The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1993 [09] Sep 21 Page 2340 September- 21, 1993 Pursuant to due call and notice thereoÏ, the City Council for the City 0:1: S'· J- oseph met in special session on Tuesday, Septembe:c 21, 19'33 at '-. '/:00 p. m. in the St. Joseph City Hall. CitY. Çouncil Members Present: Mayor Donald Bud Reber. Members of the I Council Bob Loso, Stephanie Hazen, Ken Hiemenz. Clerk/Adm Rachel Stapleton. Nay or Heber called the meeting to order and stated that the purpose of the meeting was to perform evaluations of the Department Heads. He stated the portion of the meeting may be open if the person being é'valuated so requests, and that the meeting would be closed for the other evaluations unless the other individuals being evaluated should attend and request that it be open. A summary of the Council's conclusions must be stated at the next meeting. Nayor Heber offered Hachel Stapleton to allow her portion to be open if she so requested. He stated then it would be closed :for the other department heads, because they were not in attendance. Stapleton stated that she would pre:fer to have a closed meeting with herself in attendance. Hazen stated that Stapleton did not have that option at this point because the Council is only working on evaluations. It is not public data yet. The Council is not giving evaluations tonight, only working on them. Thursday night the ~valuations would be given. This is a session to get to that point :for Thursday. Mayor Heber read the in:formation that the meeting must be open if the I person evaluated so requests. Loso stated that the person being evaluated has the right to be there. Hazen stated that this is not an evaluation, only a working session. The Council is not giving evaluations tonight. Hazen stated that the Personnel Committee would be giving the evaluations to the Department Heads on Thursday. Stapleton asked if she would have a chance to listen to the tape of the meeting. Mayor Heber stated very de:finitely she would. Stapleton asked if the other Department Heads had the option to have their portions open or closed. Hazen stated that's why the notice o:f the meeting was posted. Loso stated that employees should have the option of being in attendance, whether it is a working session or a final evaluation. Loso also stated that the employees evaluated should be notified to be there. Hazen state that the meeting has been posted. This is not disciplinary. Evaluations and per:formance evaluations are different than disciplinary actions. Hiemenz stated disciplinary actions are entirely different and have di:fferent requirements. Mayor Heber stated the required notice to employees :for disciplinary meetings. Mayor Reber stated that Loso was referring to disciplinary action. Hazen stated that the meeting o:f August 26th, which was the meeting after Mayor Heber, Mike Loso and John Scherer talked to Stapleton, that Stapleton was in attendance in the audience, should have been an open meeting. Stapleton stated that the individual being I discussed should have advance notice. Mayor Reber stated that the League information recommends that the persan probably should get advance notice. Mayor Heber had stated that the individual being discussed at a closed meeting should have notice o:f the in:formation to Page 2341 September 21, 1993 be discussed. Hazen told Mayor Reber that he had gone over the in£ormation o£ concern, at the meeting between Stapleton, and l'layor Reber, l'like Loso, and John Scherer. Hiemenz stated that at some point in time they would get down to more re£ined process and would have legal counsel but they are not having that type o£ a meeting. They are just meeting to prepare per£ormance evaluations so that the Department Head know what they are being rated on. Stapleton asked why the Council would not want the individual in attendance that they are evaluating. Mayor Reber stated he would pre£er to have the individual there. Hazen stated that they do not want other individuals there. Stapleton stated that she was understanding that she has the option to be in attendance and allow anyone else to attend who, should come in to the meeting, or she would have to leave i£ she requested a closed meeting. Mayor Reber reviewed the in£ormation on open and closed meetings. Hazen stated that she thought that the open/closed option was when they are giving the evaluations. Loso stated that the Council should not continue with this process until they have a clear understanding of" the allowances of" open/closed meetings. Mayor Reber stated that he interprets it to be allowable £or Stapleton to attend or have the meeting open if" she so requests, £or her evaluation. In order to be sure he requested to allow getting a response £rom the City Attorney. Hiemenz stated that the only problem is that Stapleton is asking to be in attendance during the rating period. They are rating the Department Heads as an employee is rated by a superv iso:L~. The employee may not necessarily agree with the evaluation, but that does not make it change, unless it is extremely derogatory or and can prove that it is arbitrary and capricious. The Council is only wanting to do annual per£ormance ratings. If" she £eels more com£ortable attending while hers is done he had no problem with it. Loso made a motion to table the matter until they receive some clari£ication £rom the City Attorney, on the l~equirements and mechanics o£ open/closed meetings in relation to personnel evaluations; Reber seconded the motion. Discussion - Hiemenz asked i£ he understood correctly that the other individuals would not be evaluated at this time either. Reber stated yes, that what the attorney can clari£y this issue. Hazen stated that they need to know the di££erence between working on the evaluations and presenting them. She £elt that evaluations are presented one on one. Hazen stated that a£ter the employee has received the evaluation it is public in£ormation. She questioned the mechanics o£ working on the evaluatins with the employee in attendance. Reber stated that he would talk to the city attorney tomorrow and get his recommendations. Is thel~e a di£f"erence between working on evaluations and presenting them. Hazen asked i£ the city attorney coulc be called that evening to get a dete:L~mination since the Council was already meeting. Reber stated that he did not £eel that they would get a response £rom him at home, without his resources available. Ayes: Heber, Loso, Hiemenz, Hazen. Nayes: None. Motion carried. PARKING LOT: Reber stated that Dennis Stueve has property north o£ his building, and would like to have the parking lot redesigned to allow for junk storage behind his building. He previously has asked to £ence it in with the city's assistance. The American Legion would like to blacktop their portion also and would like notice £rom the city that it Page ¿..J'±L September 21, 1993 is usc>d for a polling place, and to l'equest a handicapped pal'king place :tor polling, in or-der to allow them to use gambling funds fOl~ the parking lot. ¡-layor Reber asked to have Joe Bettendor:t oT' Jerry George cheGk where the property lines are, but do not hold up the project because of that. The City will have the entire parking area blacktopped and then bill the American Legion and Stueve's Garage for their portions. Dennis would like to have the parking proposal changed behind his building. This would allow a few less parking places. Hazen asked the Administl~ator to cancel the scheduled meetings for Thursday between the Department Heads and the Personnel Policy Committee. Stapleton asked for clarification of the evaluation process. She understood that the entire Council would do the evaluation and then Hazen and Hiemenz would present it to the individual Department Heads. Hazen stated that was correct. Hiemenz recommended that they hold those meetings as scheduled, and set up the methods of evaluation for next year, with the Department Heads. Hazen stated that they had intended to present the evaluations. Loso stated that the whole Council should present the evaluations. Mayor Reber stated that he had questions on the evaluation form. Hiemenz stated that the ratings are all against a standard. Loso asked who set the standards. Hiemenz clarified it. Loso stated that the Council does not deal with the Department Heads on an every day basis and did not feel they could evaluate the Department Heads. Reber stated he felt the same way, that he did not feel adequate to appraise the individuals, and he sees them more than anyone on the board. Hazen asl<ed what they would suggest for evaluations. Hiemenz stated that he used this evaluation form for individuals that he supervised and would see only two days a month. Reber felt that he did not have the personal knowledge of the employees to evaluate them, and that the form asks for information which they would have to acquire through hearsay. Hazen stated that the Council approved the form previously. Hiemenz stated that a performance evaluation is rating an individual against a job performed according to standards. Loso asked how the standards are a set. Hiemen:¿; and Hazen stated they are set by the job description. Ha:¿;en stated that guidelines will be set up for next yeal~ , for the job positions. Hazen stated that she is hearing that they need to put in place tools for evaluation. Stapleton stated that the League has a professional in per'sorlnel matters on staff, and available to Cities to assist in personnel issues, on a contract basis. There was discussion of the need for all Departments to report to the Council. Hazen requested that all Department Heads report to the Council at least once a month, immediately after the Mayor Reports. Hazen suggested that information is sought from st. Cloud, Avon, Sa uk Hapids, Sartell, and Waite Park for their methods of evaluation. Hiemenz stated that hE> will contact these cities. Hazen made a motion to lift the wage freeze until after salary negotiations. Mayor Heber stated that this mat te:c is not on the agenda and may not be discussed. Hazen made a motion to adjourn at 7:55 p. m. ; seconded by Loso. Page 2343 September 21, 1993 Ayes: Reber, Loso, Hiemenz, Hazen. Nayes: None. Motion carried. q Rachel Staple on Clerk/Administrator