[00:00:54]
>> INVOCATION. FATHER, WE THANK YOU, LORD FOR EVERYONE BEING ABLE TO BE HERE. WE ASK THAT YOU LEAD AND GUIDE US WITH YOUR SPECIAL WISDOM THAT COMES FROM ON HIGH AND NOT EARTHLY OR DEVILISH, BUT NOR MORE ADEPTH TO YOU. FATHER, I PRAY AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EACH COMMISSIONER HERE TODAY. THANK YOU FOR THE HELP THAT YOU'VE GIVENS, THANK YOU FOR THE COMMUNITY. ACCORDING TO JESUS, AND FATHER WE THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SON WHO DIED FOR OUR SIN. IN JESUS' NAME WE PRAY.
AMEN. >> PATRICK, WILL YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
[Approval of Special Agenda]
AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.".>> LET'S MOVE INTO THE ADDITIONS AND DELETE TO SPECIAL
[1. Overview of County Attorney Recruitment Process.]
AGENDA. COMMISSIONER SMITH? >> NON.
>> IS THERE A MOTION. >> MOVE TO ACCEPT.
>> SECOND. A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST AND A
SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. >> (CHORUS OF AYES).
>> IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> MISS TAYLOR?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, SARAH TAYLOR, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES. THANK YOU. WE'RE HEAR TODAY TO PRESENT THE FINALISTS FOR THE NEXT COUNTY ATTORNEY. I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A REVIEW OF THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS LEADING UP TO TODAY BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH DISCUSSIONS. SO IN APRIL, THE BOARD DIRECTED THE HUMAN RESOURCES TO BEGIN A RECRUITMENT CAMPAIGN. A COMMITTEE WAS FORMED TO SHORT LIST AND INTERVIEW CANDIDATES. 31 APPLICATIONS WERE RECEIVED AND FOUR CANDIDATES WERE SELECTED FOR INTERVIEWS. FIRST ROUND INTERVIEWS WITH THE COMMIT WERE HELD ON. THE CANDIDATES MET WITH THE COMMISSIONERS INDIVIDUALLY IN ADVANCE OF TODAY'S MEETING. AND SO HERE WE ARE. THE CANDIDATES ARE PRESENT. WERE THOM MCCAR LON AND DAVE ARE HERE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS SHOULD YOU HAVE THEM. AND I WILL TURN OVER TO YOU FOR
DISCUSSION AND DIALECT. >> OKAY. GREAT, THANK YOU, FIRST OF YOU WILL, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU GENTLEMEN FOR COMING HERE TODAY. I UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO PUT YOURSELF OUT THERE AND GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL DOING THAT. AND I THINK BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION, YOU UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE. OTHER THAN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT HIRE THIS BOARD WILL MAKE. AS FAR AS ADVICING AND GIVING US THE CONFIDENT LEGAL ADVICE. WE'RE OPENING TO THE BOARD AND GO FROM THERE. BEFORE WE DO, WOULD EITHER OF YOU LIKE TO MAKE AN
OPENING STATEMENT? >> NO STATEMENT.
>> OKAY. PLEASE COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. PUT YOUR COMMENTS
IN. >> SURE. THANK YOU, DAVID MIGOTT, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO ENTER VIEW, MR. MCFAR LON AND I THIS MORNING AND ON THE PREVIOUS OCCASION. I HAVE NO STATEMENTS BUT I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
>> OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> I DON'T HAVE A STATEMENT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE PROFESSIONALISM AND KINDNESS THAT YOU SHOWN ME AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. WHY DON'T WE OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD.
>> COMMISSIONER DEAN. THANK YOU.
