The question of what form of government is best for Salt Lake County is once again a hot topic in the media, with the
question being put on the November ballot. It was my privilege to serve on the last task force that studied this question in depth, and I oppose the change now for some of the same reasons I opposed the change then.While there are some personality conflicts among our current elected officials, changing the form of government will not stop that from occurring. Even with Salt Lake City's form of government there is conflict, and the current council members are investigating the mayor's conduct.
Approximately 95 percent of the commissioners' responsibilities are administrative, not legislative. On Page 136 of the Minority Report, dated September 1987, it reminds us that "the principle of separation of powers between co-equal legislative, executive and judicial arms as in the federal government, has little relevance at the state government level and none at the local level."
Changing the form of government in Salt Lake County to achieve a separation of powers will not solve the problems that face the county.
The people have identified several areas of concern:
1. The provision of municipal-type services by Salt Lake County.
2. A need to redefine city and county services.
3. The cost of government.
4. Efficiency in government.
5. Maintaining neighborhood identity.
6. The problem of turfdoms.
7. Service delivery/service level/ service governance.
8. Annexation and incorporation.
9. Economic development and other fall-through-the-cracks issues.
Again, changing the form of government will not solve these issues. In fact, the problem of turfdoms would be greatly increased. The council form of government, as evidenced by Salt Lake City's council, is very turf-oriented, and council members become very turf-protective rather than look out for the good of the community as a whole.
There were three areas that the citizens did not perceive to be problematic:
1. Accountability.
2. Checks and balances.
3. Representation.
Changing the form of government presents some additional concerns.
Because the county represents approximately 42-43 percent of the state, the person elected to be the administrator would possibly become the most powerful person in the state, especially if some of the current elective offices were to be eliminated or become appointive offices. Currently, three commissioners must meet in open meetings to make decisions. A single elected administrator could make those decisions in his or her head with no public discussions having to occur at all.
That single administrator would still have to wear two hats: Act as the mayor of the unincorporated portion of Salt Lake County as well as act in the capacity our current commissioners do regarding the incorporated portion of Salt Lake County. That is too much responsibility to place on any one person.
3. Salt Lake County is too large to be run on a part-time basis by a part-time council.
4. Getting good people to run for these part-time positions could be a real problem.
5. Getting to know who the candidates are and what they stand for would be almost impossible. The five specific districts would be too large for any candidate to campaign in economically by doing lawn signs, going door-to-door, etc., and yet they would be too small for effective use of the mass media.
For these and other reasons, I urge the citizens to look carefully at what is being proposed and then vote against changing the form of government when it comes up on the November ballot.