HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-12-10 Council Appointed Officers Committee Summary MinutesCOUNCIL APPOINTED OFFICERS COMMITTEE
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 5
Special Meeting
December 10, 2025
The Council Appointed Officers Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 4:30 p.m.
Present In-Person: Stone (Chair), Burt, Veenker
Absent: None
Call to Order
Chair Stone called the meeting to order. The clerk called the roll with all present.
Public Comments
No requests to speak.
Agenda Items
1. Discussion, Debrief and Recommendation to the City Council Regarding the Council
Appointed Officer (CAO) Performance Evaluation Process; CEQA status – not a project
Dan Rich, Consultant, Municipal Resource Group, indicated the point of the discussion was to
debrief on the process and feedback on any desired changes.
Ed Shikada, City Manager, opined it is in everyone's interest to complete a timely review
working on a fiscal year basis.
Molly Stump, City Attorney, encouraged redoubling efforts to get feedback in earlier in the
fiscal year and that Council endeavor to raise the conversation to a thematic and strategic level.
Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk, seconded the City Manager and City Attorney's comments on
scheduling.
Kate Murdock, City Auditor, echoed with the comments on schedule.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 5
Sp. Council Appointed Officers Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 12/10/2025
Councilmember Burt observed if the reviews were moved later, it would get closer to a
summation of the calendar year but would not be at the end of it. If moved to after the first of
the year and completion of the calendar year and goals, there would be the prospect of new
council members being in on a review they did not have much context on every couple years.
One possibility would be to move it a month or so later. The first steps are not very heavy on
the Council time demands. The things that happen in May are during budget season but are not
heavy demands to have a CAO Committee meeting. One thing is whether the Council members
can receive the self-evaluations during the summer break so they have more time to be
reflective. Mr. Rich indicated the calendar in the packet is the exact timing from this year. It was
changed and delayed a little bit from the one that was adopted at the Committee meeting in
the spring.
Vice Mayor Veenker thought it was odd to be making compensation decisions six months
retroactive. It is a five to six-month process. Looking back at the calendar year prior, making
comp decisions in the first six months in time to negotiate, and sync it up so that it makes sense
would be beneficial. Vice Mayor Veenker supported findings ways to compress it so it did not
take so long. It was suggested to consider having a special meeting where all four CAOs were
reviewed. Addressing the performance the Committee would like to see from a thematic and
strategic level is appropriate. An interesting question for Staff to ask the CAO, "what would be
helpful to you, how can we support you in achieving the expectations we set?" Consideration
needs to be expressed what the COLA does with respect to compression at the top and what
effect that has on market standing of the CAOs.
Chair Stone found the evaluation of CAOs happening mid-year odd and advised the CAO chair
could work to revise that process next year. Chair Stone agreed with the Vice Mayor's
suggestion about a special meeting for the evaluations and with changing the process. It would
make sense to change up the timing for the audit plan.
Councilmember Burt echoed the concept of having a special meeting for the in-person reviews.
It was suggested to compress it into the light August schedule, giving greater depth to the
question of what is needed from Council in the next fiscal year to be successful, and adding a
recap to the meeting. Emblematic examples to illustrate broader issues was emphasized.
Vice Mayor Veenker liked the language of talking about patterns versus grievances. If going the
route of a special meeting devoted to each evaluation would allow the chance to build in a 20
to 30-minute reflection conversation immediately after each one. Feedback from the CAOs was
invited. City Manager Shikada replied setting the date and doing that as early as possible was in
everyone's interest. City Attorney Stump and City Attorney Stump appreciated the chance to
focus on dialog.
City Manager Shikada observed self-evaluations were submitted July 17 giving Council a week
or 2 to review prior to interviews. Setting and sticking to that schedule enables getting to the
steps that follow. The goal should be to have the closed sessions with the CAOs in September
ideally and early October at the latest. Vice Mayor Veenker thought scheduling it as a special