City Council

Mayor Mark S. Nexsen Lake Havasu City Vice Mayor Don Callahan Lake Havasu City Police Facility Councilmember Crystal Alger 2360 McCulloch Blvd North Councilmember Dean Barlow Councilmember Donna Brister Work Session Minutes - Final Lake Havasu City, Arizona 86403 www.lhcaz.gov Councilmember Jeni Coke Councilmember David McAtlin City Council Tuesday, February 25, 2014 5:00 PM Work Session 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Nexsen called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The mayor led in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Present: 7- Mayor Mark S. Nexsen, Councilmember Dean Barlow, Councilmember Crystal Alger, Councilmember Donna Brister, Vice Mayor Don Callahan, Councilmember Jeni Coke and Councilmember David McAtlin 4. CALL TO THE PUBLIC There were no requests to address the Council. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 ID 14-0119 Discussion of Performance Evaluation Process for City Attorney and City Manager Positions Mayor Nexsen stated that the City Council would not be evaluating today but would be reviewing the City Attorney and City Manager evaluation process and forms. He said the City Council received a copy of the 2005 evaluation forms for their review along with other sample evaluation forms. He noted that there were two evaluation forms for the City Manager; one that is completed by the City Council and the other completed by three or four stakeholders in the community. Councilmember McAtlin said he felt the evaluation forms were fine as is, with the exception of the language “exceeds expectations” which he did not feel was needed as “exceeds expectations” Lake Havasu City Page 1 City Council Work Session Minutes - Final February 25, 2014 seemed unrealistic. Councilmember Barlow said he would like to see a rating score between 1 and 10; particularly with the City Attorney evaluation form. Councilmember Callahan said one of sample forms stated that “The evaluation should contain performance goals, objectives, and targets that are linked to the elective body’s established strategic plans, goals, and priorities, and should focus on the manager’s degree of progress toward the organizational outcomes.” Councilmember Callahan said he would like to see something similar, like setting goals, included in the evaluation process. Councilmember Callahan also noted that in one of the sample forms it stated that “The purpose of the evaluation process is to increase communication between the members of the elected body and the manager concerning the manager’s performance in the accomplishment of assigned duties and responsibilities.” He reiterated that he felt the City Council needed to design some goals and objectives that the City Manager and Council agree to. Councilmember Callahan further noted that one of the sample forms stated that “A balanced evaluation is necessary. The evaluation should provide the opportunity for open communications and at the same time be used for compensation decisions related to identify performance achievement.” Councilmember Callahan pointed out that the current evaluation does not address income or compensation. Mayor Nexsen said over the past few years the City Council has limited raises, so if one employee at the lower level receives a 1.5 percent increase in wage, another employee at the other end of the scale would also only receive a 1.5 percent increase. Councilmember Callahan said of the sample evaluations also addressed how performance evaluations that are tied directly to compensation decisions are often distorted by those decisions. He said the Council needed to be careful in how they address that so that any comments made either pro or con do not affect how the Council evaluates the City Manager’s compensation. Mayor Nexsen said if the Council is interested in setting goals for the City Manager, they should not be rating him on goals this year because he is not aware of what those goals are. City Manager Charlie Cassens said historically he has used the goals from the City Council Planning Retreat as his goals to accomplish each year. Councilmember Alger said she agreed with setting goals as it is a good way to revisit what direction the City is going for the next fiscal year and if those goals need to be revised. Councilmember Alger stated that she would also like to see a balance in the evaluations and would like to have department managers and staff be involved in the evaluation process instead of just Lake Havasu City Page 2 City Council Work Session Minutes - Final February 25, 2014 key stakeholders so that the City Council can see all sides. Mayor Nexsen said there seemed to be a general consensus from the City Council in using a 1 to 10 scoring system but wondered what 10 meant, to which Councilmember Alger said one way to do it is to make 10 the best. Councilmember McAtlin thought the evaluation would be fairer if the rating was based on a score of 1 to 10. Mayor Nexsen said he looked at “meet expectations” as minimum standards or barely getting by. Councilmember Callahan and Brister agreed that they preferred the 5-step evaluation process. Councilmember Alger stated that if there are no labels and it is simply a 1 through 5 or 1 through 10 scoring process it might help eliminate a lot of misinterpretations. Mayor Nexsen said it would be similar to the City Attorney’s evaluation where a score of a 1 is “strongly disagree” and a 4 is “strongly agree” based on the questions. Mayor Nexsen said he thought that would work. Councilmembers Callahan, Brister, McAtlin, and Barlow agreed. Councilmember Alger explained that by involving department heads and staff she felt it would make the evaluation process well-rounded. She said shareholders within the community sometimes work and sometimes do not work with the City Managers