Near-unanimous agreement among Optional Forms of Government study commissioners Wednesday night cemented the rights of voters to elect their county officials. 

After six months of data collection, members of the OFGSC have begun deliberations on whether the current Kootenai County government structure best serves constituents — or if it's time for a change. 

Last week, the nine-member commission voted unanimously to keep the sheriff and prosecuting attorney elected positions. 

On Wednesday, the OFGSC voted 8-1 to elect the county assessor, clerk, coroner and treasurer. Phil Ward was the lone opposition. 

Instead, Ward said, the county should adopt an alternative form of government permitted under Idaho Code 31-5001 and hire the assessor, clerk, coroner and treasurer. He compared them to department heads, arguing that the officials' skill levels aren't distinguished in Idaho law. 

By statute, any 21-year-old U.S. citizen who has lived in Kootenai County for one year is qualified to be elected sheriff, coroner, clerk, treasurer and assessor. 

"These four positions require expertise, professional training and administration skills, but no law requires that," Ward said. 

While Ward said the sitting officials are all competent, he worries voters would elect future officials on popularity rather than ability. 

"If we do, the consequences for us as a community would be substantial," Ward added.

Ward's proposal was met with sharp objections from his fellow commissioners and outcries from the public. 

Tamara Bateson, another study commissioner, disagreed with the idea that hiring officials would avoid a "popularity contest." 

"That's human nature," she said. "I think (electing officials) is much more of an accountability issue and much less of a popularity issue."

Last week, the OFGSC preliminarily voted to increase the number of county commissioners to five and institute a commission-manager. The measure passed 5-4. Ward said the other four officials would "disregard a manager's suggestion" if they remained elected. Specifically, Ward was concerned the disconnect could impact financial planning. 

"A professional manager understands the money that will be available and where to hold the line," he said. "That is what the professional manager brings to the job, but he needs to have people he can interact with that will listen to him and engage in a conversation."

Bateson argued that hiring officials would "take the voters' voice away" and would allow a commission-manager too much authority, which she believes "is not a risk that the voters want to take." 

"Having one person make that decision is creating a bureaucracy of one instead of a Republic of the voters," she said. "I don't see how there's any value or substance in taking all of that away."

OFGSC member Brian Cleary pointed out that a commission-manager statutorily becomes the county budget officer. Per Idaho Code Chapter 16, Title 31, if an individual withholds information or refuses to cooperate with the manager, they could be fined. 

"I think people do cooperate a little bit more when there are financial penalties involved, even when they're nominal," Cleary said. "I think that addresses that concern to some degree about punishment for not cooperating."

Touching on Ward's argument for more "competent and qualified persons," Cleary reminded the commissioner that he found no faults in the current elected officials. Without any "clear indication of something wrong," Cleary saw no reason to "change for the sake of change." 

"I would need some evidence that showed me greater than 51% that there was a change that was needed. Not one person that's come in here said anything about something wrong," he said. "I didn't hear anything contrary that says we have a bunch of bozos or had past examples of bozos run this place amok." 

Next week, the study commission will begin analyzing strengths and shortcomings of current and alternative governance structures. 

OFGSC members will not meet on Nov. 24, Dec. 22 and Dec. 29 for the holidays.   

The study group hopes to prepare an initial set of recommendations before drafting a final proposal next year. The end document will go to commissioners. If it recommends changes, it will then go before county voters.