>> UP S WELL, FIRST, I WANT TO BOTH OF YOU GENTLEMEN, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN THE POSITION. IT
[00:05:03]
SHOWS ME THAT I THINK WE HAVE A GREAT COUNTY WHEN HE HAVE TWO EXCELLENT APPLICANTS WHO HAVE APPLIED AND PUT THEMSELVES OUT TO THE PUBLIC FOR QUESTIONING AND REVIEW. AND I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH BOTH APPLICANTS WHEN I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE AN HOUR, HOUR AND-A-HALF WITH EACH. COMMISSIONER SMITH AND CONRAD AND I AND YOUR COMMITTEE, I THINK THAT BOTH APPLICANTS HAVE EXTREMELY STRONG BACKGROUNDS, RESUMES, EXPERIENCE, AND I THINK, I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE HOW BOTH COULD MAKE THE SHORT-LIST THAT WE HAVE. WE HAD A THIRD WHO TOOK ANOTHER POSITION BEFORE WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVIEW HER. WITH THAT SAID, LET ME TELL YOU WERE I AM THIS AFTERNOON. I'M VERY FLEXIBLE TO DO WHATEVER OBSERVELY, THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD WANTS AT THIS POINT. BUT I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT I CONSIDER THE LITMUS TEST FOR ME IN HIRING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY AND THAT IS THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF ETHICS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A LOT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE, BOTH IN AND OUT OF GOVERNMENT BUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH LOCAL LAWS, LOCAL ORDINANCES, AND PARTICULARLY IN THE LAND USE AREA, ALSO, I THINK THAT IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE AN ATTORNEY WHO IS ADVISING THEIR BOSSES THAT WILL TELL US WHAT WE NEED TO HEAR NOT WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR.THERE NEEDS TO BE A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS TO HAVE A BACKBONE AND A WILLINGNESS TO STAND UP AND SAY, NO, DEAN, YOU'VE LOST YOUR MIND AND YOU'RE WRONG. MAY BE NOT THAT HARSH, BUT IT'S ALL HOW YOU SAY IT. SO, I THINK EACH OF THESE GENTLEMEN MEET ALL OF THOSE CRITERIA. NOW, THE ONE CRITERIA I HAVEN'T MENTIONED AND THE ONE THAT IS REALLY WHERE I'M COMING DOWN ON THIS AFTERNOON, IS ST. JOHNS COUNTY EXPERIENCE. WITH THAT SAID, FOR ME, I HAVE TO SUPPORT DAVID MIGOT. I THINK HE WOULD DO AN OUTSTANDING JOB, I THINK HE'S LEVEL-HEADED AND I THINK HIS PRESENCE WILL COACH THE STAFF AND NOT TRY TO EMBARRASS, DISCIPLINE, OR IN ANY WAY DAMAGE THE STAFF. WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION IN THE INTERVIEW AND HE WAS VERY CLEAR ON HOW HE WOULD WORK WITH THE STAFF TO COACH THEM ALONG. AGAIN, THIS IS NO SLIGHT WHATSOEVER WITH MR. MCFARLAN, GREAT GUY, GREAT INTERVIEW, BUT I'M IN FAVOR OF DAVID'S ST. JOHNS COUNTY EXPERIENCE. I'VE DONE MY RESEARCH ON HIS BACKGROUND, I'M CONVINCED AND I'LL PUT IT ON THE TABLE, IF ANYONE WANTING TO GO THROUGH GREAT DETAIL, THAT HIS DEPARTURE FROM MARATHON WAS NOT ANY DESPAIRAGEMENT ON HIM OR HIS WORK. BASICALLY, I UNDERSTAND IT WAS A MUTUAL, ACCEPTABLE DEPARTURE WITH A MISUNDERSTANDING WITH ONE COUNSEL MEMBER. I'M CONVINCED HIS HARD WORK, ETHIC AND COMMITMENT TO THE COUNTY AND COMMITMENT TO THE LAW. IF THE MAJORITY DOES NOT WANT TO ACCEPT MY RECOMMENDATION, I'M HAPPEN TO DISCUSS EITHER MR. MCFARLAN TO GO BACK OUT INTO THE SEARCH IN SOME WAY. BUT, IT'S MY POSITION WHEN WE HAVE A BIRD IN HAND, THAT I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH, AND I THINK WOULD DO A GREAT JOB FOR THIS COUNTY, I HAVE TO SPEAK UP. BUT I'M NOT IN ANY WAY GOING TO THWART ANY EFFORT TO GO BACK OUT FOR AN EXPANDING SEARCH IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE BOARD.
SO, WITH THAT SAID, THAT'S MY POSITION THIS AFTERNOON.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DEAN FOR THE COMMENTS. WHY DON'T WE ASK OTHER COMMISSIONERS, ANYONE? COMMISSIONER WALDRON?
>> I HAVE TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER DEAN, THE LOCAL WORK WILL MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. I THINK HE WOULD HIT THE GROUND RUNNING PRETTY QUICKLY, MR. MIGOT. I APPRECIATE BOTH THE INTERVIEWS TODAY. VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE GENTLEMEN AND NICE
[00:10:03]
AND FORTHCOMING. AND I APPRECIATE MR. MCFARLAN FLYING DOWN HERE TO BE HERE FOR THE INTERVIEW, NOT WANTING TO DO A ZOOM MEETING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I'M MORE WILLING TO SECOND YOUR OPINION AND LOOK FORWARD TO WHOEVER WE HIRE AND IF WE GO BACK OUT, THAT'S FINE TOO. YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE COMMISSIONER WALDRON SAID, THIS IS A BIG DECISION FOR US AND FOR YOUR COUNTY ON HOW WE PROCEED.>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WALDON, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS?
>> YES, I HAVE COMMENT, FIRST OF ALL I WOULD LIKE TO THANK COMMISSIONER SMITH AND COMMISSIONER DEAN AND THE COMMITTEE FOR BRINGING US GREAT CANDIDATES. I THINK THEY'RE BOTH QUALIFIED AND WOULD DO A GREAT JOB FOR THE COMMUNITY. I THINK MR. MIGOT HAD GOOD ANSWERS TO MY QUESTION AND HE ASKED ME IF I HAD CONCERNS BEFORE I LEFT THE ROOM AND MY ONLY CONCERN ON PAPER AND I GUESS THERE'S STILL A CONCERN I HAVE, THERE'S BEEN A MOVING OF JOBS AND THAT'S ALWAYS A CONCERN TO ME WHEN I'M HIRING ANYBODY, I WANT SOMEBODY THAT WE HIRE FOR THE OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY FOR THEY ARE HEART TO BE IN IT FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY, AND I WANT THEM TO BE TOTALLY COMMITTED TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY, AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT MR. MIGOT WOULD NOT BE. IN FULL CANDOR, I GUESS IT'S STILL A CONCERN THAT I MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME. I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO OUR DISCUSSION TODAY BUT I WANTED TO BRING THAT TO THE BOARD.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER SMITH?
>> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND I WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU FOR APPOINTING ME TO THIS COMMITTEE, AND ALTHOUGH I'M NOT TRAINED IN LAW, AND A LAWYER WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON THINGS THAT I THINK WERE ABLE TO HELP IN THE PROCESS. IT WAS A REAL PLEASURE TO SERVE WITH MR. CONRAD AND COMMISSIONER DEAN AS WELL. GOING THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS, WE HAD A LARGE SELECTION OF APPLICATION TOSS REVIEW. AND I THINK, LOOKING AT PAPER IS ONE THING, AND ENGAGING AND INTERFACING IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. WE WERE EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO INTERVIEW AND TO FACE, HAVE A FACE-TO-FACE INTERACTION WITH ALL THREE OF THE ONE THAT IS DID COME IN. YOU KNOW, ONE THICK THAT I LOOK AT, WHENEVER I HIRE SOMEBODY, I LOOK FOR INTEGRITY, FUNCTION, AND INTELLIGENCE.
THOSE ARE THE THREE ATTRIBUTES THAT I LOOK FOR WHEN HIRING AN EMPLOYEE. AND I CAN SAY, THAT OUT OF THOSE THE MOST IMPERATIVE AND IMPORTANT IS INTEGRITY. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S VERY, VERY, VERY, IMPORTANT ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO ETHICS AND WHEN SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO GUIDE US LEGALLY WITH COUNSEL. I WILL SAY THAT I THINK THAT BOTH OF THESE APPLICANT DO HAVE THAT, IT APPEARS THAT THEY HAVE INTELLIGENCE AND I THINK THAT'S VERY OBVIOUS. I WILL SAY, MR. MCFARLAN, WHAT STOOD OUT ON PAPER WAS IN FACT THAT HE WAS IN A POSITION THAT WAS ELECTED.
WHICH TO ME WAS QUITE UNIQUE AND NOT SOMETHING WE SEE FREQUENTLY IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. AND I ALSO THOUGHT THAT PRAT A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND PERCEPTION. HE HAS EXPERIENCE IN RUNNING CAMPAIGNS AND BEING A PARTICIPANT IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS. I THOUGHT THAT WAS A UNIQUE EXPERIENCE THAT WOULD AID OR COULD ASSIST. MR. MIGOT, ONE OF THE THINGS THIEVERE WERE OUTSTANDING, THERE SEEMED TO BE A BREVITY OF DURATION IN MANY PLACES. AFTER TALKING WITH HIM AND UNDERSTANDING THE SITUATION THAT HE WAS IN, CERTAINLY GAVE ME RELIEF IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. AND I THINK I SHARE THAT WITH YOU, AND I WOULDN'T MIND HIM SHARING THAT AS WELL BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S BEEN QUESTION IN REGARD TO HIS DEPARTURE MARATHON. DURING THE PROCESS, I WOULD GOOGLE EACH NAME OF THESE FOLKS AND COME UP WITH WHAT WAS ON TOP OF THE LIST. I GOOGLED BOTH OF THESE GENTLEMEN AND AFTER READING THE FILE ON HIS, PPDF IN REGARD TO THE SETTLEMENT
[00:15:06]
DONE IN MARATHON THAT RELIEVED AND I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES AND ANGST THAT WAS THERE. I'M GRATEFUL THAT OUR COMMITTEE COULD COME UP WITH TWO VERY ELIGIBLE, QUALIFIED CANDIDATES.AND THAT WAS SOMETHING I HAD CONCERN WITH COMING TO THIS BOARD, IS I DIDN'T WANT TO BRING SOMETHING SUBPAR. BUT I BELIEVE OUT OF THE PROCESS THAT SOMETIMES I GET NERVOUS ABOUT.
I WANTED TO BRING TO YOU SOMEBODY THAT I CAN RECOMMEND.
