Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hiring topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mesa County health board approves amended executive director job description, sets hiring steps
Summary
The board approved an amended executive director job description and outlined a multi-round hiring process, including separate postings or ranges for combined clinical/administrative candidates, a three- or four-week posting window, weekly HR screening of qualified applicants, and closed board interviews followed by community sessions.
Mesa County’s Board of Public Health on Feb. 10 approved an amended job description for the executive director role and laid out a multi-stage hiring process the board members said should include closed interviews and community sessions for finalists.
Members debated whether the executive director posting should combine the medical-director duties into one job or be split into two postings (or two salary ranges). Several board members argued a combined medical/executive role would command a substantially higher salary; one board member suggested a combined range in the example of roughly $275,000–$325,000, while others urged staff to research market rates and consult HR (Nina) before finalizing compensation.
The board also discussed posting logistics. Members generally favored HR screening for minimum qualifications and sending a weekly list of qualified applicants, rather than waiting until the close of the posting. The board settled on a four-week posting window with the option to extend if candidate quality was insufficient.
The selection process was agreed to be multi-phased: an initial screening and early interview round to narrow the pool, a second closed round with the board (executive session as required for personnel review), followed by finalist meetings with the Mesa County Public Health leadership (Tier 2 and 3) and public community sessions. The board also discussed inviting county leadership or senior staff to take part in a late-stage interview for trust-building, offered as optional.
Board members reviewed an evaluation matrix and adjusted weightings for candidate attributes (e.g., financial management, political/communication skills, hiring risk), asking staff to update the rubric and circulate a revised template. The board then moved and approved the amended job description by voice vote; staff will finalize posting language and follow up on next steps.
Next steps: staff to confirm salary-range guidance with HR, post the job(s), screen applicants weekly, and return to the board with a refined rubric and interview schedule.
Quoted from the meeting: "I think we should invite either the county commissioners or senior staff or both to participate somewhere along the way," said a Committee member (Speaker 8), reflecting a desire to strengthen intergovernmental trust during the finalist stage.
