Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-30 Council Appointed Officers Committee Summary MinutesCouncil Appointed Officers Committee 1 Monday, April 30, 2018 Special Meeting Chairperson Kniss called the meeting to order at 4:12 P.M. in the Community Meeting Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: DuBois arrived at 4:29 P.M., Filseth, Kniss (Chair), Scharff Absent: Oral Communications None. Agenda Items 1. Discussion Regarding Council Appointed Officers (CAO) Annual Performance Evaluation Process. Chair Kniss asked if the Council Appointed Officers Committee (Committee) decided to handle the midyear evaluation informally. Deb Figone, Municipal Resources Group (MRG), reported the midyear evaluation was not conducted. Evaluation of Council Appointed Officers (CAO) would be based on performance from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018. The yellow matrix described the evaluation process and contained relevant dates. The purpose of the meeting was to review the evaluation process for 2018 with a focus on the schedule and key assumptions. Some elements of the process would begin immediately so that the CAOs could return their self-assessments by early July. The Council survey would launch during the Council break. Council Member Scharff believed the evaluation process would be shorter because of the City Manager's departure. Mayor Kniss advised that the City Manager wanted to be evaluated. Council Member Scharff recalled the City Manager's previous statement that he would not participate in an evaluation. Mayor Kniss clarified that the City Manager recently indicated his willingness to participate. 2 April 30, 2018 Ms. Figone suggested a modified evaluation process for the City Manager so that the Committee could base compensation discussions on his evaluation. Because of the upcoming City Manager search and Council transition, she hoped to complete the process by early September. Mayor Kniss asked if the process was completed in October in the prior year. Ms. Figone clarified that the core process was completed earlier than in prior years, but the compensation discussion and Committee debrief stretched the timeline a bit. If the Committee wanted surveys and interviews for only two CAOs each year, she recommended the full process for the City Attorney and City Clerk in 2018. For the City Attorney and City Clerk, the process would involve a direct report survey, follow-up interviews, self-assessment, a Council survey, and a compensation survey. She did not recommend interviews for the City Auditor because other interviews would be occurring at the same time. Council Member Scharff agreed to a direct report survey and follow-up interviews for the City Attorney and City Clerk. Mayor Kniss concurred. Ms. Figone indicated the City Manager and City Auditor evaluation process would include direct report surveys and follow-up interviews in 2019. The Committee could review its decision in 2019 if it chose to. The City Manager should complete a self-assessment in 2018 so that the Committee could consider compensation changes. Mayor Kniss inquired about requirements for the direct report survey. Ms. Figone explained that the direct report survey pertained to the performance evaluation. Council Member Scharff felt the direct report survey and interviews for the City Manager could be worthwhile. Council Member Filseth requested the rationale for including a direct report survey and interviews for the City Manager. Mayor Kniss wanted to learn the Staff's view of the City Manager's strengths and weaknesses. Council Member Filseth questioned whether Staff should focus on the needs of the organization or characteristics of a City Manager. 3 April 30, 2018 Council Member Scharff suggested Staff focus on the needs of the organization. Ms. Figone asked if the Committee wanted to learn what the organization wanted in the next City Manager. Council Member Filseth wished to understand the context for the City Manager's strengths and weaknesses. Ms. Figone felt an employee survey to determine their thinking for the next City Manager would be an important part of a recruitment decision. Mayor Kniss inquired whether the recruiter should handle such a survey. Council Member Scharff did not want the recruiter handling the survey. Ms. Figone clarified that the recruiter and Council would benefit from information gained through an employee survey. The recruiter could conduct the survey, but they typically did not include a survey in their cost estimate. Council Member Scharff remarked that a recruiter would have some self- interest in more process; whereas, Ms. Figone would be neutral about the process. Ms. Figone could design the survey to gather the information the Committee wanted. Ms. Figone would consult with Rumi Portillo, Human Resources Director, regarding an employee survey and timing of same. She inquired whether the Committee could hold a discussion regarding City Manager compensation with only his self-assessment or with a self-assessment and Council survey. Council Member Scharff did not want the Council survey. Mayor Kniss believed the Council survey would be an asset