AND I THINK WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. AND I HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW IT'S HARD IN AN HOUR TO BE ABLE TO GET TO KNOW SOMEONE. I'VE HAD MORE THAN THAT, AND TODAY IT WAS NO DIFFERENT IN SPENDING SOME TIME. TO ME IT WASN'T THE QUESTIONS THAT I KNOW YOU HAD TO ASK IN ORDER TO BE SATISFIED WITH THE HIRING OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY BUT IT BECAME MORE PERSONAL AND PERSONABLE TO ME. I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH EITHER ONE, I DO BELIEVE IN FAVOR OF MR. MIGOT AS WELL. I BELIEVE FROM A COUNSEL SIDE OF THING I THINK IT WOULD BE FAVORABLE AND I WOULD AGREE
WITH COMMISSIONER DEAN. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SMITH. I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THINGS I THOUGHT WERE IMPORTANT ABOUT BOTH CANDIDATES. MR. MCFARLAN YOU HAVE GREAT EXPERIENCE AND WORKING IN ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, LOCAL GIFT, IN TENNESSEE AND YOUR EXPERIENCE IS IMPECKABLE. I'VE DONE RESEARCH ON MY OWN ON YOUR BACKGROUND AND CASES YOU'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN. YOU HAVE A LARGE RANGE OF LEGAL EXPERIENCE THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO BEING A COUNTY ATTORNEY. I THINK THAT'S A STRENGTH THAT YOU HAVE. I THINK CANDIDLY ONE OF THE WEAKNESSES IS THAT YOU MOSTLY PRACTICED IN TENNESSEE. THE LAW WILL BE DIFFERENT, BUT SOME OF THE FOUNDATIONAL LAW MAY BE DIFFERENT. NONE OF THAT ARE THINGS THAT YOU COULDN'T OVERCOME, I THINK YOU ABSOLUTELY COULD AND WILL OVERCOME. YOU PRACTICE LAW IN FLORIDA TODAY, AND YOU ARE INVOLVED IN ALL LEVELS OF LITIGATION SO, CLEARLY YOUR VERY EFFECTIVE. MR. MIGOT, SPECIFICALLY, I WILL ADDRESS YOU FOR A MOVEMENT. ONE OF YOUR STRENGTHS IS YOU WORKED FOR ST.
JOHNS COUNTY BEFORE AND UNDERSTAND THE OPERATING ENVIRONMENT HERE AND WHEN WE SPOKE EARLIER YOU HIGHLIGHTED A FEW THINGS I THOUGHT WERE IMPORTANT. I THINK ONE OF THE WEAKNESS SUNSHINE YOU'RE A LOCAL GUY, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES TOO, RIGHT. SOMETIMES WHEN YOU'RE FROM THE SAME PLACE, THERE CAN BE BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES TO THAT.
THIS IS THE REASON WHY, THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MILITARY AFFAIRS, YOU CAN NOT BE IN THE MILITARY TO SERVE ON THAT COURT, BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT YOUR BRANCH-SPECIFIC BIASES TO IMPACT THAT. BUT, I THINK THAT YOU HAVE A VERY IMPECKABLE BACKGROUND AND WORKED AT ALL DIFFERENT LEVELS. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS. DO EITHER OF YOU, AND I'M GOING TO START WITH MR. MIGOT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND ANSWER THIS. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND I WOULD LIKE YOU TO ANSWER THESE AND WE'LL GO
FROM THERE. >> WITH YOU, MR. MIGOT DO YOU HAVE ANY CONFLICTS OR PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT WOULD IMPACT
YOUR ROLE AS COUNTY ATTORNEY. >> THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO. I KNOW PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY, I PRACTICED HERE BEFORE. YOU GET THE SAME ATTORNEYS AND REPRESENTATIVES REPRESENTING THE BOARD. SO, I DO KNOW PEOPLE BUT I HAVE NO CONFLICTS AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH CHAPTER 12 OF THE FLORIDA STATUES, I TOOK AN OATH SO THERE'S NOTHING IN ANY SORT OF FRIENDSHIP OR RELATIONSHIP THAT I HAVE THAT WOULD EFFECT MY ABILITY TO BE IMPARTIAL AND
UPHOLD THE LAW. >> MR. MCFARLAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONFLICTS THAT WOULD IMPACT YOUR SHH ABILITY TO BE COUNTY
>> YOU HAVE ATTORNEYS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM HERE PROBABLY ARE TRYING TO MAKE THEIR CAREER DECISIONS BASED ON WHO COMES IN AS A COUNTY ATTORNEY. EXPLAIN TO US ON THE BOARD HOW WILL MAINTAIN AND RECRUIT GOOD STAFF AND HOW YOU WOULD MANAGE THAT
OFFICE. >> WELL, I THINK CONTINUITY WOULD BENEFIT WHOEVER TAKES THIS JOB. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT EVERYONE THERE IS WILLING TO STAY. OF COURSE, I WOULD STILL WANT TO REVIEW EVERYONE AND EVERY POSITION TO BE SURE THAT
[00:20:04]
EVERYONE HAD THE SAME OVERALL VISION THAT I DID BECAUSE MY OVERALL VISION WOULD BE TO FOCUS ON REPRESENTING THE COMMISSION AND I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'SOFFICE SPOKE WITH ONE VOICE. >> AND SPEAK TO YOUR LEADERSHIP
PHILOSOPHY. >> I THINK IN MY EXPERIENCE, ATTORNEYS ARE TERRIBLE LEADERS. I THINK ATTORNEYS TRADITIONALLY ARE BAD, I THINK PATRICK'S DONE A GOOD JOB, I THINK TELL ME ABOUT YOUR LEADERSHIP PHILOSOPHY.
