Dyer Gets Vote Of Confidence From County Board In Four-Month Review

The Leelanau County Board of Commissioners has publicly reaffirmed their support for County Administrator Jim Dyer, following a four-month review of the new county leader. The review, which Board Chair Steve Yoder proposed last month, was the sole item on the agenda at a special meeting held Thursday. The board’s vote of confidence comes amidst accusations from some members of the public that Dyer has repeatedly violated key terms of his employment contract.

Board Chair Steve Yoder initially suggested the review at an executive board session held last month.

“I just think, being four months into his role as administrator here, it’s wise to do a review,” Yoder said at the July 15 meeting. “Just as a board, I think it would help us, and it would help our administrator out.” Yoder added that the board should also plan to conduct a “full-blown evaluation” in early 2026, closer to Dyer’s one-year anniversary on the job. Dyer was hired to serve as county administrator last December, but didn’t officially start until March 31.

Dyer’s first four months on the job have not passed without controversy. This spring, Dyer ran an unsuccessful campaign for a seat on the Cherryland Electric Board of Directors.

Two community members, Tony Borden and Gary Hosking of the group Taxpayers of Leland Township, have been resolute in their view that Dyer breached his contract by seeking the Cherryland seat, given that the contract expressly prohibits the county administrator from engaging “in any employment or business” outside of his duties with the county, “except as specifically approved in writing by the board.”

“[Dyer’s contract] has these very specific provisions about what he can and can’t do, and from the get-go, he’s basically ignoring it,” Borden told The Ticker in June. “My question is, if he's going to do this right from the get-go, what's he going to do later on?”

Dyer argued – and Yoder and Vice-Chair Ty Wessell agreed – that an elected board position was not “employment,” and that the contract had therefore not been violated.

Borden once again excoriated Dyer at the July executive board session, urging commissioners to use the four-month review as a chance to get the administrator back on track with his contract.

“I’ve been reading the employment contract of Mr. Dyer’s; it’s not a good contract,” Borden said during public comment, noting his experience in these matters thanks to a career as general counsel for a Fortune 200 company. “The situation will only be compounded if you fail to administer the contract according to the terms that are in there... Mr. Dyer was hired to be the full-time administrator for the county, working exclusively on county business. He’s very generously compensated at $127,000 a year. Now, on the heels of his prior situation [with Cherryland], he’s representing Northport in litigation… He recently participated in a Zoom conference on July 9 with the court, from his office in this building, during working hours. This demonstrates, certainly, that he’s not working full-time or exclusively for the county.”

Borden also claimed that Dyer’s attorney license listing with the State Bar of Michigan “lists his address in the county office, so he’s practicing law out of this office at taxpayer expense.”

“What else does he have going on that we don’t know about?” Borden asked. 

“Why have contracts if you aren’t going to enforce them?” Hosking added during his own public comment at the July meeting. “If you think that these numerous violations are nitpicky and not very important, then rip it up. And do it publicly.”

Some commissioners defended Dyer at that meeting. Wessell noted that Dyer was still in the process of winding down his responsibilities with Northport, where he previously served as a village manager, and said he knew “for a fact” that Dyer had not billed the county for the time he spent representing Northport in court. Other board members, though, agreed with Borden and Hosking that the administrator’s conduct was questionable.

“I don’t know anything about whatever this lawsuit was, but when you’re the county administrator, I do know you can’t take off that hat and go represent either a municipality or an individual in a lawsuit, and then assume you’re not still the county administrator,” said Distrct 5 commissioner Alan Campbell. “I think it does make the county a participant in a lawsuit that I wish we would have avoided.”

“I just think we should be informed ahead of time if something’s going to happen like this,” concurred District 3’s Will Bunek, adding: “I think the fact that it happened in the county building is the problem.”

It is unclear if commissioners formally reprimanded Dyer as part of his four-month review, as the review itself occurred in closed session. More details should be available soon, as commissioners voted at the end of Thursday’s meeting to release the evaluation to the public.

Coming out of closed session, though, the atmosphere was one of congenial support for Dyer.

“I would make a motion that we support the efforts of Mr. Dyer, and appreciate the growing relationship we have with him, and look forward to working with him in the future,” Campbell said immediately after the open meeting resumed – a statement that drew a unanimous 7-0 affirmative vote.

From there, each commissioner gave a brief statement affirming their support for the administrator. Bunek said Dyer had the board’s “full confidence as our administrator,” while Yoder praised his “tenacity” in a “tough job.”

“I can’t express the confidence I have in you to navigate us through the future,” Yoder told Dyer.

District 2 commissioner Mark Walter offered the closest thing to a rebuke, noting: “I think communication’s a wonderful thing, and we need to practice it a little more.”

The review process asked each commissioner to grade the administrator’s performance on a scale of 1 to 5 in administration, leadership, initiative and commitment, problem-solving and judgment, adaptability to change, planning and organization, and productivity. Commissioners were also asked to identify three goals that they want the administrator to work on for his next six months. Dyer was also prompted to complete a self-evaluation.