Ottawa County approves employment agreement for incoming administrator after hourslong debate over duties and nondiscrimination language

The Ottawa County Board of Commissioners voted Sept. 23 to approve an amended employment agreement for incoming county administrator Patrick Waterman after extended discussion and several amendments to the draft contract.

Commissioners debated language that would define the administrator’s authority over department heads and collective‑bargaining coordination, performance‑pay procedures and a proposed provision about nondiscrimination and equality. After amendments and a roll‑call vote, the motion to approve the agreement passed and the contract will be finalized as amended.

The board replaced two sections of Exhibit A to clarify the administrator’s authorities and duties. The new language states the county administrator “shall supervise the operation and performance of all county departments and department heads, except elected officials and their officers, and with the approval of the board, appoint and remove all heads of departments other than elected officials.” Section 3’s replacement clarifies the administrator “shall coordinate the various activities of the county and unify the management of its affairs, including, but not limited to, organizing the collective bargaining activities of all county‑funded operations.”

Commissioners also amended the contract to make the performance‑pay process a board responsibility. The final contract language requires that the “exact method and criteria in which Waterman will be evaluated and compensated for performance pay will be determined by the board within the first year of his employment and formalized in a separate agreement.” Chair John Moss said he would add “in consultation with the board” when explaining how the process will be developed.

Other changes approved during the meeting include: - Rewriting a paragraph so the administrator “shall be responsible for facilitating the creation of a strategic plan for the county in collaboration with the board of commissioners,” rather than taking sole responsibility for “the future direction of the county.” - Requiring that outside employment for the administrator be permitted only “with the knowledge and approval of the Ottawa County Board of Commissioners” (replacing language that gave that authority to the chairperson alone). - Correcting an apparent drafting error in the fringe benefits section so Waterman “may accrue up to 30 days of earned vacation time” (the packet had said 300 days).

The board debated a proposed sentence intended to prohibit the administrator from advancing a diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) agenda and, instead, to require the administrator to “champion colorblind equality.” That proposal failed on a roll call. After additional discussion, the board adopted substitute language requiring the administrator to “serve every person with dignity and respect in accordance with state and federal law.” Commissioner Sylvia Miedema publicly urged the board to reject offering the contract; she said she believed past county personnel decisions had eroded trust. Miedema said, “I would just urge the board to reject offering a contract to Patrick Waterman.”

Chair John Moss defended the contract amendments as aligning language with prior administrator contracts and said the changes were intended to bring consistency to the county’s employment agreements. During debate, county legal counsel warned commissioners that adding value‑laden language to a contract can create interpretive risks in litigation; commissioners who raised those concerns sought narrower wording.

The board also voted to move the process for formalizing performance criteria into a collaborative process between the board and the administrator so expectations can be set and reviewed during the first year. Several commissioners emphasized that the administrator should participate in shaping performance goals but that the board must formally approve them.

The motion to approve the employment agreement as amended passed by roll call (vote tally not specified in the meeting packet). The board instructed staff to incorporate the approved amendments into a final agreement and to execute the separate document that will set performance‑pay criteria within the first year.

The board also tabled and reordered several agenda items during the meeting and made other personnel‑policy adjustments separately from the Waterman contract.