• 
• CLASS
• JOBS
• AUTO
• HOMES

Walworth County board running smoothly but working hard after downsizing

Photo

ELKHORN — It's easy to sprint off the block.

But when you're running a marathon, you need to pace yourself.

That's what Walworth County Administrator Dave Bretl, a marathon runner, thinks when he watches the fledgling 11-member county board test its pace.

Board members took their seats in April. Two members are new to the board while nine were incumbents from the previous 25-member board. In 2007, voters chose to cut the board following a 2005 state statute allowing county board downsizing by referendum.

Since the new board took office, Bretl said he's seen a group that is well-informed and dedicated. Some board members who opposed the downsizing before the referendum said it's turned out to be a great idea.

But each of the 11 board members must put in more time than members of the larger board did. Members that once served on two or three committees now serve on four or five, Chairwoman Nancy Russell said.

And Bretl said he and his staff have been asked to turn out a larger amount of more detailed information for the 11 supervisors than they did for 25.

He wonders how long the group can keep up the pace.

Quality, not quantity

Supervisors interviewed by The Janesville Gazette had one thought in common: The Walworth County Board is functioning well because of the supervisors that make it up, not because it's made up of 11 people.

"To say whether 11 is good number or bad number really depends on who those 11 are," Russell said. "These are just great people. They put the time in. They disagree in a very well-mannered way. There are no personal attacks."

A willingness to "put the time in" is key with a smaller board, supervisors agreed. Supervisors serve on a minimum of four committees, Supervisor Jerry Grant said. Many of them go to extra committee meetings to stay informed on issues, Bretl said.

That makes for shorter board meetings, since many of the relevant questions have been hammered out by the time an issue gets to the full board, Bretl said. He's noted that his staff gets a greater volume of requests for more detailed information.

He believes board members might think their individual votes carry more weight on a smaller board.

"I would say this board is very engaged it what it's doing," Bretl said. "They are the most informed board I've worked with. Maybe it's necessitated by the small size. People realize each member is important."

Grant has served on the board since 1974, so he's been through two downsizings and many boards. He thinks the new board operates smoothly, but he recognizes the enormous commitment from individuals.

"It's doable. There's no question about that, because we're doing it," Grant said. "As far as a person who is working (another job)... if they worked full-time and do county board and do a good job at it... you don't have much time left. I would suspect they have very little time at home."

Too drastic?

County boards sometimes are the "middle child" of government, lost between municipal and state government. Even so, the subject of county board downsizing always evokes an emotional, sometimes angry, discussion, Bretl said.

"It's such a sensitive issue statewide, you can't discuss it without really evoking anger," Bretl said. "It's not a rational debate, typically. People say, 'You don't appreciate us.' or 'You can't do it. You just can't.' You'd think you were putting people on the moon."

In retrospect, Russell said it might have been hasty to cut the size of the county board so drastically, especially since the upcoming 2010 census could be enlightening. The downsizing turned off many supervisors who'd served on the board for many years, she said.

"My recommendation would be to go slower," Russell said. "We lost a lot of people that had good knowledge and good memories of what happened in the past. Frankly, it was a lot of people who had been on the board the longest who didn't run.

"I would recommend going a little slower than that. Find the right number without going past it."

Bretl said counties should make cutting costs part of a discussion about downsizing. Walworth County supervisors are paid $6,000 per year, and the chairwoman gets $12,000, Russell said. All supervisors get mileage to travel to meetings. Technically, the county does not prohibit supervisors from submitting expenses when they attend a committee meeting they're not required to attend, but nobody does, Russell said.

By cutting 14 board seats, the county saved $84,000 in salaries, Bretl said. That could be comparable to one county staff position. But with an operating budget of $155 million, an $80,000 savings isn't enough of a motivator to cut the board, he said.

What if it doesn't work?

So far, the board is working smoothly, Bretl said.

But he thinks supervisors might be extra motivated since they were so recently downsized. Maintaining the current level of commitment could be tough, he said.

Bretl said it would be a sign the board is overworked if members started needing help from outside the board to get things done.

If that started happening, the board would have to ask itself if this is what Walworth County voters wanted when they chose to make the board smaller, he said.

"If we have to compromise in order to keep this running, like if you start adding citizens (to committees) or delegating responsibility to the administrator, they would have to ask, 'Is this really what people had in mind?' The board didn't generate the downsizing. What was the voters' intent?"

The board could choose to increase its size after the next census if districts need to be redrawn, Bretl said.

But voters could choose again to downsize the board, he said.

TIMELINE

2002—Walworth County board downsizes from 35 to 25 members.

2005—Wisconsin Act 100 passes. The statute allows county boards to downsize themselves or be downsized by voters through a referendum. The act takes effect in January 2006.

April 2007—Residents voted 8,061-6,956 to cut the Walworth County board from 25 to 11 members.

July 2007—The board strips former board Chairwoman Ann Lohrmann of her title, although she remains on the board as a supervisor. Lohrmann supported downsizing and circulated a petition to help make it happen.

July 2007—The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission reveals the new district boundaries.

January 2008—Every seat on the board is contested for the spring election. Fifteen challengers and 16 incumbents took out papers. Nine incumbents, with nearly 120 years of combined experience, chose not to run.

April 2008—Incumbents fill nine of the 11 positions on the new board.

PROS AND CONS

The Walworth County Board shrunk to 11 members in April, one year after residents voted to downsize the board from 25.

Here are some thoughts from board members and county officials:

Pros

-- "The workload's increased. But... on a larger board, when you served on fewer committees, you wouldn't know some things before they came to the actual board for a vote. We spend a lot more time in committees now than we did before."—Supervisor Randy Hawkins

-- "It's going very smooth. Over the last six meetings, there have never been any real controversies. Over the years, a lot of members come in with agendas. Meetings lasted two to three hours. Now, they last 45 minutes to an hour, and there are no senseless arguments."—Supervisor Joe Schaefer

-- "The amount of material they read and the amount of meetings they attend... Percentage-wise, it's the most informed board I've worked with. Attendance has been near perfect."—Administrator Dave Bretl

Cons

-- "We lost the diversity and knowledge that we had before. Where you had 25, now you have only 11 people with different economic backgrounds and different knowledge."—Supervisor Randy Hawkins

-- "You're serving on a minimum of four committees. You don't have much time left. I would suspect they have very little time at home."—Supervisor Jerry Grant

-- "There's a lot of time involved. It gets to be a large workload. What will their attitude be next year at this time? Is everybody going to feel the same way, or are we going got start to lose folks? Because it's been a pretty difficult job to do."—Administrator Dave Bretl