>> WELL, I THINK THE BEST LEADERS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE THE HARDEST WORKERS. I THINK THAT GOES HAND IN HAND, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT IF I WAS HEADING THAT OFFICE, THE OTHER ATTORNEYS WOULD SEE MY WORK ETHIC AND ADOPT MY WORK ETHIC AND WORK
HARD FOR THE COMMISSION. >> OKAY. I UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> SO, IF I WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO GET THIS POSITION, THE FIRST PART OF YOUR QUESTION, IS, I WOULD COME IN AND NO RASH DECISIONS. I WOULD NEED TO OBSERVE HOW EVERYONE WORKS, HOW THE SYSTEMS WORK OVER TIME, A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME SO THAT I CAN SEE WHAT ADJUSTMENTS MAY BE NECESSARY OR RECOMMENDED. I WOULD SOLICIT FEEDBACK FROM MY STAFF. WHEN I SEE ISSUES I WILL CORRECT THEM IN PRIVATE, ALSO PRAISE WORK WELL DONE.
CRITICISM THOUGH, SHOULD BE DONE IN PRIVATE, I'VE CRITICIZED OTHERS BEFORE AND BEEN CRITICIZED BEFORE, SOME PEOPLE DON'T TAKE IT WELL, I THINK CRITICISM NEEDS TO BE CONSTRUCTIVE, I THINK YOU GET BETTER RESULTS WITH CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM, NOT JUST YOU DID THIS WRONG BUT HERE OWES HOW WE DO IT RIGHT GOING FORWARD. IN TERMS OF STAFF AND CAPABILITIES AND OBSERVING IT, YOU NEED TO OBSERVE A FEW INSTANCES OF THE SAME ACTIVITY BEFORE SETTING THEM FREE. THERE MAY BE EXCEPTIONS, ONE STAFF MAY BE PARTICULARLY EXPERIENCED AND YOU KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH THEM AT A BOARD OF CONSTRUCTION AND APPEALS BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR FIVE YEARS. BUT IN GENERAL, WATCH NECESSARY, PRAISE IT NECESSARY, AND SET FREE, BUT AT NO POINT WILL THERE BE MICRO MANAGEMENT, THERE HAS TO BE A BALANCE OF OBSERVING AN MAKING THINGS BETTER WITHOUT MICRO
MANAGEMENT. >> HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR
LEADERSHIP ABILITY. >> PRAISE THE OFFICE, SET A GOOD EXAMPLE, AND AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONS WHEN CRITICISM IS NECESSARY, CRITICIZE IN A FASHION THAT'S CORRECTIVE AND MAKE BETTER RESULTS, DO IT PRIVATELY, WITHOUT SCORN AND WITH LEVEL HEADEDNESS, TRY AND MAKE IT AN ENJOYABLE ATMOSPHERE FOR THE PEOPLE TO DO THE WORK THEY NEED TO DO.
>> MY NEXT QUESTION IS, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO OUTLINE, BOTH OF YOU UNDERSTAND YOUR ROLE. YOUR ROLE IS TO ADVISE THE BOARD. WHAT IS YOUR LEGAL PHILOSOPHY AS FAR AS BEING AN ADVISOR TO THIS BOARD
AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AS FAR >> IT IS APPLYING THE LAW IS THE SHORT ANSWER. I'M HERE TO GIVE LEGAL ADVICE TO THE FIVE OF YOU NOT POLICY DIRECTION. I NEED TO BE AWARE OF THE BIG PICTURE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE YOU, SO I'M SURE TO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING ON. SOMETIMES I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ANSWER NO OR GIVE YOU A NO ANSWER, HOWEVER, ONE POSSIBLE TO EFFECTUATE THE GOALS OF THE BOARD, THAT ANSWER IF POSSIBLE NEEDS TO BE NO, WE CAN'T DO IT THIS WAY BUT HERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO GET THE SAME OR SIMILAR RESULT WHILE STAYING
WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW. >> MR. MCFARLAN?
>> I BASICALLY AGREE WITH WHAT MR. MIGOT SAID. YOU KNOW, MY APPROACH WOULD BE, SUPPORT THE COMMISSION IN OF ANYWAY POSSIBLE IN REGARD TO THE LAW. IF THE LAW SAYS MAY BE WE CAN GO IN THIS DIRECTION, BUT IF THE LAW BOXES US IN AND SAYS WE CAN'T DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, I WOULD TELL YOU, LOOK, WE JUST CAN'T DO THIS. AND, I WOULD THINK THAT'S JUST AS AN IMPORTANT PART OF MY JOB AS ANY OTHER. IS BEING ABLE TO SAY NO, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE BECAUSE OF ANY POLITICAL OR PERSONAL PREFERENCE POLITICAL BELIEF OR PERSONAL PREFERENCE OF MINE, IT WOULD BE BECAUSE I COULD FIND NO WAY TO PROCEED AS THE COMMISSION WANTED TO PROCEED. BUT ONLY IN THOSE SITUATIONS. I WOULDN'T TELL
[00:25:02]
COMMISSIONER DEAN HE WAS CRAZY, BUT I MIGHT HAVE TO TELL HIM NO IF WE CAN'T FIND A WAY ABIDES THE LAW TO GO THE DIRECTION THECOMMISSION WANTS. >> I UNDERSTAND, THANK YOU.
