top of page


We evaluate the City Commission at the ballot box.  The City Commission evaluates and supervises the City Manager. The current system of evaluation is 100% inadequate.  Evaluations are not completed in a timely manner and the evaluation form is inappropriate for the significant level of responsibility and control  the City Manager has at City Hall. 


Currently the evaluation categories amount to little more than "plays well with others".  The form is short; only 16 questions, to be rated 1-5, and four comments requested.  As a sample, here's the summary version from 2016, the most recent evaluation available in March 2018: 



As inadequate as the current form may be, it should be completed on a predictable schedule.  The Commission has an obligation to let the City Manager know what he's done well and where he can improve.  A timely sharing of performance evaluation is a both supportive and courteous.    

More importantly, the Commission needs to hold the City Manager accountable for his actual accomplishments based on the goals outlined in the Commission's annual strategic plan.  This requires the Commission to set performance metrics; they need to prioritize their goals and set timeframes for completion.  For example, open the First Step Shelter by a certain date or redraft the Bike Week Master Plan by a certain date. 


Any increase in the City Manager's compensation should be tied to meeting those performance metrics.  Pay increases should never be automatic.  And next time, the City Manager's contract should require an affirmative vote for renewal, rather than a super majority vote for dismissal.

bottom of page