EDITORIAL: Nan Crary’s dismissal

McLeod County commissioners’ firing of Administrator Nan Crary caught us by surprise last week. It caught many people by surprise.

But firings often surprise people, especially the employee’s family members and co-workers. We don’t know how Ms. Crary’s co-workers reacted to the news. Most of them weren’t willing to talk with the Leader’s reporter last week. One who did talk, Bonnie Richter, Ms. Crary’s assistant, didn’t see it coming.
Obviously, the sudden end of a county’s administrator’s 12-year tenure raises many questions. Why did it happen? Was it handled the best way possible? Where does the county go from here?

An unexpected event
The public had few, if any clues, that three of the five members on the McLeod County Board — all representing the Hutchinson area — were dissatisfied with Ms. Crary’s performance. The resolution approved by the board last Tuesday said “McLeod County needs a county administrator that does not get involved in policy issues.”

We know nothing about Ms. Crary’s policy issue involvement that would have caused her dismissal. We do know, from experience, that many public administrators — whether they are leading a county, city, school district or hospital — often lead the charge to develop a policy that is eventually adopted by a board. And once a policy is adopted — regardless of whether the administrator agrees with it — the administrator’s job is to carry it out.

We know that Ms. Crary was a champion of a proposed $23 million county jail, though the County Board eventually unanimously voted it down. We know that she didn’t support a proposal to develop a countywide economic authority when we first mentioned the idea to her a year or two ago. Countywide momentum for the authority is growing stronger every day. We know that she — like all County Board members except former Commissioner Mel Dose— didn’t grasp the importance of videotaping County Board meetings for showing to the public on cable TV. When she brought the idea before the board a couple of years ago, she offered a proposal that would have cost more than $100,000, when it actually could have cost less than $10,000.

But were any of these items factors in her firing? We don’t know.

Was it handled in the best way?
The dismissal of an executive — even in the public sector — is typically done as discretely as possible. That might be why Ms. Crary’s termination was done at a rare evening meeting in Biscay, where a large audience was unlikely and Hutchinson’s government-access TV camera wouldn’t be present.

The fact that it was quickly approved by three board members is cause for concern. Where was the process? Why didn’t the County Board conduct annual or biannual performance reviews with Ms. Crary? State law makes provisions for such reviews to be done in a closed session. Administrators in Hutchinson and School District 423 are routinely reviewed by their respective boards.

Did these three board members — Grant Knutson, Bev Wangerin and Sheldon Nies — discuss, before the meeting, what they were about to do? State law forbids discussions among a quorum of board members — whether it be in person, with phone calls or via e-mail — outside of a public meeting.

Comments by the two County Board members who opposed the action — Ray Bayerl and Kermit Terlinden — suggest to us that the process occurred out of public view. Mr. Knutson asked Mr. Terlinden to join him in a meeting at which Mr. Knutson voiced his concerns to Ms. Crary. But where were Mr. Nies and Ms. Wangerin? How could they approve such a weighty resolution to fire the county administrator without any prior discussion?

Where do we go from here?
Mr. Knutson’s resolution says the county needs an administrator who “does not get involved in policy issues.” We hope that statement is fully explained to the county’s next administrator. The County Board also should consider employing a Policy Governance consultant, similar to the direction taken by the Hutchinson City Council. Government works better when roles and responsibilities are clearly defined.
We believe the county should take its time to hire an administrator with excellent credentials. We hope the board casts the net far and wide to find the best candidates. And we hope the county’s process for firing Ms. Crary doesn’t scare away those candidates.

The next administrator should be one who embraces openness and who works well not only with the board, but also with county employees and taxpayers. The next administrator needs to be someone who is fiscally responsible, and is willing to allow the County Board to set policy.

While the County Board has been hush about its reasons for firing Ms. Crary, it needs to be open to explaining its expectations to its next executive. It also needs to conduct ongoing performance evaluations with this administrator, so there are no surprises like this one.

We’re confident it will find an excellent leader. Unlike most rural Minnesota counties, McLeod County is growing and it’s a great place to live. We hope the county receives a tall pile of applications for the job.

Editorials are written by Publisher Matt McMillan and Editor Doug Hanneman. They can be reached at mcmillan@hutchinsonleader.com, or hanneman@hutchinsonleader.com.