would each of you support a county inspector to insure county guidelines and ordinances are enforced?

• Anderson: I have no problem having a county inspector. But is it feasible within our budget? How important is it? Maybe we should have a part-time inspector. I'm not sure we can afford full-time.
• Johannsen: Yes, it is a needed position. Maybe it's a good problem: growth means more building, means we need an inspector. We can't have buildings too close to right of way and such; better to catch problems right away rather than have to move a building. Funding: maybe create zoning/drainage/weed inspector, increase fees to pay.
• Giles: A building inspector is needed, especially for new construction and to look for existing violations. No one does that now; it's handled just on a complaint basis. We could make a combined position for building and zoning, maybe even do something in conjunction with the city. Partnering with the city could make a full-time position that can meet the needs of both entities. Funding is an issue; maybe we need to look at building permit fees.
• Hageman: I agree an inspector could be beneficial. Not everybody is aware of all the codes. Folks doing their own building can be problem. Maybe we should just have it be a part-time position.
• Bohl: Creating a buildig inspector position is like geothermal heating: very expensive at first, but it pays for itself after so many years. Sure, it'll be tough to pay for the position, but in a few years, an inspector would pay off by eliminating problems. Madison's experience shows it works and is very useful for city gov't. It would help the county, too.

Question 4: What do to make county government more open to county residents?

• Bohl: “I like this one.” Not a bad idea to change meeting time: people can't come to nine o'clock meetings. What's wrong with going to 5 or 5:30? Doing a cable broadcast costs, but lots of people watch the city commission broadcasts; might be an option for the county. We must always be aware of open meeting laws, people's right to hear and know, right to attend and to respond, to have open communication. We don't have all of the avenues open now.
• Hageman: [To Mayor Hexom's rephrasing of the question and asking if he has any thoughts on the issue]: “No I don't.” Meeting times: reading the minutes shows that meetings can go long. Unless we're going to hold extra meetings to make sure we cover the agenda, moving to the evenings is going to be difficult. Maybe it's o.k. to do special evening meetings. We could also maybe move meetings to different towns if town-specific items are on the agenda.
• Giles: Some flexibility in meeting time should be looked at. Maybe we don't need to move every meeting to evening. In the past, meetings have been set in evening when we anticipate lots of public input. Maybe do it once a month. It's important to make meetings open to media through radio or cable TV. Another issue: certain times and places require executive sessions, but we need to reduce and minimize them. People are more confident in open government.
• Johannsen: We definitely have to follow open meeting rules more stringently. Meeting times: we have done special meetings, and I have no problem with moving meetings to other towns. Radio curently gives good coverage.
  
• Anderson: The radio and paper cover it. Maybe the board needs to be more open to the public, maybe use less executive session.