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.