Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Engineer Hire topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board moves to hire new county engineer after firing previous engineer; public raises transparency concerns
Summary
The board discussed termination of the county engineer contract, interim arrangements and a permanent hire; board voted to offer the position to a candidate, with a split vote. Public commenters questioned the process and transparency around the engineer's removal.
The Pottawatomie County Board of Supervisors discussed the termination of the county engineer's contract, interim coverage and moved to offer the permanent county engineer position to a candidate interviewed earlier.
Background and action: Board members said the contract with the prior county engineer was terminated on May 27, the position was posted May 28, and an assistant engineer accepted an interim appointment on June 3. The board interviewed candidates in closed session and discussed guidance from the Iowa Department of Transportation about qualifications and requirements for county engineers. During the public meeting the board voted to offer the position to the candidate from the second interview round.
The hire motion passed by roll call: Chairman Bell — Aye; Supervisor Miller — Nay; Supervisor Wakeman — Aye; Supervisor Jorgensen — Aye; Supervisor Shay — Nay.
Why it matters: County engineers are statutorily responsible for preparation and supervision of plans for county roads and bridges. Several public commenters said the board's process lacked transparency and suggested the prior engineer had been a careful steward of taxpayer funds.
Public comment: John Anderson, a resident, referenced state law and argued the engineer's statutory responsibilities when he criticized the board’s action and said, in part, “I think John was a great steward of…” Another commenter, Michelle Sowell, urged more transparency and said she feared the county had opened itself to litigation and questioned whether the new direction had been discussed publicly before the vote.
Board response: A supervisor replied to public concern, saying, “I had not met him until he came in here to be interviewed, and he was very impressive,” and that hiring discussions did not involve three supervisors meeting in private to pick the candidate. Board members also discussed possible interim engineering arrangements (28E agreements) with neighboring counties and using engineering firms for federally required signatures if needed.
What to watch for: The county will finalize an employment contract and start the onboarding process. Supervisors said the county will also consider a broader staffing model if workload requires an additional engineer or outside firm.
