Appling County commissioners select Reed Levitt as top candidate, authorize contract negotiations

The Appling County Board of Commissioners completed interviews of four finalists for the county administrator vacancy and identified Reed Levitt as its top candidate, directing staff to begin contract negotiations and rescheduling its early-December meeting to allow time for negotiations.

The decision followed a series of hour-long interviews with finalists who described experience in municipal management, public works and community development. James Austin Woods introduced himself as a municipal manager with more than 17 years in local government: "I've been involved in municipal government for over 17 years now," he told the board. Adelaideia Cameron described a 25-year career in public administration and community development and said she had worked with city managers and planning and zoning boards. Alba E. Milton II cited military facility and maintenance experience, and another finalist identified in the record as Reed Levitt was named as the board's top candidate.

The board discussed procedure before voting. Legal counsel reminded commissioners of a 14-day waiting or notice consideration referenced during the meeting and advised that the board could meet again to complete hiring negotiations and any final action. Commissioners moved the regular December meeting from its usual day to Thursday, Dec. 5, at 5:30 p.m., to give staff and the chosen candidate time to begin negotiations. The board later voted to enter executive session to discuss negotiation strategy and candidate salary range.

After returning to open session, commissioners announced their preferred nominees. Several commissioners said they had conferred with absent colleagues and with each other; the public record shows a unanimous vote to begin negotiations with Reed Levitt as the targeted hire. A commissioner moved that the county begin negotiations with Levitt; another commissioner seconded the motion, and the board recorded the motion as approved.

The board's actions at the meeting were procedural direction rather than a final hiring decision. Commissioners and legal counsel indicated that formal hiring and contract approval would occur at a subsequent public meeting once negotiations are complete. The board also confirmed that one commissioner who was not present in the room participated by telephone and had heard the interviews.

Next steps listed by the board are for staff and the county attorney to open contract negotiations with the named top candidate and for the board to convene on Dec. 5 at 5:30 p.m. for possible further action.

Ending: The board's vote to start negotiations does not constitute a final appointment; any hire will depend on the outcome of contract talks and any formal vote at a future public meeting.