Washington County picks, doesn’t finalize new health director

The Washington County Board of Health announced at a Tuesday morning meeting that it had selected a finalist to become its next public health director, but opted to keep most details about the candidate under wraps until the decision until completing more steps of the pre-hire process.

“I did offer Candidate G the position last week pending background and reference checks,” Chairperson Cathy Buffington said. “I do have her reference here, which is good. Background check is not back yet.”

Details about candidate G are largely a mystery for now.

Interim Public Health Director Chris Estle said the individual was “relatively new to a management role,” at one point during the meeting. “I would recommend the board do an evaluation with the new administrator at 30, 60 and 90 days, to just give her support and direction that she is going to need in this fast role. That’s for anybody coming into a public health director job.”

Board Member Dr. Trevor Martin said the candidate was a go-getter during a discussion about the position’s start date.

“I personally think her personality will want to get started as soon as possible, and I think she will adapt to however that looks, based on the interview we had with her.” Martin said.

Otherwise, board members said they would withhold Candidate G’s name for the time being.

“I almost think that we need a signature first,” Board Member Dr. Chris Grier said. “Once she’s signed, then it’s official. I think it’s not official until she has.”

Board members settled on a start date of Nov. 29 and starting salary of around $70,000, which would gradually be raised to $80,000 by the start of the next fiscal year, the same salary former Public Health Director Danielle Pettit-Majewski ended with.

The decision was not without lengthy debate. Board members considered starting the position Nov. 8, but hesitated based on a disclosure that Candidate G had a prior obligation from Nov. 18-28. While board members said they knew what that obligation was, they did not disclose it.

“I don’t think it’s a good idea to start and stop and start,” Board Member Jack Seward Jr. said. “You’ve got a point, for the first couple weeks, you’re going to learn your passwords, how to get around the office, things like that, but then you’re going to be gone for 10 days, you’re going to lose part of that … I mean, she can still do that, even if she doesn’t start until the 29th.”

The finalists’ list of references was another point of contention. County officials said they had heard back from only one of Candidate G’s three professional references, and had not requested any personal references.

“In my experience, and I have done thousands (of) background checks for hiring in my career, you get not only professional and business but you also get personal references,” Seward said. “I would say we ask her to provide … three personal reference checks, people that are not related to her but have known her for a number of years.”

Lastly, health officials deliberated the position’s starting salary at length.

“When the person has a responsibility to the whole department, I feel that person should be paid more than whoever your highest paid employee is,” Chairperson Cathy Buffington said. “Based on the responsibility, not necessarily years of service. That’s just my opinion.”

Interim Director Chris Estle proposed the gradual ramp up to that pay level.

“I think the board is going to have to set, ‘This is what you’re going to get at 30 days, this is what you’re going to get at 60 days, this is what you’re going to get at 90 days,’” she said. “It’s going to have to be a step each time, because there’s so much stuff and information, she’s going to have to step up and it’s going to be a huge learning curve for anyone in this position.”

Comments: Kalen.McCain@southeastiowaunion.com