By DOTTY NIST
The Walton County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) has voted 3-1 to have staff negotiate to hire Quinn Robertson of Indialantic, Fla., to fill the vacant county administrator position.
The decision took place at the April 25 BCC regular meeting at the South Walton Annex.
The Walton County administrator position has been vacant for over a year, with Walton County Code Compliance Director Tony Cornman serving as interim administrator since April 1, 2022.
In December 2022, the BCC had voted to proceed with a third round of advertising the county administrator position and taking applications, with the GovHR USA search firm serving as recruitment consultant.
With more than 30 applications received in the third application period and with the group having then been narrowed down by GovHR USA, in February 2023 the BCC had approved a group of six applicants to undergo background checks by GovHR USA in advance of interviews being conducted by the commissioners.
The names of those six applicants follow, with town of residence included for applicants who listed one on their resume: Katie Bordeaux; Mark Martin – Freeport, Fla.; Quinn Robertson – Indialantic, Fla.; Randy Stovall; Brent Walker – Dalhart, Texas; and Jeff Wilkins – Pickerington, Ohio.
At the April 25 BCC meeting, Walton County Human Resources Director Nathan Kervin brought forward an update on the county administrator search process.
He referenced individual interviews conducted by the commissioners in mid-April with two of the candidates—and reported that a third candidate who had previously remained under consideration had begun negotiations for another job and was no longer interested in being interviewed for the Walton County administrator position.
BCC Chairman Danny Glidewell noted a little later that the applicants had been “winnowed down” to the group of six by GovHR USA,
Kervin reported, as well, “We also have had eight new candidates that have applied. Out of those eight, only three met minimum qualifications.” He asked the commissioners for direction on what to communicate on the matter to GovHR USA.
District 4 Commissioner Donna Johns motioned to move forward with negotiations to employ candidate Quinn Robertson.
Robertson had been one of the two candidates interviewed by the commissioners a couple of weeks previous, the other being Mark Martin, who currently serves as city manager for Freeport.
Johns’ motion was seconded by District 5 Commissioner Tony Anderson.
District 1 Commissioner Boots McCormick suggested that the commissioners instead rate the two candidates to determine with whom to first have staff negotiate a contract, with staff then to be instructed to proceed with negotiations with the second candidate if unsuccessful with the first.
Clay Adkinson, acting county attorney, said he saw no problem with either course of action.
After some discussion, McCormick said he would also be comfortable with no ranking being conducted but just with Johns’ motion being amended to give instructions for negotiations with the number two candidate on a contract if negotiation with the first one (Robertson) “falls apart.” He indicated that his concern was that “number two may get discouraged and just pull out” without the instructions he suggested being added to the motion.
“All I would say about either of them is that I would like… for this first contract to be a one-year contract and then revisited,” Glidewell said.
Anderson brought up the difficulty of getting a person not from the area to “come to town on a one-year contract.” He was not against a one-year contract if it could be negotiated and the person was willing. “But I also think that…we’re limiting our search field dramatically by doing a one-year contract,” Anderson said.
Glidewell responded that what he was saying was that the person would get at least a year in the job “or we’re going to pay them.” A former law enforcement officer, he said he had worked a long time for the sheriff’s office on a “day to day” basis with no contract.
Johns said she did not think a one-year contract was long enough, adding that it would not be fair to the people of the county or the individual. She suggested a three-year contract with a six-month probationary period.
Adkinson said a probationary period would be something that would have to be built into the contract if the BCC decided on that option, as the county personnel policy providing for six months probation would not (automatically) apply with a county administrator contract. He added that, whatever the length of the contract, state law allows for only 20 weeks of severance pay.
McCormick observed that “if we don’t get a contract, then we may have to start all over again.”
“I don’t want to see this process start all over again,” he emphasized.
Johns said she understood, adding that when the commissioners had first started choosing candidates from the pool of applications, that only one of the people she chose had ended up on the list, and that was the candidate who was taking another job. Johns said one of her issues was that “I know for a fact” that there was another candidate that the commissioners were not given information about.
Johns continued, “I also happen to know some other information that I’m leery about stating right now, but because of the information that I do know, I would like to stick with my original request that we move forward with Mr. Robertson, and if that is not going to be the case, then I would like to elaborate on what I know.”
McCormick again called for, after negotiating with “this gentleman first,” proceeding to the other candidate if a contract had not been negotiated. “If we vary from that, then we’ve wasted a whole bunch of time and money for nothing,” he asserted.
Glidwell asked Johns if she was saying that there was a problem with one of the candidates. “I am,” she replied.
