Should commissioners make policy, or try to run everything?

     Look for some significant retooling in the office the Carroll County Commissioners, as the board seeks to put people in place to take orders, rather than advise elected leaders.
     This will mark the most significant difference between this board and prior one, which relied on information from senior staff and outside consultants to make policy, then turned the work over to the professionals and county employees.
     This new board has been consistently sending signals that it will take charge. Haven Shoemaker, as a candidate, promised to clean house. Richard Rothschild and Robin Frazier have made no secret of their intentions to down-size government and the services the county provides. Doug Howard, despite his difficulties making the Carroll Area Transit work on the funds provided, commented that the five new commissioners have sufficient business skills to divide responsibilities among themselves and run the departments that are now administered by professional directors.
     The morale in the county office building is at its lowest since the last time Frazier had an office there, apparently the results of micro-managing and inconsistent signals from the commissioners' office. Word is that Steve Powell, who as chief of staff for the previous board of commissioners was at the top of the chain of command, is now left out of policy meetings held by the commissioners directly with senior staffers.
     Part of the chill in the building is that there are those around who remember what happened the last time commissioners tried to run the county by decree, instead of with the input of the people who do the work. Key leaders left the building in the 1990's, some on their own, others pushed out, as then commissioners Donald Dell and Frazier, who served one term, attempted to micro-manage the county. Several employees, competent in lesser positions, were given additional duties because they were willing to salute, take orders, and not challenge what later turned out to be bad decisions.
     By the end of the 1990s, the county had been under fire from the state government for failing to keep up with environmental efforts, growth management and planning. Schools were overcrowded, residential housing was out of control and new permits exceeded the allowance under the adequate facilities ordinance. Planning was in shambles and there was a disconnect between county government and the Board of Education, the volunteer fireman's association, and incorporated towns. Economic development efforts were out of sync with modern corporate needs.
     The reputation the county government created for itself in those years cost it credibility with neighboring counties, the Baltimore Metropolitan Area Council, and the professions who maintain consistency in state agencies. That made it more difficult to deal with official Annapolis, and to recruit and retain employees. The pay and benefits packages for county employees was among the lowest two or three subdivisions in the state, and some employees had not had raises in five or more years, while others with friends in high places had seen salaries go up disproportionately.
     If this new board continues on the path it seems to have chosen, the effect will be like watching amateurs try to keep the dozen or so plates spinning that professional jugglers had been hired to put in place.