County Administrator Heidi Petito ‘Does Not Meet Expectations,’ 3 of 5 Commissioners Say, Putting Her Future in Doubt

In a set of evaluations potentially devastating to Flagler County Administrator Heidi Petito’s tenure, three of her commissioners—Chair Leann Pennington, Kim Carney, and Pam Richardson—concluded in their evaluations of Petito that she “does not meet expectations.”

They each rated her a failing 2 out of 5, sharply criticized her leadership, and two of them explicitly said Petito is no longer the person for the job.

“I am not confident that the current Administration or certain members of staff are fully prepared to meet that challenge or deliver the transformational change that will be required,” Commission Chair Leann Pennington wrote in a sum-up with the ring of a tocsin to Petito’s tenure. “I do believe there remains an important role for Mrs. Petito within this organization; however, as the county and legislative directives continue to evolve, I am not certain that role is best suited as County Administrator.”

In radical contrast, Commissioner Greg Hansen found Petito to “significantly exceed expectations,” while Andy Dance found her to “exceed expectations.” The latest evaluations also are as radical a departure from the 84 percent confidence she received for last year’s performance, the 78 percent she received for 2023, and glowing reviews for her first full year on the job.

The all but complete annual evaluations—Pennington was meeting with Petito today—are the first set to reflect the judgments of Richardson and Carney, who were elected a year ago. (The administration tagged the evaluations, embedded below, as “draft,” as if they are a work in progress. Commissioners briefly last Monday discussed their evaluations as done. Done or not, the documents reflect the commissioners’ own words.)

To observers of the County Commission, the findings, and the dichotomy between the men and the women, are not a surprise. They put words and grades to a dynamic that has been obvious for most of the year as Hansen and Dance have served as ramparts in defense of Petito’s administration while Pennington, Carney, and Richardson have regularly thrown battering rams against those ramparts.

The evaluations are a major blow to Petito on the heels of the deepest loss she’s experienced, professionally and personally, when Deputy County Administrator Jorge Salinas died in October. The loss of Ansley Wren-Key, the accomplished coastal engineer who’d led the county’s beach management initiatives and just took a job with St. Johns County government, compounds the administrative challenges over a high-profile and increasingly complex part of Petito’s responsibilities.

Petito provided a five-page “evaluation response” that nowhere refutes the criticism or addresses it head-on—she does not refer to any of the evaluations, any of their wording, any of their accusations—but seeks to implicitly answer much of the criticism with numbers, facts, and assertions in positive language. The gulf between that language and the three commissioners’ criticism is gaping.

“Over the past year, we have continued to strengthen the County’s operations and deliver meaningful results for our residents,” “From enhancing organizational effectiveness and reinforcing clear lines of authority, to improving communication both internally and externally, we have built a culture of transparency and accountability. Our leadership team has worked diligently to align priorities with the needs of the community, and our financial stewardship has ensured that resources are managed responsibly while supporting critical initiatives.”

Hansen, nearing a decade on the commission, has known Petito throughout those years, either as the director of general services, as a deputy county administrator, or as the administrator since 2001. He’s customarily kept his evaluations short and unfailingly glowing, making them hard to take seriously: he gave Petito 5s across the board, limiting his comments to a few lines here and there such as: “She sets the standard for professionalism in the county” (though Superintendent LaShakia Moore or Acting Palm Coast City Manager Lauren Johnston have at least equal rights to that claim) or “She always tells me what I need to hear so I am armed with the truth,” and “She is a great leader!”

Regarding finances, “She ensures that there is no waste and that we efficiently run the government,” one of the many findings that will be vehemently contradicted in three commissioners’ evaluations.

Dance credits Petito for spearheading and following through with the county’s strategic plan (its annual goals) and pushing through such initiatives as the airport zoning ordinance, which creates an overlay slightly restricting neighboring development, the rebuilding of the Bull Creek restaurant, the launch of an Industrial Development Board, and her continuing working relationships with other governments and constitutional officers.

Dance doesn’t pull punches: he criticizes her, for example, over her handling of the Ragga Surf controversy in Marineland, where poor communications and judgment errors allowed a private business to set up shop in a county park overseen by the state. The state rebuked the county and threatened to pull the county’s authority over the park. (See: “Ragga Surf Fiasco: How Flagler County Risked Losing River to Sea Preserve Over Botched Favor for a Private Business.”)

“Additionally,” Dance wrote, “one of the most controversial issues that received a majority of negative news was the debate surrounding the beach funding plan. Much of the discussion from commissioners revolved about not getting adequate information when this issue was discussed at a workshop or meeting. One takeaway from all this is to internally evaluate the criticism and create a process that ensures commissioners are provided various avenues to get information.” The plan marred Petito’s year more than any other initiative and was ultimately defeated by the three disenchanted commissioners. Dance applauded her “herculean effort to get it as far as it did.”

Pennington was scathing, starting with the beach-management plan, its lacking documentation for proposed fees or taxing plans: “the Administration has allowed staff to provide reports that lack the factual basis and substantive detail necessary for the board to make informed decisions,” she wrote, citing other examples (such as the county’s adult day care program, when the administration proposed an approach without “due diligence,” undermining public trust, or eliminating the county’s contribution to Flagler Beach’s lifeguard budget without warning, which was reversed after an outcry.)

“As a board, we have too often found ourselves in the position of having to vet and clarify decisions made by the Administration,” Pennington wrote. “On numerous occasions, we have had to step in to direct, revise, or correct staff presentations and recommendations before they could be considered acceptable for public discussion or board action.” Just as critically: “Over my three years on the board, I have observed a recurring pattern within the Administration, an unwillingness to fully consider or incorporate board input. Too often, it feels as though we are in greater conflict with staff than with the public on important policy matters.”

Much of Pennington’s evaluation is in the same vein, in one case explicitly stating that Petito goes in directions that “differ significantly” from the commission’s—a usually fatal move for any top executive. Judgments such as “lack of accountability,” “concerning pattern of administrative inaction,” “unnecessary controversy, confusion, and internal strife,” and “last-minute adjustments” grate through the evaluation.

Pennington acknowledged Petito’s qualities, her steadfastness and professionalism especially, and “one of the most challenging years the Administration has faced.” But the kindness merely softened the blow of Pennington’s conclusion: to the chair, the administrator is no longer suited for the job.

Carney’s and Richardson’s evaluations follow the same pattern, though Carney’s reflected a greater interest in providing detail, examples, and reasoning. Her words are usually the least sugarcoated among her colleagues. She called the beach management plan poorly researched and a “complete disaster,” she called the Ragga Surf controversy a “debacle” and compared it to another land matter last month that was poorly vetted before it reached the commission, and bluntly stated: “Heidi does the minimum required with regard to her public image.”

Just as gravely, Carney criticized Petito’s administration for “overbudgeting” in case the funds are needed, before echoing Pennington’s conclusion that Petito is out of step: “We are in a time when this practice, although probably acceptable several years ago, does not work now.” Carney gets into the weeds of the budget and the administration’s practices, including hiring from within, which Carney considers limiting. She acknowledges Petito’s long tenure and institutional knowledge, but sees it almost as a crutch to more current expertise.

“With the number of years Heidi has served the County, I know she is dedicated and committed to Flagler County and the citizens that call it ‘home,’” Carney concluded, before delivering a verdict as damning as Pennington’s: “There are many issues facing Flagler County and I am not confident that Heidi[,] her knowledge base, her experience and her leadership style is able to get us to where we need to go.” She hinted that had the administration properly informed the board of the 60-day notification requirement in Petito’s contract, if the board was to not renew it, Carney would have been opposed to a renewal.

“The deadline passed with no discussion leading to an automatic renewal,” Carney wrote. “Discussion of renewal or nonrenewal should have come up in August.”

Richardson’s evaluation was not as cursive as Hansen’s, but close, in a more negative direction, citing the same blots on Petito’s record as her colleagues did (Ragga Surf, beach management, but also the fuel dump fiasco, and so on). “Administration must do a much better job in conveying accurate and valuable info in a timely manner, to aid in discussions on key decisions,” she wrote. “Administration does listen and welcomes new ideas but does not follow up on discussion after that, which leaves ideas often left on the table.”

Richardson was also critical of what she felt is a different level of information-sharing depending on the commissioner. She criticized the administration for not using “cable” television to disseminate information. And she doesn’t like the workload: “An extreme amount of items are placed on the agendas and in addition, too many meetings on the same issues,” she wrote.

While she refrained from judging Petito’s tenure no longer tenable, as her two colleagues did, her overall grade amounted to the same thing: “Does Not Meet Expectations.”

One word now sums up Petito’s hold on her job: embattled.

petito-evaluations-2025