Should it take two years for a new administrator to restructure the hierarchy, change the culture and make Indian River County government’s operations more efficient?
Two of our five County Commission members don’t think so.
That’s why County Administrator John Titkanich will begin the final year of his contract fielding questions, responding to complaints and defending his job performance at Tuesday’s commission meeting.
This marks the third time in seven months that the embattled administrator, who started in April 2023, will be grilled by commissioners – particularly Chairman Joe Flescher and Vice Chairman Deryl Loar, both of whom said they are dissatisfied with Titkanich’s leadership.
“I’m not overly impressed,” Flescher said during a phone interview last weekend. “He has fallen short of my expectations. I’m not that confident we’re on the right track.”
Loar, too, expressed frustration with Titkanich’s body of work, blaming the administrator for the absence of any substantial progress the county has made in addressing the challenges, complaints and other concerns he inherited.
The former three-term sheriff wondered aloud when the county might start reaping the benefits of the commission’s sizable financial investment in Titkanich’s administration – the additions of an assistant administrator and ombudsman, significant increases in staff salaries and various studies.
“He’s been here two years now, so you have to ask: How long is enough?” Loar said last week. “We gave him a three-year contract. It shouldn’t take two years to turn around an agency that wasn’t exactly in terrible shape.
“He was going to change the world in 18 months, but here we are – 24 months in – and we’re still spinning our wheels,” he added. “He’s got his team in place. We gave him what he asked for.
We’ve gone through two total reorganizations in two years. And there’s still no momentum.
“To me, it points to leadership.”
Asked if he had lost confidence in the administrator, Loar replied: “Not totally,” but he provided the impetus for next week’s commission discussion, just as he did for similar public conversations in September and December.
Flescher said he’s prepared.
During the previous two sessions, Titkanich responded to questions and criticism by providing statistics and other tangible evidence, making a case that perception wasn’t necessarily reality.
Flescher expects more of the same next week.
“On paper, the guy has it, but statistics and numerical assessment of performance can be skewed,” he said. “The situation really hasn’t gotten any better, but the reports we get will claim otherwise.
“As for myself,” he added, “I don’t see the improvement reflected in the reports.”
Despite two years of almost-constant change in the organization, Flescher said the county continues to receive many of the poor-service complaints made prior to Titkanich’s arrival.
The five-term commissioner joined Loar in wanting to know why it’s taking so long for the promised improvements to be realized.
“I said in January: We’ve had two years of consulting; this needs to be the year of resulting,” the chairman said. “But we’re four months into the year, and I truly haven’t seen any noticeable resulting.
“Our administrator tells us the process of changing culture takes time, but I don’t know that the culture was as bad as initially assessed,” he added. “Even so, it shouldn’t take as long as it’s taking to see results.
“Two years in, it should be mostly smooth sailing, but we haven’t gotten more efficient.”
Flescher was quick to say that the operational struggles are “not a reflection of the overall staff,” adding that he believes the county’s performance has been hindered by the loss of a “tremendous amount of institutional knowledge.”
He said too many longtime, knowledgeable employees were pushed out or opted to leave because they were troubled by what was happening within the organization.
“Change should be positive,” Flescher said, “but we’ve had so much transition that the day-to-day operations have not improved systemically – only on a case-by-case basis.”
To be sure, Flescher and Loar are not among the commission’s majority.
Commissioner Laura Moss remains in Titkanich’s corner, saying he was the best choice for the job when he was hired and he has given her no reason to back off her staunch support.
“He’s doing fine,” she said last weekend. “It’s unfortunate and unnecessary that this keeps coming up.”
While Commissioner Joe Earman said he would like to see Titkanich start moving forward more aggressively with his agenda, he believes the administrator is doing a good job.
“Not a great job – not yet,” Earman said. “But he’s a good man and a good boss who cares about the county and cares about his employees. If I were grading him right now, I’d give him a B-minus.
“Let’s quit studying things and start getting things done,” he added. “We’re in a good place, in terms of our organization, and it’s time to go full-steam ahead.”
Earman said he’s curious to hear what Flescher and Loar say at the commission meeting, particularly the specifics as to why they’re disappointed with Titkanich.
He does not expect anyone on the dais – including Loar or Flescher – to call for a confidence or no-confidence vote.
“I’m not expecting anything like that,” Earman said. “I don’t think John deserves to be treated that way.”
That leaves Commissioner Susan Adams, who said she’s not oblivious to her colleagues’ concerns and will go to the meeting with an open mind.
She knows she’s likely to be the swing vote on Titkanich’s fate, and she welcomes the opportunity to discuss the matter. But she wants the administrator’s critics to provide specifics.
“I think it’s good that we’re having this conversation,” Adams said. “Let’s all be forthcoming and get it all out there – the good, the bad and the ugly. Let’s talk about our expectations and which ones are and aren’t being met.
“Anytime you try to change the culture of an organization, it’s very difficult,” she added. “It’s hard to keep one boss happy. It’s harder when you have to keep five of us happy.
“What’s most important, though, is that we do what’s best for the organization, because our employees are watching how we deal with this.”
As for Titkanich, said providing the Loar-requested quarterly reports is part of his job – an opportunity to reflect on what the county has accomplished during that three-months span.
He said he welcomes the conversations.
“I think it’s a good thing, and I hope the commission views my performance in a positive way,” Titkanich said Monday. “With a keen ear, I’ll listen and respond. … I’m an open book, and I’m open to feedback. It’s a relationship you work on.”
Told that at least two commissioners continue to criticize his performance, he conceded that his administration has “struggled in some areas,” citing the Building Division’s permitting operation and staffing the Public Works Division.
“Cultural change doesn’t happen overnight, and there were probably some things I didn’t foresee,” Titkanich said. “But that was mostly single points of failure.”
He said the organization has made progress in his two years, and he expects that progress to accelerate this year.
“Could we have come further? Yes, there’s always room for improvement,” Titkanich said. “Success is never final. Change is never complete.”
Will we see dramatic change come at Tuesday’s meeting?
Probably not.
Unless Adams or Earman hear something disturbing, Flescher and Loar don’t have the votes to remove Titkanich, if that’s their desire.
And it might be.
In September, both Loar and Flescher publicly questioned Titkanich’s approach, tactics and, in some cases, decisions. They also voiced their frustration with what they perceived to be the administrator’s lack of communication, especially with commissioners but also with community leaders and employees.
Their other criticisms included:
- The loss of institutional knowledge because of staff turnover, including at the management level, where some of the departures were prompted by Titkanich’s arrival and resulting personality conflicts.
- A penchant for hiring supervisory personnel from outside the organization, instead of promoting from within to inspire employes and improve morale.
- Spending excessively to hire consultants, some of which provided information that was entirely predictable.
“I have been candid with him, and I know he knows how I feel,” Flescher said. “We’ve come through hurricanes, economic downturns, significant growth spurts – many, many challenges during my time as commissioner – and the past two years have been more labor-intensive than any time in all my previous years.
“So, any motion that will accomplish the goal of making our county government more efficient and effective will be embraced,” he added. “I think we’re falling short.”
Loar said he couldn’t predict the outcome of the discussion, especially since Titkanich tends to raise his game in the weeks leading to these quarterly reports.
“I don’t know what’s going to happen, but I’ve got a list of stuff to bring up at the meeting,” he said. “A lot will depend on what John has to say and what the other commissioners say.
“We’ll have the conversation and get it on the record,” Loar added, “but I don’t think we can wait a year.”
Will two other commissioners agree?
