Steamboat Pilot & Today

Rob Douglas

For 20 years, Steamboat resident Rob Douglas was a Washington, D.C. private detective specializing in homicide, political corruption and terrorism. Since 1998, Douglas has been a commentator on local, state and national politics in Washington, D.C., Maryland and Colorado. To reach Rob Douglas, email rdouglas@SteamboatToday.com.

Find more columns by Douglas here.

On Wednesday, the Steamboat Springs City Council voted to offer Victorville, Calif., City Manager Jon Roberts the city manager's job in Steamboat. The vote was 6-1, with City Council President Loui Antonucci casting a lonely "nay."

Perhaps befitting the snowy environment he soon must adapt to, it was an avalanche of a vote in favor of Roberts. But in spite of the lopsidedness of the vote, when you see Antonucci, shake his hand and say: "I'm with you, Loui."

Instead of voting with expedience, emotion and inexperience, Antonucci cast his vote based on reason and a desire to see the hiring process through to the appropriate and logical conclusion. Antonucci's vote was not only the correct vote, it was the only vote faithful to the hiring process the citizens of Steamboat deserve.

To be clear, Antonucci's vote was not one to block Jon Roberts from becoming the city manager. To the contrary, his vote was based on his stated belief that an appropriate due diligence investigation should have continued for a short period beyond the public interview process so that Roberts' answers concerning a host of issues could be weighed and investigated - the very essence of meaningful due diligence.

Amazingly though, what began as a discussion concerning whether further due diligence should be performed to examine Jon Roberts' history in Victorville - especially given questions surrounding lawsuits, a seriously overdue audit and other issues in Victorville that arose immediately before the public interview - deteriorated into a vote to extend an offer mere moments after the interview.

Remember, the community repeatedly was told that while only Roberts remained as a candidate, Roberts' hiring was not a foregone conclusion. In a letter to the Steamboat Pilot & Today last Sunday, Citizens Search Committee member Mike Forney wrote, "Although we have only one remaining 'finalist,' it is my understanding that the selection of Jon Roberts is not a 'done deal.'"

I beg to differ.

Anyone with insight to the hiring process knows Roberts was the clear front-runner after the closed applicant interviews. Also, statements in the Steamboat Today by the interim city manager and city attorney before Wednesday's public interview indicated Roberts was going to be offered the job short of a meltdown. As City Attorney Tony Lettunich put it, "He's not been offered the job, but we're down to one candidate, so you do the math."

With the pretense of Roberts' hiring not being a "done deal" shattered, why have an open interview if the council wasn't going to at least pause a week? That would have allowed those unable to attend because of work obligations to read the reports about the interview and chat with neighbors who did attend and then provide constituent feedback to the council, while the council and press simultaneously review the newly revealed information and answers.

Common sense and common courtesy dictate that if the hiring process is designed to include a public interview, the public should be allowed time to provide feedback. Otherwise, the only possible conclusion is the interview devolved - hopefully unintentionally - into a charade as the majority of council already had decided to hire Roberts without post-interview constituent feedback.

The rush to vote before sundown on Wednesday was unfortunate. The process as originally envisioned and created by the council and the Citizens Search Committee was excellent, and all involved are to be commended for the tremendous effort and time they provided the city. The hiring process worked fairly well through the parts of the process done in executive session.

Unfortunately, when it comes to the final public interview process and the necessary follow-up due diligence, the process was flawed.

For example, at the very moment the members of the Citizens Search Committee and a majority on council were declaring that there was no need for further due diligence investigation of Roberts' answers to issues raised by the Steamboat Pilot & Today in an editorial Wednesday morning, Roberts' local paper was running an article contradicting his statement about why Victorville's audit is more than a year overdue. The timeliness of the audit and Roberts' answer is just one of numerous issues deserving further investigation.

Bottom line: When hiring a public official, due diligence does not end at the point when the candidate's identity becomes public. A second phase of due diligence should be conducted while allowing the public a period of time to reflect upon and respond to the candidate's assertions during the public interview phase.

On Wednesday, one elected official demonstrated he understands the importance and meaning of due diligence and the responsibility of allowing time for the public to provide constituent feedback.

Thank you, Loui.

To reach Rob Douglas, e-mail Rob.Douglas@Comcast.net