“Then I want to know what it is, because that’s not fair…” Glidewell said.
“I was approached by Mr. Martin several, several months ago,” Johns explained, “and I was told that the way this was going to work was that the county was going to hire a company to vet some folks for us to interview, and that we were going to vet them, and that none of them would be hired, and that the county was going to place him in this position.”
“And I was told that,” she continued, “not only once but I was told that twice by Mr. Martin. I personally have a huge problem with that. I don’t think that’s the way the county should work. I don’t think that’s the way the people…that’s not transparent. That’s not—that is manipulation of the system, and it’s just flat-out not right! And for that reason I don’t think he’s a viable candidate.”
“In all respect to the commissioner,” McCormick replied, “I have not heard that.” He then asked if the reason Johns did not want to move to the number two candidate was “you don’t like that choice.”
Johns said it was not that she “did not like the choice,” but repeated what she said she had been told twice personally about “how the system was going to work.” She said she had spoken to other people about what Martin had told her but that she had not been not able to talk to other commissioners about it (due to Sunshine Law restrictions).
Anderson suggested going ahead and allowing HR and legal counsel to proceed and try to negotiate a contract with Robertson, and “see where it goes, and then if it doesn’t work out, let’s bring it back to another board meeting.” He noted that a contract would have to come before the BCC anyway.
“Let me go ahead and state this for the record,” McCormick said; “I’m not going to be behind starting this process over again…when we have two candidates.”
“We hired a company to keep exactly what you’re talking about from happening,” Glidewell told Johns, “and so what you’re saying is that company is a crook…and the rest of us are complicit in that.”
Johns replied, “That is not what I said.”
“I can’t help it that he told me this… I did not want to hear it,” she added.
Cornman asked Johns if she had been told this prior to or after Martin had applied for the position. She said it had been prior.
Glidewell commented that Martin would have had to be a “dadgum magician.”
Johns clarified that no names or specifics had been discussed nor had there been a mention of any company.
Glidewell said that earlier he had been prepared to vote to negotiate with Robertson, “but I’m not now.”
“Commissioner Glidewell,” Johns replied, “it is not my fault that someone told me this… am I supposed to not say anything?”
“That’s what you did,” Glidewell said, “until up here in front of God and country.”
After some BCC discussion on the pressing need for a full-time county administrator, Johns said she would like to reinstate her original motion, and Anderson again seconded.
In public comment, Miramar Beach resident Suzanne Harris brought up an application that she stated had been submitted by an Aaron Murray for the position, accompanied by a “good resume.” She said the application had not been provided to the commissioners and questioned why. “So I’m asking,” she said, “how many other good resumes did we get that didn’t make it to y’all?”
Harris also went on record in opposition to a one-year contract for an administrator. She credited Cornman for having done a good job, but observed that if he hadn’t already worked for Walton County and known Walton County, he would not have been able to step in and do the job. “Somebody in this caliber that would take this job is an idiot to start with,” she said, “but somebody needs to come in here, and y’all need to give him the benefit of the doubt, to learn the county…”
Kervin offered to reach out to GovHR USA to find out why the resume of which Harris had spoken had not been “sent over.”
With citizen comments continuing, Lisa Johnson questioned why a commissioner would not vote in favor of the motion to negotiate with Robertson, who had been determined to be the best candidate. “And that’s who needs your vote, your vote, your vote, and your vote,” she told the commissioners.
Glidewell clarified that “at this stage I would have taken either,” speaking of the two candidates, but said he would not support the motion. “Mr. Martin should have a chance to defend himself, that’s not fair,” he protested.
Miramar Beach resident Lori Echols asked to know more about the candidates, their resumes and experience. “Nobody’s going to come over here and move their family here for a year, “she added.
Echols was also of the opinion that the remarks reported by Johns of one of the candidates were “all the reason in the world,” not to have that candidate in the job.
Glidewell responded that the one-year contract was what would be best in his opinion, but he indicated willingness to consider another option, including an open-ended contract.
He also noted that both of the two candidates under discussion have city management experience although not experience on the county administrator level.
McCormick summarized that he was not advocating for either of the two candidates, “I’m just advocating about the process…from start to finish.” He stated that this would involve negotiating with Robertson and then going on to negotiations with the other candidate were that not successful.
With public comments concluded, a vote on Johns’ motion was taken. The motion was approved with Glidewell voting in favor despite his previous comments. Aye votes were cast by Glidewell, Johns, and Anderson. McCormick voted no.
The Herald-Breeze contacted Mark Martin on April 28 and was able to speak with him. He stated that he had no comment on the matter at this time.