Title
Agenda Item:
Process for Conducting the City Manager's Performance Evaluation
Body
Issue:
Consider the process to use for the City Manager's performance evaluations.
Committee Recommendation:
N/A
City Manager’s Recommendation:
Consider options
Staff Contact:
Steve Hall, City Manager, 753-8370
Presenter(s):
Steve Hall, City Manager
Background and Analysis:
The City Council asked the General Government Committee to propose a process for the annual evaluation of the City Manager.
The City Manager is employed by the City of Olympia through an employment contract. In 2003 when I was hired as City Manager, I worked with the City Council to develop five areas of core responsibilities for the conduct of the City Manager's job. Those include:
1. Community Relations
2. Intergovermental Relations
3. Communication
4. Policy Making Implementation
5. Management of the organization
These five areas were agreed to by the City Council and became part of the performance expectations to be reviewed annually by the City Council and the City Manager. In addition, it was agreed that two other areas be considered, both at the mid-year evaluation and the year-end evaluation. Those included:
- Demonstrated progress on the completion of Council goals, and
- Personal professional development of the City Manager
In 2004, working with the City Council, I developed a template for the evaluation process which laid out these five areas of core responsibility and a rating guide for Councilmember consideration. It also included a provision for describing how the City Manager has made progress toward implementation of Council goals and a section for future development of the City Manager's skills. This document is included as Attachment No. 1.
The City Council used this rating instrument beginning in 2004 through 2007 or 2008. The results of each individual Councilmember were collected and tabulated by the Human Resources Director and then shared with the City Manager and the full City Council at the annual performance evaluation. The experience of this tool was that some Councilmembers used it and provided detailed feedback about the areas of core competency in the City Managers role in achieving Council goals and personal development. Others either did not complete the form at all, or provided only limited feedback. In approximately 2009, this evaluation tool was discontinued. Instead, each year the City Manager would provide an overview of accomplishments for the first half of the year or the complete year, and then Council would use that as a springboard for discussion and feedback.
I have also reviewed the performance evaluation recommendations of the International City Managers Association (ICMA). I have attached two recommended documents from ICMA that are very similar to the instrument used for the City Manager evaluation in 2004 through 2008. The first is a generic performance evaluation template developed by the University of Tennessee. It allows for the Council and the City Manager to insert alternative areas of manager responsibility, but also has some level of scored application (Attachment No. 2) Attachment No. 3 is a similar model used by Bonner Springs, Kansas, which is considered one of the good models by ICMA.
Finally, I've included three other brief documents for your consideration.
1. A brief summary from the Association of Washington Cities having to do with the Council/Manager form of government
2. An article from the November, 2007 Public Management magazine which outlines very closely my perspective about my job and how I should deliver my services to the City Council and the community
3. A summary of my anticipated areas of focus through the remainder of 2012
I am looking forward to a discussion of the perspective tools and process for my annual evaluation. As I have said many times, I always appreciate frequent and immediate evaluation by Councilmembers throughout the year. However, the mid-year and year-end evaluations provide valuable feedback for me as to how I can better perform my job and steer the energy of the organization toward meeting your goals and expections.
Neighborhood/Community Interests (if known):
N/A
Options:
1. Consider options provided
2. Determine other options
Financial Impact:
N/A at this time