Minutes - Council - 05/24/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

to ask what the messaging was that was given to those two candidates. The messaging was different. She asked the City Attorney if she could read the messages, if that would be appropriate. City Attorney Knaak replied it would be appropriate given the circumstances. Councilmember Howell stated the message in question that was sent to the candidate that did not think he was a part of the process anymore states: "Hello (so and so), Ramsey's Council met tonight and held a lengthy discussion regarding the next City Administrator. Unfortunately you are not selected at this time. Feel free to call with questions. Colleen." She stated the message was sent at 1:46 a.m. She stated the other message sent to the other applicant stated"Just finished. No decision. They want you to go to (a certain place) again to gather more information essentially." She stated that was sent at 7:32 p.m. in the evening, right after they finished the meeting. She stated it concerned her. She stated she wanted to be really clear that this is about policy and not about personality. She stated she can see the direction this could go, saying she is trying to persecute an employee. She repeated she wanted to be very clear about this. This is not about an employee, this is about policies. They have to have policies in place. They have to have job applicants treated equally. What came out of this, after contacting the attorney, and then basically reaching out to the City Administrator, a letter was sent to both applicants stating that no decision had been made and Council was gathering more information. She stated that is the letter that should have gone out in the first place. She repeated this not about persecuting someone, it is just the fact that two things, messaging has to be consistent, it needs to match what a lot of Council thought was the outcome of that meeting. They were pausing the process. She stated her other concern was that messages were being sent out at 7:30 p.m. and 1:46 a.m. that is a concern, and text messaging. She stated they need to nail down a good process in reaching out to job applicants where they are conducting professional communications. She stated this is a concern of hers. She stated she hoped it doesn't happen again but if it isn't addressed, what is to stop it from happening again. She stated this why she brought it forward. Councilmember Musgrove stated she appreciated Councilmember Howell's summary of what happened. She stated she shared concerns with the process. She stated she believed the process, that was correct, was followed-up after they raised concerns about the initial process. She stated the former City Administrator had initiated that process. She believed that is the process that the residents are looking for,that it is concise, consistent, and equal. She stated that is why she would like to have this addressed. Residents need to know that there is a fair and equal process when they are hiring and that it is being done professionally. She agreed with Councilmember Howell that there was a corrective action taken but they need to make sure the type of text messaging, especially at the time of the day that it happened, does not happen again. Councilmember Specht stated Administrative Services Director Lasher is always professional with him and is good at responding. Every interaction he has had with her has been professional and good. He stated he appreciates her and her work. He asked to hear her side to get a full view of things before making a judgement. Councilmember Heineman referenced the information under the title "Closed Session Administrative Service Director Performance Evaluation" and asked Councilmember Howell and City Council/May 24, 2022 Page 6 of 21