Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Size Ballot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mills County supervisors table resolution to put five‑member board question on ballot after public comment
Summary
After extensive public comments both for and against expanding the board from three to five supervisors, Mills County supervisors agreed to table Resolution 2625 for review by the county attorney and reschedule consideration next week.
The Mills County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday agreed to table Resolution 2625, which would place a question on the general‑election ballot asking voters whether to increase the board from three to five supervisors, until the county attorney can review the language.
During the public‑comment period several residents urged the board either to place the question before voters or to delay it for more community discussion. One resident, identified later by another speaker as Dan, told the board, “I respectfully urge this board to vote to place this question on the ballot and let the people have their voice.” Chris Whitey also urged letting voters decide and said his group intends to “research all the pros and cons” so voters are informed. Several other speakers, including Weston Wet Rock (reading on behalf of Henry Clark), Lucy Wil and Melody Breland, expressed support for ballot placement; Karen Cipold urged caution and more community outreach before a vote.
Board discussion focused on legal review and timing rather than the merits of the change. Staff reported receiving correspondence from county stakeholders, including a note that Beth Manley had not identified legal problems but recommended coordinating with the county attorney. A supervisor asked that the resolution be moved to next week’s agenda so the county attorney’s office can review it; the board agreed to table the item for that reason.
The board did not vote on whether to change the structure of county government; tabling the measure means the question will not be placed on the ballot this week. No formal vote tally was recorded in the transcript for the tabling motion (tally not specified). The board indicated the item will return to the agenda once the county attorney has reviewed the draft language.
What happens next: The board will revisit Resolution 2625 after county‑attorney review and staff consultation; if the resolution is approved at a later meeting it would place the question on the November ballot for a public vote.