for the Committee. Ms. Figone noted the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) would want at least a self-assessment for the City Manager. Mayor Kniss asked if the process could include the Council survey without the City Manager receiving the comments. Ms. Figone answered yes. The point of the City Manager receiving comments was to allow him to modify his behavior as needed. Mayor Kniss suggested deferring a decision on the City Manager for a bit. 4 April 30, 2018 Ms. Figone advised that the Council survey would be released at the end of June. Council Member Filseth inquired about a mechanism to obtain information for a discussion of City Manager compensation if a Council survey was not conducted. Ms. Figone responded the City Manager's self-assessment and Council discussion of it would provide information. Council Member DuBois requested the rationale for evaluating the City Manager. Ms. Figone reported evaluation of the City Manager was not necessary. The self-assessment would provide the City Manager's position regarding the goals the Committee set for him and his accomplishments. Council Member DuBois suggested an exit interview rather than evaluation for the City Manager. Ms. Figone explained that the Committee could obtain information from the City Manager evaluation in order to discuss compensation. Council Member Scharff wanted a compensation survey only. Ms. Figone proposed a compensation survey and a self-assessment for the City Manager. The City Manager was holding meetings with all employees and expected to prepare some sort of closure report for the Committee. Council Member DuBois noted the City Manager's compensation would pertain to only a few months. Council Member Scharff indicated the issue was a raise for the City Manager effective July 1 through September or October based on his prior year performance. Mayor Kniss stated the City Manager was expecting something. Council Member Scharff related that the City Manager would like to receive a raise and wanted a process that could grant him a raise. The process should focus on the City Manager's exit so that the Committee obtained as much information as possible. Council Member Filseth did not wish to conduct a Council survey as it would not add any value to the process. 5 April 30, 2018 Ms. Figone clarified that the City Manager evaluation process would be a self-assessment and a survey. The CAOs should receive summaries of the direct report surveys prior to the end of May; therefore, the survey would be launched on May 7. The Council survey would launch during the Council break and remain open for two weeks. She hoped to speak with each Council Member before the Council returned from its break. Hopefully, Council Members would have time to focus on the survey over the break. Council Member Scharff felt the survey would be easier for Council Members to complete because the City Manager would not be a part of the survey. Ms. Figone indicated the packet provided to the Council would contain the 2017 reviews, direct report summaries, and self-assessments for each CAO. The CAOs would not attend the Council’s first Closed Session so that discussion could occur. The City Clerk would work with the Committee to determine dates for the first and second Closed Sessions. Under the proposed timeline, the core process would be complete by early September. A Committee discussion of compensation was planned for the week of September 24 with a recommendation presented in the Council's Closed Session scheduled for the week of October 10. If desired, a debrief meeting could be held at the end of October. Mayor Kniss related that recruitment for a City Manager could complicate the proposed schedule. Ms. Figone advised that completing the core process by early September would be the main focus. MRG would complete survey work, and then the City's Human Resources Department would add historical insight with respect to compensation. Perhaps the Committee could meet at the end of May to discuss parameters for the compensation discussion. Council Member DuBois asked if the 2017 discussion included comparison of compensation with surrounding cities. Ms. Figone reported MRG would survey the same cities and bring the data into the Closed Session. Council Member Scharff felt a compensation discussion was important, but a pre-meeting did not seem necessary. Mayor Kniss recommended delaying a decision on a pre-meeting. She requested Ms. Figone summarize the earlier discussion for Council Member DuBois' benefit. 6 April 30, 2018 Ms. Figone reviewed the evaluation process for the CAOs. She would shape a survey designed to interview Staff about their views for the next City Manager. Council Member DuBois anticipated a recruiter would interview Staff. He asked if the interviews would be conducted twice. Mayor Kniss replied no. Ms. Figone would handle the interviews. Council Member Filseth asked if a citizens advisory committee was needed for recruitment of a City Manager. Mayor Kniss responded yes. Ms. Figone summarized the written materials provided to the Committee. NO ACTION TAKEN Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 4:53 P.M.