>> WE'RE GOING TO COME TO YOU, MR. MCFARLAN, HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE YOU TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THIS POSITION IF YOU WERE TO JOIN THIS BOARD, CAN YOU GIVE US A TIMEFRAME? ARE WE LOOKING AT MONTHS OR LONGER THAN THAT. WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION PRIVATELY.
>> RIGHT. I DO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL PRACTICE. I DO HAVE A LOT OF CASES AND MANY OF THOSE, I CAN REFER TO OTHER ATTORNEYS, BUT THERE'LL BE SOME I'LL HAVE TO TAKE TO TRIAL.
BUT, I ANTICIPATE THAT I CAN STILL BE HERE BY THE FIRST OF THE YEAR. AND I MAY HAVE TEMP
TEMPORARY. >> WE WANT A REALISTIC EXPECTATION. OBVIOUSLY, YOU HAVE TO MOVE AND RELOCATE.
THAT'S NOT A BARRIER TO YOU, I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL.
MR. MIGOT? >> SO, WHICHEVER CANDIDATE YOU ALL CHOOSE TODAY, AS YOU ARE AWARE, A CONTRACT NEEDS TO BE NEGOTIATED WITH THEM. AND UNLESS YOU ALL CALL A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THAT, THAT CONTRACT'S GOING TO BE UP LIKELY ONE WEEK FROM TODAY OR THREE WEEKS FROM TODAY. AND IF I'M FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE CHOOSEN, ONCE A CONTRACT WILL BE APPROVED I WILL GIVE MY CURRENT EMPLOYER, A 14-DAY NOTICE. AND AT THE END OF THAT 14-DAY PERIOD, IF NEEDED I CAN BE AVAILABLE. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SAYING I WANT TO START THAT DAY, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A WEEK OR TWO OFF IF THE BOARD WAS OKAY WITH THAT, BUT IF THE BOARD SAID WE NEED YOU ON DAY 15, I'M PREPARED AND READY TO START WORK
AT THAT TIME. >> NEXT QUESTION, I'M TURNING BACK TO THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO FLUSH THIS OUT. MR. MCCORMICK HAS BEEN NICE ENOUGH TO STAY UNTIL THE END OF THE YEAR. OBVIOUSLY THERE'LL BE A TRANSITION PERIOD. HOW DO YOU FORESEE THAT, MR. MIGOT, BETWEEN
YOU AND MR. MCCORMICK? >> SO, IF I'M CHOSEN, I WOULD GLADLY DISCUSS IT WITH HIM. ANY OFFICIAL THOUGHT IS HE'S HERE THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST, I THINK HE SHOULD BE HERE UNTIL DECEMBER 31ST, THERE MAY BE FINANCIAL DETRIMENT TO THE COUNTY TO CHANGE THAT AT THIS TIME. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH I'VE WORKED HERE BEFORE, THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING HIM FROM MY DAY ONE UNTIL, IF HE STAYS UNTIL THE FIRST. AT YOUR FIRST BOARD MEETING, I'M YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND WILL BE IN THAT SEAT, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THAT MEETING OR MOST OF IT, HE'S SITTING NEXT TO ME AND HELP POINT OUT THE THINGS TO LEARN THE JOB QUICKER. I ANTICIPATE WORKING WITH HIM, LEARNING FROM HIM UNTIL DECEMBER 31ST.
>> MR. MCFARLAN PLEASE ANSWER THE SAME QUESTION.
>> I WOULD THINK SPENDING AS MUCH TIME WITH PATRICK, SPENDING AS MUCH TIME WITH HIM AS POSSIBLE WOULD BENEFIT WHOEVER GOT THIS POSITION. AND THAT'S CERTAINLY WHAT I WOULD INTEND TO DO. IN FACT, I THINK I TOLD HIM THAT EARLIER TODAY.
["Additional Item"]
>> I THINK MY COMMENT TO HIM, WAS, I WOULD PROBABLY BE
FOLLOWING YOU AROUND FOR AWHILE. >> I GOT YOU.
>> WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT. ARE THERE ANY FOLLOW UP
QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> OKAY. WHY DON'T WE GO FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. COMMISSIONER DEAN AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE.
>> WE'LL NOW TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE SELECTION OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. NAME AND ADDRESS, AND THREE MINUTES.
