The City Commission of North Port on July 30 selected five finalists to advance in its search for a new city attorney and directed the recruitment firm to begin background checks and schedule in-person interviews.

The finalists selected by consensus were Keith Merritt, Matt Rowerson, John Anastasio, Michael Puino and Regina Kardish. Doug Thomas, senior vice president at Strategic Government Resources (SGR), the firm conducting the search, told the commission the next steps include criminal- and employment-history checks, reference checks, media searches, and asking finalists to prepare a written "first-year game plan" and a short public presentation for on-site interviews.

SGR told commissioners it received ten initial applicants and narrowed the pool to eight semifinalists for the commission’s review. The semifinalist group included four women and four men; SGR said one originally qualified applicant had accepted another position and another withdrew before semifinalist review. The commission agreed to invite a fifth candidate to the finalist round after discussion about local experience and other considerations.

Why this matters: the city attorney is the commission’s chief legal advisor and plays a central role in land use, procurement, code enforcement and other legal matters the commission raised as priorities. Commissioners said they wanted finalists who understand municipal growth and local government law and who will work constructively with staff.

During the meeting Doug Thomas described the recruitment process and candidate mix, and he cautioned that Florida law requires active membership in the Florida Bar for appointment: "Florida is not a reciprocal state, so you have to pass the Florida Bar and be in the Florida Bar," he said.

Commissioners flagged several issues they wanted SGR to examine during finalist vetting. Commissioner Langdon and others expressed concerns about a candidate currently involved in personal litigation; Commissioner Duvall said he was impressed by that candidate’s municipal experience but asked SGR to gather more context. Commissioners also discussed that several semifinalists were recent solo practitioners and said SGR should probe how those candidates would transition into a larger, in‑house municipal legal office. Commissioner Duvall raised a separate concern that one strong candidate is also pursuing a similar opening elsewhere; SGR said it would check each finalist’s availability and interview status before confirming the schedule.

SGR proposed on-site interviews and related activities in late August; commissioners and staff discussed holding two days of interviews and meetings with staff and community stakeholders, with public candidate presentations and 30‑minute private, round‑robin one‑on‑one sessions between each commissioner and each candidate. Commissioners told SGR they want the finalists to complete IOP (behavioral) assessments and to present a concise first‑year plan during the public interview.

No formal roll-call vote was taken when commissioners agreed on the finalists; the record shows the decision was reached by consensus and SGR will notify the five candidates and confirm availability for the interview dates.

The commission also heard unrelated public comments before the item and then returned to the attorney recruitment item for its substantive discussion and decisions. The meeting ended after the commission and SGR staff confirmed next steps.