Leavenworth County commissioners move to form government-efficiency committee
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Leavenworth County commissioners agreed during their public meeting to form a government-efficiency committee and asked staff to begin scheduling meetings.
The committee will include two commissioners—Commissioner Jeff and Commissioner Mike Smith—and the county administrator, Mark, who told the board he would start scheduling meetings. “If you were gonna go forward with the committee, you would need to have 2 commissioners on there,” Mark said.
County officials framed the committee as a targeted review of operations with goals to identify waste, consider whether services exceed the county’s core mission and explore efficiencies outside the normal annual budget review. Mark warned about practical limits: if the committee excludes roads and the sheriff’s office, it would not review roughly 54% of the county’s budget because those areas represent the largest expenditures. Board members debated whether those large departments should be included, noting participation by elected department heads would be voluntary.
Supporters said the committee could validate existing budget choices and identify incremental savings such as material or procurement changes. Opponents cautioned that a new committee could become politicized and suggested instead expanding existing budget review timing. “If we can find even a few additional things like that...then it would pay off to have this committee,” one commissioner said.
Following the discussion commissioners reached what the chairman described as consensus to proceed and asked Mark to schedule meetings with the two designated commissioners. The board did not adopt formal rules or a formal ordinance for the committee at the meeting.
The county administrator and commissioners indicated next steps will include defining the committee’s goals, deciding whether to examine elected departments, and identifying whether outside expertise (for example, a CPA) should be engaged for deep financial analysis.
The topic was raised as part of administrative business and further details and formal committee charges remain to be drafted and returned to the board for approval.
The committee will include two commissioners—Commissioner Jeff and Commissioner Mike Smith—and the county administrator, Mark, who told the board he would start scheduling meetings. “If you were gonna go forward with the committee, you would need to have 2 commissioners on there,” Mark said.
County officials framed the committee as a targeted review of operations with goals to identify waste, consider whether services exceed the county’s core mission and explore efficiencies outside the normal annual budget review. Mark warned about practical limits: if the committee excludes roads and the sheriff’s office, it would not review roughly 54% of the county’s budget because those areas represent the largest expenditures. Board members debated whether those large departments should be included, noting participation by elected department heads would be voluntary.
Supporters said the committee could validate existing budget choices and identify incremental savings such as material or procurement changes. Opponents cautioned that a new committee could become politicized and suggested instead expanding existing budget review timing. “If we can find even a few additional things like that...then it would pay off to have this committee,” one commissioner said.
Following the discussion commissioners reached what the chairman described as consensus to proceed and asked Mark to schedule meetings with the two designated commissioners. The board did not adopt formal rules or a formal ordinance for the committee at the meeting.
The county administrator and commissioners indicated next steps will include defining the committee’s goals, deciding whether to examine elected departments, and identifying whether outside expertise (for example, a CPA) should be engaged for deep financial analysis.
The topic was raised as part of administrative business and further details and formal committee charges remain to be drafted and returned to the board for approval.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting