My topic this week is the city manager’s evaluation.
Will the commissioners share with the public the city manager’s evaluation and not try to keep it confidential? I can understand conducting an evaluation in executive session, but I think the public should at least get some basic idea as to how the city manager is performing.
For those of you who are interested in the city manager’s contract, it can be located on the city’s website under City Commissioners’ minutes and then click on ordinance number 11-116 for the year 2011. The contract states that the salary is to be $127,000 with the manager receiving a possible 5 percent pay increase after six months on the job. No one knows if the 5 percent raise has actually happened or if any raise was given out to the manager, nor do we know what the manager’s pay is at this time.
I think the contract should have had an option to renew term limit applied to it. The term limits would serve a couple of purposes. It would give the city a chance to make any adjustments to the contract at the time of renewal, or the city could choose not to renew the contract if the performance has been critically compromised. Term limits would provide for a constant incentive for continuous improvement. At one time, the city did have a city manager who was under a one-year contract.
Will the public be informed as to what goals and objectives were set forth by the commissioners and whether or not those goals were met? Will we know what form was used for rating the city manager? Will the commissioners bring their separate evaluations together to present one evaluation with an overall consensus?
Until next week, it would be inconceivable to pay for a service and not know if the service was satisfactorily rendered. A very lucrative contract was given to the city manager and now it is time for the taxpayers to receive some kind of report for the expenditure of money that was rendered for those services.