Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Administrator Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ottawa County commissioners select Patrick Waterman in 7-4 ballot; authorize contract negotiations
Summary
After a months-long search and public comment, the Ottawa County Board of Commissioners chose Patrick Waterman as the county administrator candidate by a 7-4 ballot and authorized the chair to begin contract negotiations by a 7-4 roll-call vote.
The Ottawa County Board of Commissioners voted Sept. 12 to identify Patrick Waterman as its administrator candidate by a 7-4 ballot and then authorized the board chair to begin contract negotiations and return a proposed employment contract to the board for approval.
The vote followed public comment, a multi-month candidate review and an extended commissioner discussion in which supporters described Waterman as a steady, “day‑one” manager and critics said his selection would deepen divisions on the board and in the community.
Commissioners cast secret ballots that were read into the record. Seven commissioners voted for Patrick Waterman and four voted for Matthew Farrar. The board then voted 7-4 in a roll call to authorize the chair to negotiate with Waterman and bring a contract back to the board.
Supporters said Waterman’s municipal experience and familiarity with county staff make him ready to begin work immediately. "I support Patrick Waterman," said Joe Busch, Ottawa County water resources commissioner, who also told commissioners the choice would affect county operations for the county’s more than 300,000 residents. Commissioner Barry said, "I firmly believe that Patrick Waterman will most bring stability and pragmatic vision our county requires." Several other speakers and commissioners praised Waterman’s temperament and said he had the respect of many county employees.
Opponents said the process and choice risked prolonging or deepening political division. Some public commenters urged the board to unite behind a candidate perceived as neutral; others criticized Waterman’s past actions while serving in municipal government. Dan Winarski, chairman of the Ottawa County Building Authority, urged the commissioners to consider one of the other finalists, saying he believed the county should "move beyond some of the divisiveness of the past." Resident Gary McCaleb said commissioners had an opportunity to hire someone "that everybody could agree on" and expressed disappointment with the outcome.
Multiple commissioners referenced input from a citizen work group formed during the search. The citizen group’s notes, as summarized by commissioners during the meeting, praised different finalists for fiscal experience, communication skills and leadership style; the group also flagged concerns about Waterman’s candidacy and his ability to remain in the role if political tensions rose.
After ballots were read, the clerk returned the results aloud: Commissioner Rodey (Matthew Farrar); Commissioner Barry (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Zielstra (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Joritsma (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Bonnema (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Bruegger (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Tepals (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Mitima (Matthew Farrar); Commissioner Moss (Matthew Farrar); Commissioner Kires (Patrick Waterman); Commissioner Wenzel (Matthew Farrar). That tally was 7 votes for Waterman and 4 for Farrar.
The board then voted to authorize the chair to begin negotiations with Waterman and return a proposed employment contract. In a roll-call read after the motion, votes were recorded as: Moss — No; Kires — Yes; Berry — Yes; Bonnema — Yes; Rohde — No; Zielstra — Yes; Wenzel — No; Miedema — No; Joritsma — Yes; Brugger — Yes; Tieteples — Yes. The motion passed 7-4.
During the meeting, several public commenters and commissioners discussed diversity, equity and inclusion policies (DEI), prior personnel matters in Hudsonville, and whether an internal candidate would best restore stability. Commissioners who voted for Waterman emphasized his municipal experience, public-administration credentials and relationships with county staff; commissioners who opposed or urged other choices cited concerns about past conduct and the potential for renewed conflict.
The board instructed the chair to begin contract talks; no contract terms were disclosed at the meeting. The chair and staff said they would return a proposed employment agreement to the board for consideration at a future meeting.