YES, SIR? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, ED SLAVIN, BOX 304, I'M KIND OF DISAPPOINTED IN THE PROCESS, AND LET ME TELL YOU WHY. WHEN A PERSON APPLIED IN FLORIDA TO BE A JUDGE, THEY FILL OUT A FORM FROM THE FLORIDA JUDICIARY NOMINATING COMMISSION, I'VE SHARED WITH WITH Y'ALL, 73 QUESTIONS. WE DIDN'T DO THAT LEVEL OF INTENSE QUESTIONING AND WRITING. THOSE ANSWERS SHOULD BE UNDER OATH AND AVAILABLE TO
[00:30:02]
THE PUBLIC JUST LIKE J & C, JUST LIKE OUR LATEST JUDGE, LAUREN BLOCKER. VERY IMPRESSIVE CANDIDATE, FIRST IN OUR LAW SCHOOL CLASS AND FIRST IN HER COUNTY BAR. SHE HAD TO PROVIDE A LOT OF ANSWERS TO GET THAT GIG. AND SHARP MARKED CONTRAST, I ASKED 34 QUESTIONS, NEITHER APPLICANT RESPONDED. THE COMMISSION DIDN'T ASK THE APPLICANT TOSS RESPOND EVEN TO MY 34 QUESTIONS. AND I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH ONE APPLICANT, THERE'S NOTAL FALSE DICHOTOMY BETWEEN LAW AND POLICY. I THINK WE GOT HOMECOOKING HERE IN TENNESSEE. I THINK WHEN MR. MIGOT MET WITH MR MR. MCCORMICK.>> EXCUSE ME, I CAN'T HEAR THE SPEAKER.
>> GO AHEAD. I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A PRE-SELECTION HERE.
AT THE VERY LEAST, I'M MYSTIFIED AS TO WHY SO FEW CANDIDATES WERE DEEMED UNQUALIFIED. THERE WERE A FEW CANDIDATES FROM HERE, EXCELLENT ATTORNEY, HE MET THE QUALIFICATIONS AND STAFF ALONE DECIDED TO REFUSE HIM. THAT'S NOT RIGHT. AND UNDER GREGG'S POWER IN THE CASE LAW IT'S NOT A BONA FIDE REQUIREMENT THAT THE PERSON HAVE EXPERIENCE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WON'T PAST MUSTER WITH EOC. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU ALL TABLE ANY ACTION. NOT CHOOSE TO HIRE EITHER GENTLEMAN TODAY AND GET A LEGAL AUDIT AS TO OUR PROCESS BECAUSE IT LEAVES MUCH TO BE DESIRED. WE HAVE REPEATEDLY RUBBER STAMPED RECOMMENDATIONS FROM MR. CONRAD, THERE'S NOT EVEN A RESUME ON FILE AND WE DON'T HAVE WRITING SAMPLES FROM THESE FOLKS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT J & C DID IS WHAT I WANTED TO SEE Y'ALL DO IS ASK FOR WRITING SAMPLES. YOU'RE HIRING A LAWYER. ST. JOHNS WANTED TO CHARGE ME MONEY TO SEE WRITING SAMPLES. THAT'S NOT RIGHT. YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WITH ALL THE WRITING SAMPLES. THIS PROCESS LEAVES MUCH TO BE DESIRED. I PUBLISHED IN 1988 IN AMERICAN BAR
[2. Board Discussion]
ASSOCIATION IN THE STUDENT BAR MAGAZINE ABOUT THE DISCRIMINATION OF HIRING ATTORNEYS. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE GOT HERE, AND THE PUBLIC'S NOT GOING TO LIKE IT. PLEASEMOVE TO TABLE. THANK YOU. >> FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK THAT
COMPLETES PUBLIC COMMENT. >> THANK YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR.
PUBLIC COMMENT NOW CLOSED. I WOULD LIKE, JUST BEFORE WE GO FURTHER, MR. CONRAD, YOU'RE KIND OF IN AN INTERESTING POSITION WE ASKED YOU TO KIND OF WEIGH IN ON THIS. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, OBVIOUSLY, THESE ARE THE TWO GENTLEMEN THAT WE SELECTED, BUT YOUR ROLE AS THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR IS A CRITICAL ROLE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH COUNTY ATTORNEY, DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS OR FEEDBACK TO THE BOARD THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
>> I WOULD JUST SAY, IT WAS A PLEASURE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT ON THE PANEL WITH COMMISSION TERRE SMITH AND COMMISSIONER DEAN. BOTH APPLICANTS DID WELL IN THE INTERVIEWS. AND WHOEVER THERE BOARD HIRES BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM OR ANYONE ELSE, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO WORK WITH THEM, I TRUST YOUR JUDGMENT, AND FROM AN ADMINISTRATION WE WILL WORK WITH
WHOEVER THIS BOARD SELECTS. >> WHAT OPTIONS WE HAVE FOR THE BOARD TODAY, SO, WE CAN THERE WILL BE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND ONE OF THESE CANDIDATES OR WE CAN POTENTIALLY IF IT'S THE BOARD'S WISH, WE COULD GO BACK OUT AND OPEN IT BACK UP. CAN
YOU OUTLINE THE OPTIONS? >> YES, SIR, YOU JUST DID BEAUTIFULLY. THOSE WOULD BE THE OPTIONS BEFORE YOU TODAY, YOU CAN CHOOSE TO SELECT ONE OF THE CANDIDATES AND THEN WE WOULD SEEK YOUR DIRECTION ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH ONE OF THE CANDIDATES THAT ARE BEFORE YOU, OR YOU COULD CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD AND DO AN EXECUTIVE POTENTIAL RECRUITMENT TO
CONTINUE THE CAMPAIGN FORWARD. >> THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONER DEAN? >> WELL, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION AT THIS POINT. AND I WOULD MOVE THAT WE ENGAGE MR. DAVID MIGOT AS COUNTY ATTORNEY.
