More Details Emerge From Four-Month Performance Review Of County Administrator Jim Dyer

Leelanau County Administrator Jim Dyer earned a vote of confidence from the county’s Board of Commissioners following a four-month performance review last week. But despite the board formally affirming its support, subsequently-released documents show that at least some commissioners are rankled by Dyer’s leadership style and attempts to take on responsibilities outside of his county role. The review calls for more communication between Dyer and commissioners and better team-building within the county government center, and also prompts Dyer to stay more in his lane as administrator.

The review process asked each of the seven county commissioners to grade Dyer on a scale of 1 to 5 in 10 different categories: administration, leadership, initiative/commitment, problem solving/judgment, adaptability to change, planning/organization, professional presentation, public relations, financial knowledge, and productivity. Across those 10 categories, Dyer earned a composite rating of 4.1 out of 5. His highest ratings came in professional presentation (4.4), initiative/commitment (4.3), adaptability to change (4.3), and financial knowledge (4.3). His lowest ratings were for administration (3.7) and productivity (3.8).

Since last week’s review, the county has released a document collating the “results and comments” from commissioners on Dyer’s performance. Notably, the commissioner comments are kept anonymous, with opinions not attributed to specific members of the board. Since the review process took place in closed session, it is not immediately clear which commissioners were most critical of Dyer’s performance.

Overall, commissioners praised Dyer for his palpable commitment to Leelanau County, his willingness to take on big challenges, his cautious nature in “attending to detail and considering the consequences” rather than rushing into important decisions, and his ability to navigate the challenging learning curve of the county administrator job with grace.

“Mr. Dyer has done exactly what leaders must do when they begin a new job – listen a lot, learn about operations, meet with board members, meet with staff, reach out to community, and address emergency needs,” one commissioner wrote.

Elsewhere, though, Dyer was criticized for not having “open communications with commissioners,” for not fostering a “collaborative team atmosphere” at the county government center,” and for not always respecting the line between administrator responsibilities and commissioner responsibilities.

“There are times that I feel Mr. Dyer would prefer to be a policy maker over a policy administrator,” one commissioner commented. “I believe he holds an allegiance to the county, which is different than an allegiance to aiding commissioners in their development of public policies and the administration of those policies.”

Speaking briefly about their support for Dyer at last week’s meeting, commissioners did not specifically mention the controversies he’s faced since taking the county commission job, such as running for a seat on the Cherryland Electric Board of Directors and practicing law out of the county building. Some community members have suggested that these issues amount to breaches of contract, given that Dyer’s employment agreement with Leelanau County bars him from engaging “in any employment or business” outside of his duties with the county, “except as specifically approved in writing by the board.” 

“I feel [Dyer] used poor judgment in four instances that put commissioners in unwelcome positions,” one commissioner stated as part of the “problem solving/judgment” section of the evaluation. “Those are when he: Ran a campaign to be elected to a paid position on the Cherryland Board without consulting commissioners; Represented Northport in a civil lawsuit through a Zoom trial he conducted in the county administrator's office...; Listed the county building as the address on his personal law practice; And when he continued in discussions during Land Bank and Brownfield meetings after confirming he held a conflict of interest.”

In the “adaptability to change” section, one commissioner wrote that Dyer “needs to say ‘no’ to attorney and non-administrative opportunities that may be influenced by his former jobs,” adding: “We hired an administrator not an attorney or community activist.” Another commissioner, while assessing Dyer in the “productivity” category, expressed the opinion that the administrator’s productivity had “been curtailed by continued non-county activities,” and that Dyer should “concentrate on county budget and business” going forward.

Beyond the graded sections, the review also called for commissioners to recommend goals for Dyer to pursue over the next six months. Specific priorities identified include steering commissioners through the 2027 budgeting process; responding to emails in a timely fashion and compiling “Friday BOC update” emails to communicate more effectively with commissioners; working with elected officials and department heads to “make team building a priority for 2025 and 2026,” and staying in his lane as the county administrator.

Dyer also completed a self-evaluation, in which he called the first four months in the administrator job “challenging,” blaming “two distinct factors.”

“First, there has been neither agreement about, nor communication of, the goals and objectives of the Board of Commissioners,” Dyer wrote. “In hindsight, it would have been wise to use the ninety-day transition period after my appointment to conduct a strategic planning and goal setting session with the Board.” Dyer added that the lack of goals meant he had “no real reference points” for evaluating his own performance at this stage.

“Secondly, I have encountered certain entrenched practices, procedures and attitudes in some areas of the organization, which seriously impact operations,” Dyer continued. “When I have questioned these things, I often get the response that ‘this is how we have always done it.’ When I press to try to understand, or indicate that past practice taken alone does not justify a particular process, I hear (never directly) that I am trying to change to much, or acting too fast. Understanding these processes and reassuring staff that they will participate in any changes that eventually occur has taken more time than I would have initially anticipated.”

Dyer ultimately gave himself a 3.9 composite rating across the 10 performance categories, vowing to improve communication to the Board of Commissioners, push for a “board strategic planning and goal setting meeting” by September 30, and to “initiate a review, by legal counsel, of the various conflict of interest policies of the various boards” and then “suggest an integrated policy that applies to all, and a procedure for resolution of conflicts.”