City Manager Performance Evaluation Committee

City Manager Performance Evaluation Committee City Hall Room 302A 10 N. Division Street Battle Creek, MI 49014 Monday, February 5, 2018 3:00 p.m. Committee Members Present: Vice Mayor Susan Baldwin and Commissioners Chris Simmons and Sherry Sofia, and Comm. Kaytee Faris, as the alternate. Committee Members Absent: Vice Mayor Dave Walters Staff Present: Rebecca Fleury, City Manager: Nancy Mullett, Labor Attorney: Vicki Houser, City Clerk Call to Order: Comm. Baldwin called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. Public Comment: None Approval of Minutes: A motion was made by Comm. Sofia, supported by Comm. Faris, to approve the December 6, 2017 City Manager Performance Evaluation Committee minutes. All yes, none opposed. Motion approved. Bi-Monthly Performance Review A. City Manager Report of Performance Highlights and Concerns Ms. Fleury stated she had focused on the new goals established at the workshop. B. Commission Highlights and Concerns Comm. Baldwin noted no Commission concerns or comments were received. Discussion of Commission Workshop to Review Goals Comm. Simmons stated he felt the workshop provided a lot of good discussion and information. Comm. Baldwin agreed with workshop recommendations that City Commissioners should establish goals for themselves. Comm. Baldwin noted it was important to finalize the goals document to establish the City Manager’s annual performance evaluation, noting the survey will be sent to the community and senior staff in July, and to the Commission in August. Comm. Simmons inquired as to a “climate survey” to all City employees asking how they felt about the organization, not the City Manager. Comm. Simmons stated the survey responses should be anonymous, asking how their department is doing and if they receive good communication. Comm. Faris asked if the survey would be sent to the employees from the Commission or the administration. Comm. Sofia recommended putting the subject of an employee or climate survey in the “Parking Lot” for future discussion as it was not appropriate to place it in the City Manager’s evaluation document. Comm. Sofia cautioned the committee that an employee survey was not a platform to encourage a critique of the City Manager, stating staff members who work directly with the City Manager’s office should complete her evaluation. Comm. Baldwin informed the committee that an additional item, #9 Progressive Adaptive City Government, related to staff and internal operations, might be added. Comm. Baldwin stated her notes referenced a “Dashboard,” stating that would be a different type of report. Ms. Fleury noted many of the topics are captured under Managerial Competencies, stating she reports what is happening during the reporting period, stating they could put more specifics under strategic focus or teamwork. Ms. Fleury stated the topic may also fit under Adaptive Government. Ms. Fleury stated MML or ICMA might have a tool the city could use. Comm. Faris recommended an employee survey be put under the Progressive Adaptive City Government goals. 1 Comm. Baldwin agreed to add an employee climate survey, stating additional goals or needs may be revealed. Comm. Baldwin asked committee members if they wanted to add a dashboard to the goals. Comm. Faris stated that although a dashboard was a good idea, she did not feel 8 months was sufficient time to develop the tool, suggesting it be considered as a goal for the next year. Ms. Fleury requested additional clarifications for several items on the goals update, including “stream line process for doing business in the city” and community conversations related to code and inspections, noting they are very different departments. Comm. Faris stated website improvement was one specific, to help residents and business to better navigate the website. Comm. Faris also noted the one stop shop was related to small businesses. Regarding goal 3.2, Comm. Simmons stated he did not need the form to identify partners, instead to reach out to existing and potential partners, recommending the City Manager provide a list of potential partner organizations and their contact person. Comm. Simmons agreed there was not a specific number of contacts required, but a note as to whom the City Manager met with and what was discussed. Ms. Mullett noted it was important from an evaluation standpoint to be specific, stating otherwise it is difficult for Ms. Fleury to meet unidentified expectation. Comm. Sofia stated she did not feel the city should take the lead in providing cultural activities for residents, stating the city has a function to provide service to residents they are not able to provide themselves, such as police, fire, streets, water and sewer. Comm. Sofia agreed the city could be a partner, but that Ms. Fleury should not be judged on the number of partnerships developed and programs run by non-city entities. Comm. Faris stated forming relationships may provide an opportunity for the city to offload some current obligations or to collaborate so that it is financially beneficial to the city to form the partnership. Comm. Faris stated the first step would be to create a contact list, and if the City Manager goes beyond creating a list and meets with then, then all the better. Comm. Faris stated the city needed to form the partnerships as there was not a funding stream to maintain the current physical arts the city has. Comm. Baldwin noted it tends to be larger cities that have museums, noting the City operates Full Blast as a leisure activity. Comm. Simmons stated it was not unreasonable to say “explore,” stating Ms. Fleury would not be judged on how many contacts she makes, but consider initial steps to contact, form relationships and consider possible collaboration. Comm. Baldwin recommended Ms. Fleury be given the opportunity to identify the partners and report to the Commission, and incorporate more specifics in future years. Comm. Baldwin requested “initial contact” be added to goals 3.2 and 3.5. Comm. Baldwin also noted the activities of outside organizations are not within Ms. Fleury’s control. As an example, Ms. Fleury informed the committee that staff has been asked to require developers include more art in their development. Comm. Sofia asked about goal 3.1, BC Whitewater, asking if a specific entity should be listed, stating that Ms. Fleury should not be held accountable for the entity’s actions. Ms. Fleury stated staff continues to work with BC Whitewater planning, including possible property acquisitions along the riverfront. As to goal 1.4, Comm. Baldwin noted there were not any specifics listed. Comm. Sofia recommended it remain blank so that the City Manager can research opportunities, such as incentivizing teacher and public safety housing. Comm. Simmons recommended using tax abatements to employers that encourage employees to reside in the City and using the recent relocation guide created by the Chamber of Commerce. Comm. Simmons also asked about Neighborhood Enterprise Zones and other tools that may be available through the state. Ms. Fleury stated the goals worksheet would be presented to senior staff personnel to add specifics to the chart. As to goal 8.3, Ms. Fleury noted many grant-funded opportunities have neighborhood or area restrictions. 2 Comm. Simmons expressed understanding of restricted grant funding, but asked that general fund dollars not be restricted to specific areas, making them available to the entire city. Comm. Sofia recommended the specifics instead include “target resources to maximize results.” Comm. Simmons, referencing 9.2, asked if there were any discussions related to collaborative efforts or consolidated services. Ms. Mullett noted collaborative efforts may also include the Fugitive Team, Fusion Team, and Lead Task Force. Comm. Baldwin stated the goal would include updates on regional conversations, collaborations and potential initiatives. Referring goal 9.3, Comm. Baldwin asked if it fair to do an employee survey in the absence of an HR director. Comm. Baldwin stated it is the administration’s responsibility to determine the questions on the staff survey, not the commission’s. Comm. Simmons stated it would be sufficient to develop and determine the timing for the survey. Ms. Mullett also cautioned employee opinions may be unhappy with the results of the compensation study. Ms. Mullett stated the survey could ask staff if they felt they shared a common goal, are part of a team, and felt listened to. Ms. Fleury informed the committee that the community survey would be delayed one year due to costs. Committee members discussed the checklist, discussing possible formats, with Ms. Fleury agreeing to try different worksheet designs. Next Meeting: April 16, 2018 at 3:00 pm in Room 302A Adjournment: Comm. Baldwin adjourned the meeting at 4:53 p.m. 3