My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2020 02 11 SP
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2020 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2020 02 11 SP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:15:16 PM
Creation date
3/4/2020 2:57:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
2/11/2020
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />February 11, 2020 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Ramos reviewed the proposed performance measure tool. She asked members who <br />were here last year what they liked or didn't like so changes could be made if necessary. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Maloney noted edits were made to the tool after last year's process in the <br />hope that everyone uses the tool in the same way. Councilmember Lipton stated he liked <br />the changes that simplified the tool. <br />Members noted the comments are needed to help people understand exactly what <br />reviewers are thinking, if someone only gives a numerical rating it is not enough <br />information. <br />Councilmember Brown noted the tool questions are very qualitative and subjective. He <br />asked if in the future there could be some more measureable/quantitative goals. Members <br />agreed that can be incorporated better in the goal setting for next year. <br />Councilmember Leh wanted to be sure people are using the tool equally. Members <br />agreed the tool is to be used to start the conversation the Council will have in March; <br />people will try to use it as consistently as they can. F <br />Members discussed how the number scale should be interpreted and used. <br />Members discussed the weighting for the performance factors. Mayor Pro Tern Maloney <br />noted strategic leadership, economic development, and budgeting/financial management <br />have been weighted higher for this year. <br />Members agreed to use the ratings and weightings as presented. <br />3600 Questions for Directors <br />Ramos stated she created a form for directors to complete that uses the performance <br />factors the Council has agreed to. Members made formatting and language suggestions. <br />Members discussed what information the director's will get before completing the <br />evaluation and confirmed the director's answers will be anonymous to the Council. <br />Members agreed to use the 360 process. Ramos will incorporate the feedback into the <br />survey. <br />Self -Evaluation Form <br />Ramos stated her example is a compilation of similar forms from other cities. She noted it <br />is meant to be a summary narrative of typical things such as accomplishments, <br />successes around major issues or how they were solved, and target goals; what she sees <br />for the next year. The response should be relatively short, two to four pages which gives <br />enough information from the Manager that the Council can compare it to their experience <br />and information. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.