CC Minutes - 02/02/98 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Meisner said that either time frame option for evaluating the City Manager was acceptable to him. He said he was not pleased with the draft Request for Proposal because he believed information developed during the interim evaluation of the City Manager should be included in the proposed process. He said he believed incorporating department heads in the evaluation process was a reduction from that considered earlier. He said he believed division managers, representatives of employee unions, and intergovernmental partners should also be included in the evaluation. He said he had been contacted by City employees expressing interest in participating in the evaluation of the manager, but who had concerns about having the confidentiality of their evaluations protected. Ms. Swanson Gribskov observed that increasing the number of persons to be interviewed in the evaluation process would likely require more time than was provided in the Option A time frame proposal. She said she preferred Option B because it provided additional time for securing inputs and the work of the facilitator. Mr. Lee said he was willing to accept the Option B time frame proposal, but preferred the quicker completion of the evaluation process. Ms. Taylor said she believed evaluation of the City Manager was the responsibility of the City Council and that it seemed inappropriate to involve employees in an evaluation of the chief executive officer of an organization. Mr. Fart said that he could accept involving division managers in evaluation of the City Manager, but that front line employee input might be inappropriately affected by negative reactions to cutbacks created by Ballot Measure 47/50. He said he believed front line employees were the most significant in an organization, but that he did not believe they had opportunity to observe daily decisions of the manager. Mr. Tollenaar said he believed that adding division managers to the evaluation process could stretch resources and add inordinately to the time required for the process. He said he believed an employee "climate survey" might be helpful to the council, but not in regard to evaluation of the City Manager. He said he agreed that representatives of employee unions might provide helpful input in the evaluation process. Mr. Fart moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, that the draft request for proposals for facilitator services to the council during its evaluation of the performance of the City Manager be approved. Mr. Tollenaar moved, seconded by Mr. Fart, to amend the motion to include representatives of collective bargaining units in the evaluation process. Ms. Swanson Gribskov said that she agreed with the amendment, but would not support incorporation of a "climate survey" of employees in the evaluation process. She suggested that written responses to questions supplied to employees could speed the process. Human Resource and Risk Services Director Lauren Chouinard said he believed written input in the evaluation process beyond that provided by members of the City Council could invoke issues related to public information laws. Ms. Nathanson said she would support the amendment, but that she did not believe the ability of employees to evaluate top management should be underestimated. Minutes--Eugene City Council February 2, 1998 Page 4 7:30 p.m.