Standafer leads charge to reduce size of county board

By Doug Stohlberg

County Board Supervisor Darryl Standafer is a rare politician who may "wish" himself out of a job. Standafer, chair of the Administration Committee, is leading the charge to reduce the size of the St. Croix County Board from 31 to 21 members.

The time clock is running, however, and the first shot in the game was rejected. At its November meeting, the county board tabled the issue until after the spring election on April 4. The rationale for the tabling was that the new board should make the decision.

The clock is running because, if a change is made, it must be made during a census year - in this case, 2000. A similar effort to reduce the size of the board in 1989 and 1990 failed.

Standafer, who represents parts of the North Hudson from District 24, is hopeful that the change may come next spring.

He has the unanimous support of his five-person committee, which includes Gerald Peterson from Baldwin and Standafer, Linda Luckey, Nancy Bieraugel and Tom O'Connell from the Hudson area.

"We conducted a survey of all county board members and 21 of the 31 returned the survey and it showed a clear majority in favor of reducing the size of the board," Standafer said.

He said that 10 surveys were not returned for whatever reason. Observers could conclude that most of those would be against such a change, but Standafer is not willing to read anything into the 10 missing surveys.

The possibility of change is allowable during census years because district lines must be redrawn after each census.

"Even if we don't change the size of the board, we must redraw the lines," Standafer said. "Most people expect the county population will be in the neighborhood of 60,000, which means each supervisor will represent about 2,000 people if we stayed at 31 members."

The 1990 population was approximately 50,000, meaning each supervisor represented about 1,600 people.

"The lines will be redrawn regardless. That must be done before the spring election of 2002 and is usually done soon after the census is completed in 2000."

Standafer said there are a number of reasons to reduce the size of the board.

"First is efficiency," Standafer said. "It is easier to work with smaller numbers."

With 31 members, Standafer said it takes an hour to discuss even a simple issue if each supervisor talks for just two minutes.

Second, he said a smaller board would force supervisors to have a more "global perspective."

"With a smaller board, there would be a tendency to look at things from a total county perspective and not just the perspective of a single district."

Third, Standafer said a reduction would, as he said, "force, or give us the opportunity," to streamline county government.

Currently the county has 24 committees. Most are staffed totally, or partially, by county board members.

"There is too much staff work being done by committees," Standafer said. "Supervisors should be setting policy and providing oversight, not micro-managing departments. We have competent professional staff members to manage the departments."

He said committees could be combined and eliminated in some cases.

"Some do very little work and maybe meet for 30 minutes a month, while others meet the entire day and longer," Standafer said. "First of all we are paying too many per diem claims, but it is not fair to give the same pay to committee members who have few responsibilities.

"When I introduced the resolution to reduce the size of the board, I urged the County Board Chair (Tom Dorsey) to initiate a study of the committee structure with an eye to streamline."

Most of the opposition to the plan comes from rural areas where it is often perceived that growth in urban areas has already diminished the power of the rural supervisor.

Standafer, however, said remaining rural supervisors would have more power on a smaller board.

"All supervisors on a smaller board would have more impact. It would enhance, not diminish, the role of supervisors."