“Now we are in a state of paralysis,” McNabb-Coleman said. “There is no talk of investigating a new form of government, and no investment in a strategic leadership plan.”
Several lawmakers spoke during the meeting on why they were voting for or against the proposal.
Pecher said the county needs to get a better handle on its long-term leadership structure.
“I think we’re putting the cart before the horse,” he said, while also saying he worries that the operations officer would be “the administrator in disguise” and that he wants to avoid having to pay once again to buy out a contract of an executive-level employee.
Legislator Ryan Foley, D-Auburn, who chairs the Government Operations Committee that advanced the proposal at the beginning of April, said the operations officer job description was crafted so it would not be on the level with an administrator.
“We worked very hard to make sure we put in the job description … that it has no decision making authority,” Foley said. “It’s simply someone that coordinates various department heads, and ultimately it entirely reports to the chair.”
He also noted the position would not come with an employment contract that could need to be bought out, like an administrator. And he said the overall cost of this structure would be less than what the county was paying for the administrator’s office in 2019.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .