Loading...
10-02-2012 - Evaluation Process CommitteeEVALUATION PROCESS COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 2, 2012 1:00 P.M. CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM MINUTES The meeting started at 1:00 p.m. Committee members present were: City Manager Tracey Barlow, City Clerk Bonnie Wenzel, Personnel Director Donna Looney, Councilwoman Gigi Bennington, and Councilman Gene Emter. Councilman Emter provided an overall synopsis of where they might go to the Committee. He spoke of identifying the purposes, major areas, format and timeline at this meeting which could be collated and prepared for the next meeting where they would establish the process as well as look over specific evaluation sheets and identify specific evaluation criteria. Once that is done it is a matter of reviewing the whole thing, sending it to Council for ideas, thoughts and suggestions and if there are any, review and incorporate and go for the adoption. City Manager Barlow informed the Committee he had a meeting in the City Hall Conference Room at 2:00 p.m. with the County on the Southeast Service Area and suggested they schedule the Committee's next meeting at 1:55 p.m. Councilman Emter spoke of identifying a record keeper. City Clerk Wenzel informed him it would be Deputy City Clerk Lisa Bloomer. Councilman Emter suggested they identify the purpose of an evaluation. City Manager Barlow spoke of since he has been here the sole purpose has been to evaluate past performance of the Charter officers and there hadn't been a great deal put into establishing future goals. Councilwoman Bennington felt the goals provided by Council to the City Manager and how he met them were an evaluation in effect. City Manager Barlow pointed out there was nothing identified for an individual person. Councilwoman Bennington felt the goals were establishing what the Council expected him to accomplish. Councilman Emter felt there were more elements than that particular list that might come into play. Personnel Director Looney referred to the document entitled "Purpose of Evaluations ", which she found on a website. She further identified what else was included in the packet, which she compiled, based on the list in Councilman Emter's e -mail. 1 Evaluation Process Committee October 2, 2012 City Manager Barlow commented on his present agreement with the City by identifying his duties were defined in the City Charter. Councilman Emter asked if there would be any items on the "Purpose of Evaluations" that they would want to exclude. Ms. Looney asked if they wanted to separate the City Manager's and City Clerk's format to be handled differently. Councilman Emter felt they were different positions that should be treated differently although there could be some overlapping. City Manager Barlow identified both of the evaluation forms as they exist today are pretty global and if they get more defined as to the roles and responsibilities of each one of the positions, they would definitely have to have different evaluation forms. Neither City Manager Barlow nor City Clerk Wenzel had a problem with anything identified in the "Purpose of Evaluations ". Councilman Emter asked if they wanted to adopt the list as an established purpose. City Clerk Wenzel informed him they couldn't adopt anything and that Council had to. Councilman Emter stated he was talking about within the Committee because everything goes to Council. City Manager Barlow had no problem making this a recommendation to Council. Councilman Emter felt different evaluations have different formats, different scales, and different concepts. He asked if they had any thoughts on those. City Manager Barlow has found working with previous Councils' if they get too cumbersome or complex, he was concerned they wouldn't be completed. They had to be purposeful to give good communication to himself and City Clerk Wenzel of their past performance, some areas looking for improvements and some personal or overall goals going forward. There had to be a balance. He spoke of encouraging the Council to include narratives as well as have an evaluation scale. There was discussion regarding the performance review forms and evaluation forms from Daytona Beach and Ormond Beach and ways they could be changed to be specific to Edgewater. Councilman Emter explained he had not planned to look at these at this time and wanted to go through some of the other stuff and then come back and plug in the specifics. He suggested they come back at the next meeting with some notes as to preferences and avoidances. Councilman Emter stated when he sent the agenda out, Deputy City Clerk Bloomer sent him an e -mail informing him he could not send an e -mail to the other Board members and could not communicate with the Board members and he thought he was communicating properly through City e- 2 Evaluation Process Committee October 2, 2012 mail, which was all public information. He asked why that couldn't happen. City Clerk Wenzel informed him the Sunshine law prohibits any correspondence, written or oral, between board members, Council members and Committee members. City Manager Barlow stated it wasn't in a public noticed meeting. The meeting can occur but what he communicated was outside a public noticed meeting. It insights an opportunity for Councilwoman Bennington or one of the other Council people to reply and communicate back their ideas, which is a violation of the Sunshine Law. City Clerk Wenzel informed Councilman Emter the Sunshine Law and public records law were two very separate things. The e -mails are public record but have nothing to do with the Sunshine Law. Councilman Emter stated he did an agenda for the next three meetings. City Clerk Wenzel informed him that needed to be done through Deputy City Clerk Bloomer. A Committee member can't do the agenda. City Manager Barlow informed him any correspondence to be placed on the next agenda should be sent to Deputy City Clerk Bloomer. Councilman Emter felt if there was any communication that might be the way to deal with it. City Clerk Wenzel informed him it would have to be that way. Councilman Emter stated all he wanted to do was get some ground rules. City Manager Barlow explained that the City staff that is on the Committee could not communicate about anything that could potentially be discussed at a meeting due to now falling under the Sunshine Law. City Clerk Wenzel informed him because this is coming back to Council, the Committee can't discuss it with the Council until it goes on their agenda unless they are at a public meeting. Councilman Emter felt this was a total, ignorant waste of government. He agreed to go through Deputy City Clerk Bloomer if he had any communication. The Committee decided to review the job descriptions for the City Clerk and City Manager and identify the format at the next meeting. Councilman Emter commented on having a three -part, four -part, and five -part scale. He liked a five -part scale. Councilwoman Bennington liked the five -part scale. City Manager Barlow identified Edgewater currently had a four -part scale. He personally didn't like non applicable or non observant. He spoke of in the future new Councilmembers being provided with the performance evaluation. Councilwoman Bennington felt because the two jobs were different that they should have two separate forms, job specific. Councilman Emter and Personnel Director Looney agreed. There was a unanimous decision of the Committee to go with the five - part scale. Personnel Director Looney pointed out what time of year the City Manager and City Clerk are evaluated was identified in their contracts 3 Evaluation Process Committee October 2, 2012 as annually, at the end of each fiscal year. City Manager Barlow identified traditionally they had been doing them in January but felt that should be something they change by going back to the October meeting when they are distributed. He also pointed out during an Election year, they could potentially have three new Councilmembers. Councilwoman Bennington suggested they be given out in September and due by the end of October. Councilman Emter felt what was more appropriate was to give them a week to be returned and if they aren't back. City Clerk Wenzel informed him there was nothing they could do. Councilman Emter felt there should be. He further spoke of Council adopting procedures. Councilwoman Bennington suggested they be given out in September, due back by the first meeting in October. Any that were not turned in could be identified during the City Clerk's report. City Manager Barlow spoke of the Personnel Director distributing them at the September meeting to be returned prior to the agenda closing for October and then in October the Personnel Director would give a report on the evaluations. City Clerk Wenzel pointed out they were currently only having one meeting a month and that they should specify the first or second meeting should they go back to two meetings a month. City Manager Barlow spoke of them being handed out at the first meeting in September with a report at the first meeting in October. Councilwoman Bennington felt it could be publicly stated who didn't turn them in. Personnel Director Looney asked if they would be reviewed at the Council meeting. City Manager Barlow commented on where they were at by describing that at the October meeting, Personnel Director Looney would present on it and Council would have to reconcile the goals established for the City Clerk and City Manager, because of having to be done in a public forum, which would take them into their next evaluation period. Councilman Emter asked if there was such a thing as an executive session to discuss personnel. Personnel Director Looney referred to the City of Klamath Falls Performance Evaluation for the City Manager with regard to the Mayor and Council meeting in an executive session with the City Manager to discuss the evaluation. After being dismissed, the Mayor and Council would discuss the performance of the City Manager. City Clerk Wenzel didn't think they could do an executive session for that and that it was strictly for litigation. There was a discussion regarding each of the Councilmembers meeting with the City Manager or City Clerk one on one to discuss their evaluations. City Manager Barlow stated they could but there was no way without being a conduit to have the collective goals but they could go over the evaluation. 4 Evaluation Process Committee October 2, 2012 Councilwoman Bennington commented on meeting with each one of them before she gives it to them so they know what is going in there prior to it. She felt that would be the easiest way. Personnel Director Looney stated she would still do an agenda request with the tabulation of all of them for the meeting. Councilman Emter felt in terms of the process, recognizing that no one has to or not have to meet with them individually. They turn them into Personnel Director Looney and she compiles. He questioned how she would compile. City Manager Barlow informed him average score. Councilman Emter commented on some places using a compilation of average scores and some places using identified scores. City Manager Barlow pointed out Personnel Director Looney's summary would be an average but he and City Clerk Wenzel as well as the Council would still receive the individual evaluations. Councilman Emter questioned where all of the comments would get compiled if at all. City Manager Barlow informed him they don't compile them. Councilwoman Bennington didn't want her personal comments going out at a public meeting. She didn't mind that they were public record but she didn't want to put it out there. City Manager Barlow informed her if that was the majority of the Council they wouldn't have to. Councilman Emter stated when the compilation comes out, the public aspect to it will be only the scores and any identified goals that were there he felt would be a different process. There was further discussion regarding the goals of the City being different from the performance goals. Councilman Emter summarized the previous discussion with regard to the evaluation process. City Manager Barlow suggested if any Councilmember wanted to look through all the evaluation comments, they could schedule a time with the Personnel Director to review them. Councilman Emter asked how much time they needed to establish before the meeting, between the time the Personnel Director gets them and for compilation and the meeting itself. City Manager Barlow informed him a week and a half. There was further discussion regarding the Personnel Director needing time to do the compilation and tabulation before the agenda closes. Councilman Emter suggested Personnel Director Looney and Deputy City Clerk Bloomer work out a date schedule for the whole process. City 5 Evaluation Process Committee October 2, 2012 Manager Barlow informed him Personnel Director Looney could do the date schedule and provide it to Deputy City Clerk Bloomer for the next meeting. City Manager Barlow presented a summary by describing the evaluation forms would be distributed at the first meeting in September to be returned one day prior to agenda cutoff for the first meeting in October, which would not be date specific. Then the Personnel Director would present average scores and it would be put on the first meeting in October that the Personnel would discuss average, aggregate score for the evaluation of the City Manager and City Clerk and work with the City Council to reconcile any performance goals of the City Manager and City Clerk. The City Manager will reconcile City goals with the City Council. It would have to be two separate agenda items, City Manager's evaluation and City Clerk's evaluation. Councilwoman Bennington didn't think they would see very many Councilmembers that would take the time to go check what the other ones wrote. City Manager Barlow informed her it was nice to have that opportunity if they want it. City Clerk Wenzel spoke of Councilwoman Bennington being in a lot and talking to her and City Manager Barlow. Councilman Emter spoke of establishing a timeline and they would be looking at the evaluations they have. He also wanted to include the TPO. He then confirmed they would be reviewing existing evaluation forms for the same positions but it would be two separate positions. They are also talking about evaluations and goals. Councilman Emter felt it would be good to go through the evaluation forms they have and mark what they think would be appropriate for inclusion from the different evaluation forms. The next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, October 9, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. Councilman Emter questioned if they would have the minutes by the next meeting and expressed he felt they would need them. The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Lisa Bloomer, CMC Deputy City Clerk 6 Evaluation Process Committee October 2, 2012