FAIRMONT– In a special work session held Tuesday afternoon the Fairmont City Council heard about several different city administrator candidates.

The city has been without a full-time city administrator since May 19, 2023. The city partnered with recruiting firm, GovHR USA to find both an interim and full-time city administrator and in late September 2023, the council hired Jeff O’Neill to serve as interim. O’Neill has been filling the role ever since.

On Tuesday Charlene Stevens of GovHR was present to go over the newest batch of candidates with the full council, O’Neill and Mayor Lee Baarts.

“We have a smaller candidate pool this time, about 11 candidates in total. Out of those I identified about five that I think will fit the needs of the city,” Stevens said.

She had already interviewed each of the candidates and went over her findings with the council. No names of candidates or other identifying characteristics were mentioned during the work session.

The first candidate Stevens said she would not highly recommend. She said that while they had good economic development experience, they lacked general local government experience. They were also at the top of the city’s salary range.

The second individual had more experience, including human resources experience. Stevens said that they had done their research on Fairmont and had seemed passionate about the community. The candidate is currently out of state but very willing to relocate to the community and is familiar with it.

The third candidate possessed well-rounded government experience and would bring depth in community and development planning. They are from the midwest and wanting to relocate back to the area and is drawn to Fairmont and more specifically its downtown.

“This individual’s experience in community development would be an asset. They really have an understanding of planning, zoning… and has experience working in a full-service city,” Stevens said.

Council Member Britney Kawecki said, “I was excited to see that they’re working in a population smaller than ours but are eager to grow. I really like that they have a Master’s (degree) in public administration and all of their community development experience.”

Stevens said that this candidate was also willing to relocate but did note that they were looking for other jobs in the region as well.

Candidate number four also brings about 20 years of well-rounded experience, mostly as a city administrator in smaller, full-service cities. Stevens said that they are familiar with the area and has knowledge of both the challenges and opportunities in Fairmont.

“They’re within your salary range and are open to relocating to the area even though they’re already within the region,” Stevens said.

The last candidate has more experience in parks and recreation but is familiar with the region and has some acquaintances in Fairmont and had clearly done their research on the area.

“Planning and zoning will be an area of opportunity for them… I also thought this candidate had good management and people leadership skills,” Stevens said.

Council Member Michele Miller asked how many candidates the council should interview. Stevens said that she suggested at least three should be interviewed.

Council Member Jay Maynard asked how likely the council was to find itself in the same situation after the last batch of candidates were interviewed. He was referring to an instance several months ago when individuals who were interviewed either heard something negative about the community or were contacted by a community member and withdrew their application for that reason or another.

“I think that candidates two, three, four and five have genuine interest in this position,” Stevens said.

When asked Stevens said that candidates three and four were her favorites, but that two and five were also worth considering. She admitted that she didn’t think candidate one was very strong.

Council Member Randy Lubenow said he felt like the council should interview candidates two through five. Council Member Wayne Hasek agreed, saying that if one dropped out the council still had several to choose from.

Stevens said that four was a reasonable amount to interview. She asked the council to identify some potential interview dates. The council went over its schedule and chose Tuesday, March 26 as a potential interview date. It spoke briefly about doing interviews virtually but ultimately decided to hold them in person.

As last time, the city will offer to pay for travel expenses for those coming out of state.

O’Neill said he would block off some staff time during that morning so that the department heads could meet with the candidates. Stevens said she believed they could fit everything in one day by staggering time between meeting staff and holding interviews.

O’Neill noted that candidates might be contacted by residents in the community for whatever reason and asked Stevens to let them know that it could happen.

Stevens did not seem too concerned about the possibility. She said, “the candidates selected have been looking at council meetings or looking at the newspaper and it’s been a positive for them, seeing some stability in the interim position and that work is being done.”

She recommended that the council come up with about 13 questions to ask each candidate in a conversational manner. She also let the council know that it’s possible for it to have further conversations with a candidate if desired.