Agenda - 03-19-2013 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

12 1 2 Chair Jacobs said this item is related to the Board's business itself. He said they have 3 talked for years about developing a process and an instrument for reviewing the staff they 4 appoint (clerk, attorney and manager). He said in the past an instrument was developed with a 5 former city manager who worked at the School of Government and two Commissioners; but the 6 manager's predecessor did not want to use it and it went by the wayside. He also noted that 7 Commissioner Gordon had developed a process but no instrument. He referred to the draft 8 evaluation process on page 3. 9 Chair Jacobs said the Commissioners discussed at a closed session in 2011 the 10 possibility of clustering the reviews of the three staff members and two ( Clerk and Attorney) 11 were put on the same night in March. He said that the manager would fit in the spring category. 12 He said that if there will be a review of two of the employees on March 26, and a work plan is 13 required for review then the time frame is too short to review of the work plan and for adoption 14 of a review instrument. 15 Commissioner Gordon referred to page 3 and said that this outlines a potential process 16 for the Board to evaluate the three positions. She said the Board would need to approve this 17 process and develop an instrument as well as the requirement of a work plan. She said that if 18 they approve of this process, three instruments would need to be developed and a decision 19 made about how to set the process in motion. She said that, even with the short time frame she 20 feels that a work plan could still be requested and some kind of formal evaluation done. She 21 said that this plan could be adopted, instruments developed and the process used. 22 John Roberts said he prepared an evaluation document similar to other local government 23 evaluation documents and he has provided this every year and gotten decent feedback. 24 Donna Baker said that she has used the SOG instrument for many years, and also used 25 one similar to the County Attorney's for the past two years. 26 Commissioner Price asked if each commissioner gets one of these forms individually and 27 sends it back in and Chair Jacobs, said that each one has been different the last couple of 28 years. Commissioner Price asked, for example, in the case of John (Roberts), they would get a 29 form and each do it individually at home and send it in. 30 Donna Baker said that it has not been done this way in the past but that this appears to 31 be the way the proposed process leans toward. 32 Commissioner Gordon said that this process is a process where someone compiles the 33 information, the Clerk in two cases and the Chair in the case of the Clerk. In this way the 34 information is not attributed to any one commissioner and the instruments are under lock and 35 key. She said she is uncomfortable with having each employee developing his or her own 36 instrument and then returning it back to the employee with all the signatures. She feels it is 37 better if someone compiles it then the output is done after the board has discussed it. 38 Commissioner Rich said that while on the Chapel Hill Town Council, their evaluation 39 process for the manager was goal driven, what you have accomplished, what hasn't been 40 accomplished, why and where to go from here. She gave examples of recent reviews of the 41 manager and attorney. In the case of the manager, a meeting was held with the manager, led 42 by an outside person who compiled the information; this was followed by individual meetings 43 and a final group meeting with the manager. 44 Donna Baker asked about the selection of the outside person compiling the information 45 and Commissioner Rich said this person was chosen by the Mayor and was the keeper of the 46 information, which is important since she outside of the situation and is not judging, only 47 gathering. 48 Donna Baker spoke about a course developed by someone from the School of 49 Government that teaches elected officials how to evaluate appointed employees. Donna Baker 50 has spoken to the SOG about presenting to the Board regarding development of an evaluation 51 process but has not been given direction yet by the Board.