>> YES, SIR. >> SO, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN IS THERE A SECOND?
>> THANK YOU, SIR, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SMITH.
[00:35:01]
>> MAY I, THROUGH THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, IT SHOULD THE MOTION BE I GUESS, DEEMED TO BE FOR THE COUNTY TO NEGOTIATE WITH DAVID MIGOT, AND A PROPOSED CONTRACT BE BROUGHT BACK BEFORE THIS
BOARD FOR APPROVAL? RIGHT? >> WHEN YOU SAY, COUNTY, I PRESUME YOU MEAN THE CHAIRMAN? NORMALLY THE CHAIRMAN WOULD NEGOTIATE A COMPENSATION PACKAGE WITH ALL BENEFITS AND BRING THAT BACK, A MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE PACKAGE, BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. WE'RE NOT GOING TO FIVE OF US SIT DOWN AS A CONTRACT AND NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT. IF THIS MOTION PASSES, THE CHAIRMAN WOULD NEGOTIATE A PROPOSED CONTRACTED AN COME BACK TO THE
BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION. >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. >> THAT'S MY MOTION.
>> IF I MAY, UM, I THINK FOR AN INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER TO NEGOTIATION, THAT CAN BE DONE, BUT THAT, I THINK SHOULD BE DONE IN THE SUNSHINE, THE ADMINISTRATOR OR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OR OUTSIDE COUNSEL CAN DO THAT, BACK AND
FORTH KIND OF THING. >> WE'RE GOING TO DO IT EXACTLY THE WAY -- WELL, WE DID THIS, COMMISSIONER SMITH IS THE CHAIRMAN, NEGOTIATE IN THE SUNSHINE WITH MR. CONRAD, THAT'S
THE SAME PROCESS. >> IN OTHER WORDS, AND I THINK, IN THE WAY THAT WAS HANDLED, REGINA ROSS HANDLED THAT, THE COMMISSIONER SMITH, THE CHAIR, WAS, I THINK, OVERSIGHTED OR KEPT IN THE LOOP. IN OTHER WORDS IF THAT'S THE INTENT TO HANDLE THAT SIMILARLY, OF WHAT WAS DONE BEFORE THAT, NEEDS TO
BE DONE. >> WELL, THE COMMISSIONER NEEDS TO MAKE A MOTION, LET'S OUTLINE THE MOTION AND WE'LL SEE IF COMMISSIONER SMITH WILL SECOND AND WE'LL WORK OUT THE DETAILS.
>> YOU WANT ME TO MAKE MY MOTION AGAIN?
>> I WANT TO BE SURE IT'S YOUR MOTION AND IT'S IN LINE WITH...
>> WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE HIRING OF DAVID MIGOT AS COUNTY ATTORNEY AND REQUEST PART OF MY MOTION WOULD BE THAT THE CHAIRMAN NEGOTIATE A PROPOSED CONTRACT INCLUDING ALL COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS WITH MR. MIGOT AND DO THAT IN WHATEVER PUBLIC FOR RUM IS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 12 OR ANY OTHER STATUE AND BRING THAT BACK FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION
FOR APPROVAL. >> THAT WOULD BE ACCORDING TO
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? >> SURE.
>> UNDERSTOOD. >> COMMISSIONER SMITH?
>> I'LL SECOND THAT. SO, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND SECOND BY COMMISSION TERRE SMITH AND WE'LL OPEN IT UP
FOR BOARD DISCUSSION. >> OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. WE HAVE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE'LL GO INTO,
GENTLEMEN, PLEASE VOTE. >> OKAY, THAT PASSES 5-0, THANK YOU MR. MCFARLAN FOR COMING HERE. MR. MIGOT, WOULD YOU
PLEASE COME BACK UP? >> SO, WE STILL HAVE SOME WORK TO DO. THIS IS NOT FINALIZED, WE HAVE SOME NEGOTIATING WHICH WE WILL DO PURR COMMISSIONER DEAN'S MOTION AS ADOPTED BY THE BOARD. BUT THIS IS AN INCREDIBLE AND AWESOME RESPONSIBILITY THAT YOU'RE BEING WEIGHED WITH. THAT RESPONSIBILITY TO THE CITIZENS OF ST. JOHNS AND TO THIS BOARD.
SO, WE'RE GOING TO HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE AND TO THE HIGHEST OF THE STANDARDS AND WE BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE FULLY CAPABLE OF DOING THAT. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO MAKE?
>> THANK YOU, SOT FIVE OF YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE TIME AND EFFORT TO INTERVIEW THE TWO OF US AND ALL THE APPLICANTS. AND I AGREE WITH YOU FULLY, THIS IS A JOB
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.