County Coordinator Wilbur Dean will receive annual written evaluations from county commissioners.

By Terry Witt – Spotlight Senior Reporter

                County Coordinator Wilbur Dean hasn’t been formally evaluated by his elected bosses for two years, but that’s about to change.

            Commissioners agreed to Board Chairman Matt Brooks’ proposal Tuesday to evaluate Dean annually and for Dean to perform a written evaluation of all department heads each year.

            Commissioner Lilly Rooks opposed the plan.

            Rooks said she preferred to speak directly to Dean or any department head she had a problem with rather than go through a formal written evaluation every year.

            Brooks said they couldn’t force her to do anything.

            “We’ll do written and you do it verbally. We’ll all be happy,” Brooks said.

            “I’ll do it my way,” Rooks responded.

            Dean hasn’t been evaluated by the board since 2018, a year after being hired for the county’s top administrative position.

            Brooks, Commissioner John Meeks, and Commissioner Mike Joyner participated in the 2018 evaluation of Dean. Rooks and Commissioner Rock Meeks didn’t evaluate him.

            County department supervisors have never received a written evaluation from any county coordinator.

            Brooks said he believes evaluations can be a valuable way of communicating how well Dean is performing his job duties.

            “I think it’s important that we have this as a communications tool for Mr. Dean. He hears from us from time to time but I think it’s a really good interaction with the board to put down and let Mr. Dean know some of the things that he’s doing well, areas of improvement and goals from the year,” Brooks said. “That way we can have some feedback and Wilbur as well.”

            Brooks said when the county coordinator evaluates department heads it provides him with a good opportunity to sit down with the county supervisors and talk about what they’re doing well and where they might need improvement. He said it’s a good communications tool and a morale builder.

            “A lot of times it’s just left unsaid because we’re movin’ and shakin’ and responding to the moment. I think it’s also good to sit down with them and say, hey, here are some things I’ve seen you do a great job, here’s something we need to work on and see what y’all think about it,” Brooks said.

            Commissioner John Meeks said he would like to see the commissioners individually evaluate department heads as well. He said the department heads answer to board members directly. He said all department heads work at the will of the board and this board can tell them to move on if they aren’t doing a good job.

            His suggestion for the board to evaluate department heads didn’t sit well with Commissioner Mike Joyner or Rooks.

            “With all due respect to Commissioner Meeks, I don’t know if we as a board spend enough time with these department heads to evaluate them,” Joyner said.

            Rooks said she doesn’t know anything about some department heads or their job responsibilities.

            “We have to know what their job is and there’s a lot of them we don’t even know what they do,” Rooks said.

            Meeks said he has a good grasp on everybody’s job duties and he thought it would give the board an opportunity to have direct conversations with department heads “and maybe get some improvements.”

            Rooks said she has her own way of dealing with department heads.

            “I can tell you how I’ve done it over the years. It works good for me. If I know someone’s not doing their job, I meet with them, I tell them what they’re doing right, I tell them what they’re not doing right, I tell them what I think they should be doing; I give them two months to straighten it out. For the most part, most people come back and resign,” she said.

            Brooks said his ultimate goal is to approach the evaluations as a communications tool.

            “When I find a lot of holes that need to be plugged it’s because of lack of communication. When it gets down to it, I think that’s where a lot of problem comes from is lack of communication,” he said.

            Meeks said he wasn’t worried about bias in the process of evaluating department heads. He said if a board member gave the employee a score of 3 and the rest scored the employee 9, it would be apparent there was a personal conflict.

            “On the other hand, maybe this is the way to understand what these departments are really doing and what they’re up against,” Meeks said.

            Rooks asked her fellow commissioners how they would know enough to evaluate an employee when they may know little about the employee’s job responsibilities.

            “If this is a tool that’s one thing, if this is a witch hunt I’m not for it,” she said.

            Ultimately the board decided to go with Brooks’ plan for evaluating Dean in writing, and with Dean evaluating department heads in writing.

            Rooks apparently won’t be doing any written evaluations.

———————–

Board of County Commission Regular Meeting September 22, 2020; Posted September 22, 2020