^{By Craig Jackson – Staff Writer
Published March 4, 2024}

Opinion Report Based on Pertinent Facts as We Know Them

Continuing our investigation into the conversations between Commissioner Selina Jarvis and Thom Roddy, Director and Founder of BlackwaterReports, the intricate web of actions aimed at removing, discrediting, and attacking Commissioner Paul Beaumont continues to unravel, shedding light on the affair through official records and statements by county officials.

Rewind that tape

We begin this report by rewinding to January 12, 2024, a pivotal date in the unfolding drama of Currituck County. It’s crucial to note that January 12 came more than two months after White and Jarvis hand-delivered notice to McRee regarding the non-renewal of his contract. However, what truly marks the significance of this day is the county attorney’s email sent to all commissioners, inquiring about their knowledge of InsightGlobal, the headhunter responsible for posting the county manager position online. While most commissioners responded negatively, Commissioner Bob White’s response stands out, especially considering his later admission, detailed in his press release on February 1, 2024, that he had authorized Beaumont to engage with InsightGlobal.

Code of Ethics for thee, not me

Yet, the events of the morning of January 15, 2024, raise serious questions about the board’s adherence to the county code of ethics, particularly Sec. 2-89, which stipulates conducting board affairs in an open and public manner. While county officials argue that the email exchanges did not constitute a meeting, Robert Joyce, Charles Edwin Hinsdale Professor of Public Law and Government at UNC School of Government, opined that it indeed qualified as an official meeting. The significance lies in the content of those email exchanges and what commissioners expressed therein. Notably, these exchanges occurred a whole week before the county attorney reached out to InsightGlobal for information and an entire month before Beaumont was given the opportunity to present his perspective on the unfolding situation.

We don’t need stinking evidence

In the absence of factual evidence regarding Beaumont’s authorization of InsightGlobal to post the job online, Commissioner Jarvis made her stance clear, stating, “I definitely support a motion for CENSURE,” and proposed initiating steps to express disapproval, including the possibility of requesting his resignation. Similarly, Commissioner White, without conducting an investigation or establishing facts, remarked, “From my understanding, there are only really two ways to do this. 1. He resigns willingly 2. Go through an AMOTION process.” It’s astonishing that the Chair and Vice Chair proceeded to pass judgment on Beaumont without conducting an inquiry or investigation or even providing him with a hearing. These email exchanges were conducted covertly, without Beaumont’s knowledge, let alone his involvement. White has treated this as a personnel matter subject to confidentiality standards, but the reality is that commissioners are not employees, and the same standards of privacy do not apply. Beaumont should have been included in the email exchange, and had he been, this situation might never have garnered public attention.

Moving forward

In a text exchange dated February 12, 2024, Roddy queried Jarvis about a comment made by the county attorney in a Virginian-Pilot article, published on the 11th, stating that Commissioner Bob White and Selina Jarvis personally delivered notice to county manager Ike McRee. Jarvis’s response was emphatic: “I have NEVER said I was not present. I never saw the letter until the morning of the discussion. I did not receive a digital copy but read the letter on the way to the courthouse.”

Unilateral Moves by White and Jarvis

In a subsequent message dated February 13, 2024, Jarvis stated, “I’m in no conspiracy. I will say that the contract as it was in October was not being renewed, but Mr. Roddy, we never voted on that in an open meeting.” This statement raises pertinent questions regarding the decision-making process behind the delivery of notice to county manager Ike McRee by White and Jarvis, mainly if the decision was never formally voted on in an open session. Statements from three out of the seven commissioners affirming they had not seen the notice drafted by White until after its delivery to McRee further suggest another unilateral move by White and Jarvis. This begs the question: why would White and Jarvis subject McRee, his family, and county staff to such public turmoil without a “public vote” on the matter back in October 2023? Additionally, one might wonder why the employees who had indicated they would resign if Beaumont wasn’t censured are not expressing more discontent with White and Jarvis’ role in serving notice to McRee.

More ethics problems

What’s particularly notable about this unfolding conspiracy is the discrepancy in treatment between the actions taken against Beaumont and the standards the commissioners and staff held themselves to. According to Sec. 2-86 of the ethics code, commissioners are expected to uphold the integrity and independence of their office, demonstrating the highest standards of personal integrity and honesty in their public activities. The actions taken by commissioners and some staff, dating back to October 2023, appear to fall significantly short of these ethical standards.

Moreover, Sec. 2-88.(2)c underscores the importance of performing the duties of the office diligently, requiring commissioners to maintain honesty, patience, and courtesy in their official capacity. Yet, it’s difficult to reconcile this ethical mandate with Commissioner White’s public attack on Thom Roddy during the special meeting on February 15, 2024.

Further, Sec. 2-88.(3)c stipulates that commissioners should ensure county employees under their direction observe standards of fidelity and diligence. The discrepancy between McRee’s assertion to the county attorney that he was never served notice on his contract, as reported in the Daily Advance, and the confirmation of notice delivery in a Virginian-Pilot article on February 11, 2024, raises questions about compliance with this section of the ethics code.

Residents of Currituck County may find it disheartening that the board appears unwilling to subject themselves or senior staff to the same level of scrutiny applied to Beaumont. Unfortunately, North Carolina lacks a recall process for elected county officials, leaving voting for changes in leadership as the only recourse for concerned citizens.

Discrediting the office

At the core of this entire debacle is the action taken by White and Jarvis in delivering notice to McRee regarding the non-renewal of his contract, accompanied by a list detailing ten areas of performance concerns. The fact that four commissioners claim they were not involved in drafting the notice, nor did they see it before its hand delivery to McRee, strongly suggests a unilateral move by White and Jarvis. As the county attempts to address the legality of the notice delivered in October, it becomes evident that this initial action set off a chain of events that has unfolded to this day, bringing discredit to the offices of the county commissioner and the county by and large.