depending on the project. Mayor Nexsen stated that the Council would probably not want staff other than department heads involved in the evaluation process. Mr. Cassens said he works directly with department heads, the City Attorney, and the Mayor on a regular basis. He added that with most of the rank and file staff, his interaction with them is intermittent or incidental of what is going on at the time. He said as far as them knowing beyond a perception as to what exactly he does on a daily basis, they may not have that information or insight. Councilmember Alger suggested scoring the evaluation based on percentages, with a certain percentage from the employees, department heads, City Council and stakeholders. Mayor Nexsen expressed concern that employees would be required to put their name on the evaluation. Councilmember Callahan said he did not agree with this primarily because the City Manager already works for seven Councilmembers and he did not feel the City Manager should be evaluated by the people that work for him. He added that what the City Manager does or does not do should Lake Havasu City Page 3 City Council Work Session Minutes - Final February 25, 2014 be under the City Council’s control and he did not think it was fair that the City Manager be rated by the people that work for him. Councilmember Alger said she disagreed with Councilmember Callahan because the City Council is responsible for the taxpayers. Councilmember Callahan said he agreed with that, but said that is why the City Council hires the City Manager. He added that the City Manager does what the City Council asks him to do. He said there are many people the City Manager has to be responsible for and there has to be some place where it stops. Councilmember Brister stated that she agreed with Councilmember Callahan. She said if Councilmember Alger wants to involve employees in the evaluation process it should be at a supervisor or department head level. She added that the City Manager may not work with each and every employee; therefore, there may be employees that do not know what his job is other than what they may hear or perceive. Councilmember Alger asked how the stakeholders know what the City Manager is doing on a daily basis, to which Mayor Nexsen replied that the stakeholders are selected based on who has had substantial interaction with the City Manager throughout the year, whether they were good or bad interactions. Mayor Nexsen said one alternative option could be if the City Council was interested in the City Manager’s interaction with department heads and allocation of work load they could discuss it with the department heads directly. Mr. Cassens stated that he personally did not have a problem with the City Council asking selected department heads how their interactions are with him as long as they are willing to go on the record. Councilmember Callahan stated that he agreed with speaking to the department heads but said it is not the City Council’s responsibility to worry about the people that answer to the department heads. He said with permission, he would not have a problem speaking with the department heads as long as they identify themselves. Mayor Nexsen said for the record, what he heard is that the City Council has permission to speak with the department heads and get their input; however, the City Council needs to be specific when it comes to any comments. Councilmember Barlow asked Mr. Cassens how he handles situations that come up with the department heads and if the discussions ever lead to how he is performing. Mr. Cassens replied that if he is not having success in something the Council has made a priority for the organization he has a discussion between the department head and himself. He added that he meets with his Executive Team almost every Thursday and they discuss what they are working on and the progress in those areas. He said most of the discussions are based on the priorities the City Lake Havasu City Page 4 City Council Work Session Minutes - Final February 25, 2014 Council has set at the Planning Retreat. Mayor Nexsen asked if there were any suggestions from the Council regarding setting City Manager goals. Councilmember Alger suggested using the goals that were set at the Council Retreat in January. There was discussion on whether the goals would be added to this year or next year’s evaluation. Mayor Nexsen advised that the goals would be added to the evaluation for next year. Councilmember Barlow suggested that the goals be used in the form of a question, to which Mayor Nexsen and Councilmember Alger agreed. Mayor Nexsen added that Vice Mayor Callahan agreed to coordinate the process of evaluation for both the City Attorney and City Manager. He said once all comments are received they will be summarized and a discussion would be held in Executive Session. Councilmember Alger wondered if the City Magistrate evaluation was held every two years, to which Mayor Nexsen replied every year. Mayor Nexsen added that all evaluations would be completed in May. Councilmember Callahan asked for clarification from the City Council on whether they were comfortable with the City Attorney evaluation format. Councilmember Barlow said he felt the same way about the rating scale for the City Attorney’s evaluation. There were requested changes to the City Attorney evaluation format. 6. ADJOURN Upon motion by Councilmember Callahan and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 5:36 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full and true copy of the Work Session Minutes of the Lake Havasu City Council held on the 25th day of February, 2014. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and posted, and that a quorum was present. ____________________________________ Kelly Williams, City Clerk Lake Havasu City Page 5