Other articles by Erica Meltzer:

County staff in $100K club up 87% since 2006Supervisors fret about Kino money, to file brief in Phoenix garage casePima weighs new, less-complicated system of building feesPima plans to buy 4 parcels for open spacePima County set to spend $12.8 million on land purchases Major data firm drops plan for S. Ariz. site amid power concerns Firm's input on Kino Hospital shushed Off-road track at center of Court of Appeals challenge Gate near river is cut, restored County gets role in Rosemont mine study

Construction
West-Press
Printing Health Care
Sierra Tucson
Eating Disorders Program Coordinator Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor Health Care
Dependable Health Services
Physical Therapists Health Care
CENTRAL ARIZONA COLLEGE
DIRECTOR OF HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps

It's been more than three years since the Board of Supervisors held a study session.

With all the big issues facing the county, that's far too long for the supervisors to go without dedicating a meeting just for policy discussion, said county supervisor candidate Donna Branch-Gilby.

"There really is no questioning discussion or probing into the root cause of a problem," Branch-Gilby said of the board meetings. "Having seen the City Council in study session, I think it's a useful tool."

Branch-Gilby said that if elected, she would push for more frequent study sessions on issues like water, growth and the budget.

But her opponent Supervisor Sharon Bronson, a three-term incumbent, said there is no shortage of opportunities to discuss issues, and e-mail and the Internet allow supervisors to come to meetings already informed about issues.

"Every meeting is a study session," she said. "We have access to all the information we want. We can ask all the questions we want."

Branch-Gilby said the lack of study sessions raises doubts about who really runs the county, the elected board or County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry. Bronson disputed the idea, saying Huckelberry carries out the board's directives, not the other way around.

Study sessions, ideally, are meetings where elected officials can discuss policy issues without dozens of items of routine business distracting them from the big picture.

But that's not the way it's worked in the county in the past, Bronson said.

"Historically, the board had study sessions when it was the Gang of Three," she said, referring to the previous Republican majority. "And they did it to beat up on staff and cause mischief and mayhem."

In the last four years, the board has had just one study session, on Feb. 22, 2005. It included two action items — agreements on two major open-space purchases. The last study session before that was April 27, 2004, and it involved the contract that shifted operation of Kino Hospital from the county to University Physicians Healthcare.

Branch-Gilby agreed that former Supervisor Ed Moore interjected himself too much into the county's day-to-day business, but she said the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction.

"There has been perhaps an overreaction to that, and that leaves a lot of decision-making to one unelected person," she said, referring to Huckelberry.

She said she believes he exercises too much influence.

"That's the impression that I have," she said. "The supervisors have few questions for the county administrator. Usually his recommendation is just accepted, whatever it is."

Bronson said the reason the supervisors usually accept Huckelberry's recommendations is that they reflect the board's wishes.

"I disagree with the impression," she said. "I just haven't seen it. The board sets policy. Chuck carries out policy."

Bronson said she fears formal study sessions quickly would become politicized. She said supervisors can have face-to-face meetings with Huckelberry, use e-mail to talk with staffers, use the Internet to review documents and community meetings to hear from the public.

"I want to have real, rational policy discussions," Bronson said. "And that's hard to do at a board meeting."

But Branch-Gilby said something is lost when supervisors hash out questions one-on-one with staffers instead of having public discussions.

"I cannot go in and sit in on those discussions, and neither can any other taxpayer or business owner," she said. "It is difficult to appreciate the complexity of the problem or the thoughtfulness of the solution if you don't have a way to observe the process."