photo by: Chad Lawhorn/Journal-World

Candidates for the Douglas County Commission are pictured at a June 28 forum at the Douglas County Fairgrounds.

Multiple candidates for the Douglas County Commission on Sunday expressed concern that the county administrator was overstepping her bounds, with one sitting commissioner going so far as to say the administrator had misdirected her on occasion.

The topic of whether county commissioners were independent enough of the county administrator and county staff members ended up being an issue candidates came back to often at a Sunday evening candidate forum at the Douglas County Fairgrounds hosted by the Douglas County Rural Preservation Association.

Sunday’s forum took questions from the audience — which numbered several dozen people — and questions about staff versus commissioner roles and public transparency in County Commission matters were asked multiple times.

“I also learned very early on that when I asked hard questions, that was not always well received,” County Commissioner Erica Anderson told the crowd of her interactions with the county administrator. “And I didn’t always get the right information. Sometimes I got misinformation, or sometimes hurdles were put in front of me that I had to scale.

“Sometimes when I asked her questions, I was misdirected or sent in a different direction, or sometimes I was left out of emails. Or, purposely, information was just not sent to me. So, I learned early on to do my own research.”

The Journal-World asked Anderson after the forum to clarify her remarks, specifically asking who she was referring to in those comments. Anderson said she was specifically referring to County Administrator Sarah Plinsky, but at times there were also similar issues with other staff members, she said.

Kirsten Kuhn, Anderson’s opponent for the County Commission’s District 5, was the first on Sunday to raise the concern of staff overreach and has made it a part of her regular campaign talking points.

“You will see that staff pretty much directs county commissioners and county commissioners go along with that,” Kuhn said of her observations of County Commission meetings. “I know it is not a very popular thing to say, and it is a little bit spicy to call staff out directly, but I will do it because I think it is inappropriate. You did not vote for staff. You voted for the people on the commission themselves.”

Commissioner Gene Dorsey — who represents District 4 — did not bring up the same sets of concerns as Anderson did, but said he did not approve of how the county administrator set the agenda of County Commission meetings. Dorsey said that the administrator has free reign to place an item on an agenda, but when a commissioner wants an item placed on the agenda for discussion, Plinsky generally will not do so unless two other commissioners agree that the item should be on the agenda.

“I don’t like that,” Dorsey said. “That is an issue with transparency, and takes control away from elected officials and gives it to appointed officials.”

County Commissioner Patrick Kelly — who represents District 1 and is the longest serving member on the commission — said the agenda process was a workable one because each commissioner can bring up any item they like during the miscellaneous portion of the meeting. At that point, a majority of commissioners can then decide whether to add the item to a future meeting.

Kelly also told the crowd that there was a proper chain of command between the County Commission and the county administrator.

“The county administrator works at the pleasure of the elected body, the County Commission,” Kelly said. “We direct her to do the work that we want her to do.”

Milton Scott, Kelly’s opponent, at one point in the meeting said it appeared that the County Commission often “rubber-stamped” recommendations from county staff. Scott said he had seen enough to question whether the dynamic between the staff and the commission was appropriate.

“If we are seeing that commissioners aren’t getting the information that some need, and some are, we need to hold staff accountable,” Scott said. “My mentor used to always say ‘You get the behavior that you allow.’ We are allowing the staff to dictate what is going on, and then the commissioners are responding to it. We have to change that.”

Other topics addressed in the forum included:

• A split emerged between Dorsey and his opponent in the District No. 3 race, Ethan Spurling. Dorsey reiterated his opposition to a pilot program that would provide tenants in Douglas County with a right to legal counsel when eviction notices have been filed against them. The county would pay for the legal services through a $40,000 pilot program. Dorsey said he opposed the idea because he would rather use the money to provide rental assistance, and questioned how effective counsel could be in cases where it was clear that a tenant hadn’t paid their rent. Spurling came out in support of the program, saying he believed data showed such programs had been effective in other communities.

But the issue did not end there for the two candidates. Dorsey, during his opening comments, accused Spurling of running a dirty campaign ad on the matter, pointing to social media posts that highlighted Dorsey had voted against the pilot program and also had received campaign contributions from a prominent Lawrence landlord. Dorsey said such messaging questioned his integrity and ran counter to a pledge Spurling had made to run a clean campaign. Spurling said the material did no such thing. He said it did not make any negative statements about Dorsey but rather communicated information that was in the public record.

• Members of the audience asked multiple questions about possible data center development in the county. All candidates expressed reservations about future development of data centers in the county, noting that they did not currently see any areas in rural Douglas County that appeared to have the necessary infrastructure to support data centers.

Scott said he would support a ban of large scale data centers, if such an act was legally allowed. Spurling said he would as well, but he said the county, for legal reasons, likely will need to be prepared to write regulations for data centers in the county. He said his goal in crafting any regulations would be to keep the data centers out of the county, calling them a “plague” that is sweeping across the country.

“There’s no regulation I would vote against on large scale centers,” Spurling said of his opposition to the centers. “I’ll support every regulation you can come up with, and that will be my position for at least four years.”

Most of the candidates at Sunday’s forum will be squaring off in the upcoming August primary. Kelly and Scott are both Democrats and will face off in the Democratic primary to represent District 1. Dorsey and Spurling also are both Democrats and will compete in the Democratic primary. No Republican has filed in either the District 1 or District 4 race, meaning the winner of the primary election is likely to win the seat in the November election. Anderson also is a Democrat, but Kuhn is a Libertarian. They will face off in the November general election to determine the winner of the District 5 seat.

Residents have until July 14 to register to vote in the Aug. 4 primary.