Jackson County commissioners held a special meeting to interview candidates for the county attorney position and to clarify the interview process. Commissioners confirmed that candidate order was determined by drawing names and that the county prepared 10 scripted questions (two per district) to ensure consistent evaluation; commissioners retained the ability to ask follow-ups.

During early questioning, Commissioner (Dr.) Spires raised a concern about a redacted ranking sheet: "This process is a public process. So why was the redaction necessary?" Staff said the redaction was recommended by outside counsel handling a related litigation (named in the transcript as Michelle Jordan) and said the county would provide an unredacted list and the statutory citation later. Legal counsel told the board there are statutory limits tied to certain RFP/RFQ procurement records and committed to follow up with the specific statute number and unredacted material.

The bulk of the meeting was a sequence of candidate interviews. Daniel Hartman and Joshua Pascual described roughly 30 years of licensing and local-government counsel work, citing land-use, utilities, bid protests and ordinance-enforcement litigation; they said they use contract paralegals to control costs and proposed a fee structure covering meeting attendance plus hourly rates for litigation. Clayton Knowles highlighted experience managing redistricting litigation, administrative hearings and pandemic-related litigation and proposed hybrid retainer/hourly arrangements while stressing communication in plain language. Nathan Nolan, Michelle Jordan, Marcus Green and other applicants described local-government legal work in land use, procurement, emergency availability and conflict-management processes; several applicants said they would recuse or step away from conflicting private work if hired.

Commissioners emphasized transparency and the Sunshine Law during questioning; multiple applicants repeatedly said they would avoid text-message advice to commissioners and use email or phone to reduce Sunshine-law risks. Applicants described varying fee proposals ranging from modest monthly retainers for meeting attendance to larger monthly retainers covering fixed hours plus hourly litigation rates.

The board approved a procedural motion at the start of the meeting to remove the consent agenda from the day’s agenda. Commissioners said they expect to take a final vote on the county attorney appointment at their February meeting and asked staff to circulate candidate materials and any promised unredacted ranking documentation before that date.

The meeting recessed for about 15 minutes during the interview sequence and resumed to continue applicants’ presentations. No final appointment was made at the session; the board left the matter for a future vote.