To the editor:

Press accounts, together with county board minutes, reveal that the chair of the county board mistakenly signed a resolution removing a sunset provision from the joint powers agreement that authorizes Chisago Countyís participation in the ECSWC landfill in Kanabec County.

Administrator John Moosey advised the board that the resolution was presented to the chair on the mistaken belief that the board had passed it.

Arising out of this background, the following resolution was presented and defeated on a 3-2 vote: Commissioner Montkza offered the following motion: The County Board finds that the Amendment to the East Central Solid Waste Commission (ECSWC) Joint Powers Agreement dated January 30, 2004, which appears to encumber millions of dollars of taxpayer-controlled revenue, may be a fraudulent document because it states that it was signed after proper authorization by the County Board, which authorization was not given. Therefore, the County Board requests that the Chisago County Attorney contract with an appropriate County Attorneyís Office not associated with the ECSWC to conduct an investigation into the circumstances of such document. (Partial excerpt)

Despite the defeat of the motion, the County Attorney has referred the matter out for investigation by the Washington County Attorney. On one hand, this is a good thing, as someone competent will handle the investigation. On the other hand, by acting as she has, the County Attorney has created a huge conflict of interest between her office and the County Board, with scant justification. On balance, this was an extremely poor decision for at least the following reasons:

Other than gross speculation, there is no credible evidence of a criminal purpose in what appears by all accounts to have been a series of mistakes.

As it now stands, board members may be hesitant to vote on the merits regarding controversial issues; for fear that the County Attorney will infer some dark motive and commence an investigation.

The matter should have been handled differently, with due regard for the need for continuing relationships within the county boards itself, and the boards relationship with the county attorney. A reasonable method for dealing with this issued would have been for the county attorney to tell the board that they are involved in a political dispute, and it is up to them to work it out. Actually, they did that by voting down the motion for an investigation, yet the county attorney has requested one.

Having been the Chisago County Attorney (1977-1985), I am aware that county attorneys have and should have a great deal of discretion. With that discretion comes a duty of responsibility. That duty has clearly been breached, in my opinion.

James R. Clifford
Stanchfield

Top of Page

©ECM Post Review

6448 Main Street
North Branch, MN 55056
Telephone: 651-674-7025
Fax: 651-674-7026
E-mail: editor.postreview@ecm-inc.com