Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.17.2026 - City Council Minutes City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17,2026 CALL TO ORDER The City Council met in a workshop session on Tuesday, March 17, 2026, in the Clermont City Center.Mayor Murry called the workshop to order at 3:00 pm with the following Council Members present: Council Members Strange, Bain, Myers and Petersen. Other City officials present were City Manager Van Wagner, Deputy City Manager Matthys, City Attorney Waugh and City Clerk Howe. City Manager Van Wagner gave the invocation. AGENDA ITEMS Item No. 1 —City Manager Review Criteria Deputy City Manager Matthys stated that an email was recently distributed to all Council Members containing sample evaluation criteria used by other jurisdictions for City Manager performance reviews. The purpose of providing those examples was to assist the Council in developing clear and consistent evaluation standards and expectations. He explained that establishing defined criteria will help ensure alignment between the Council and the City Manager regarding performance goals and priorities. Deputy City Manager Matthys turned the matter over to Council for discussion and direction on the next steps to proceed. Mayor Murry stated that Council has historically not conducted formal City Manager evaluations and noted past challenges in reaching consensus on evaluation criteria despite prior efforts. He stressed the importance of having clear standards in place,noted that other cities struggle with this too, and stated his preference for evaluations to be done privately rather than in public, though public input could still be considered. Council Member Bain asked if reviewing the City Manager requires a public meeting under Florida's Sunshine Law, and City Attorney Waugh confirmed that formal reviews must occur in a City Council meeting or workshop, though individual feedback can be given privately, and noted that cities use various methods like collecting forms or consultant summaries to facilitate the process. Council Member Bain stated that since there has been no formal goal setting for the City Manager, there is no clear path to the way they should prioritize beyond day-to-day duties. He suggested establishing annual strategic priorities or goals, conducting a yearly review of progress, and providing consolidated feedback from Council. Council Member Bain emphasized focusing on objectives rather than personalities, allowing adjustments based on circumstances, and creating a recurring cycle for goal setting and evaluation to guide City Manager performance and support the community's long-term vision. Council Member Strange agreed on the importance of goal setting and praised the idea of reviewing standards while keeping feedback constructive. 1 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 She highlighted transparency to avoid the appearance of secrecy, suggested a twice-yearly review cycle to balance accountability and politics, and supported establishing clear standards to guide the City Manager and hold the Council collectively accountable. Council Member Petersen noted that the City Manager is already under constant informal evaluation by the Council. The value of a formal review depends on the framing and weighting of the questions and the design of them. He cautioned that poorly designed evaluations could be meaningless and emphasized the need for a thoughtful, well-structured process to ensure the review has real significance. Council discussed using the evaluation process to strengthen the City Manager's effectiveness in executing the Council's vision,improve communication between individual Council Members and the City Manager,and establish clear,measurable criteria,such as financial audits,crime statistics, departmental goals, and state-of-the-city presentations, that can be tracked objectively. They also supported a twice-yearly review cycle to monitor progress, link staffing and budgeting decisions to strategic priorities, and provide transparency and accountability to the public. Council Member Myers agreed on the need for clear standards so the City Manager knows what is expected,acknowledged the challenge of conducting evaluations publicly,expressed uncertainty about the frequency of reviews, and suggested using examples from other cities' evaluation processes as a starting point that could be adapted. Mayor Murry proposed a six-month check-in using standardized criteria, developed by a neutral party, focusing on measurable areas like finance, budgeting, audits, and public relations. City Attorney Waugh summarized that,per Section 32 of the City Charter,the city manager serves as CEO and head of administration,responsible for appointing and removing employees,preparing and administering the budget, reporting on city finances and activities, advising the council on financial needs, attending council meetings, performing duties required by charter or ordinance, overseeing purchasing, setting salaries per council-approved schedules, and managing all city- owned utilities, public works, facilities, and improvements. Mayor Murry and Council Member Strange both suggested using the City Charter as the foundation for evaluating the City Manager. Mayor Murry suggested grouping charter responsibilities into key areas such as finance,human resources,and public relations,highlighting the importance of public engagement while acknowledging differing Council priorities. Council Member Strange recommended establishing a small set of clear, measurable criteria for each area and stressed the need for Council alignment on shared priorities to ensure a fair, consistent, and forward-looking evaluation process. Discussion focused on sharing evaluation criteria while complying with Sunshine Law requirements. City Attorney Waugh suggested that each member complete the same evaluation form independently, using agreed-upon criteria, and submit it to the City Clerk, to compile the results for collective review. 2 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17,2026 This approach allows input to be gathered without direct communication, avoiding Sunshine issues, with the option to later present the compiled results publicly. Council discussed developing evaluation criteria and expressed concern that independently developed criteria could vary widely, requiring a public process to review, refine, and reach consensus. City Attorney Waugh suggested that an impartial party compile potential criteria based on the Charter and existing evaluation models, creating a broad range of criteria for Council consideration. Council could then identify preferred criteria through a voting or tally process, selecting those with majority support for inclusion in the evaluation. Council also discussed the importance of using the finalized criteria as a foundation for setting clear, forward-looking goals for the City Manager. Council invited City Manager Van Wagner to share his ideas on the evaluation criteria and process. City Manager Van Wagner stated that his role is to carry out the will of the Council majority,even when it differs from individual preferences, which can create tension. He emphasized communication and relationship-building as key areas for evaluation and noted that feedback already occurs continuously through regular interactions. He also highlighted the importance of remaining neutral and relying on staff and professional guidance to implement Council direction effectively. Discussion ensued on creating an objective, personality-free framework for evaluating the City Manager, highlighting communication and public representation as key expectations, with a neutral party helping ensure fairness and consistency. Deputy City Manager Matthys agreed to work with City Attorney Waugh to develop eight criteria and define the standards for meeting, and exceeding expectations, creating a clear framework for review. Mayor Murry opened public comments. Brian Hess, 1166 Short Street — spoke about the groups progress, emphasizing the need for alignment and acknowledging the staffs hard work and dedication. Joe Fumasi, 2693 Jumping Jack Way — praised the council and City Manager Van Wagner for their professionalism,goal-oriented approach,financial transparency,and empowering leadership, noting the city's positive progress. Jim Cretti, 2177 Cedar Springs Way—suggested using the Florida City and County Management Association (FCCMA) performance dimensions as a ready-made framework for evaluating City Managers. Mayor Murry closed public comments. Council Member Strange suggested City Manager evaluation layout that begins with charter-based criteria, aspirations, and any additional proposed criteria not covered in the charter. Each council 3 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 member would submit input, which staff would compile into a manageable, refined list. This approach was generally supported by Council as a strong starting point, though there was discussion on the need to keep the process flexible and it noted that further discussion would be needed before finalizing the structure. Mayor Murry asked City Attorney Waugh to provide Council with an update regarding Code Enforcement cases including the property on Sunset Lane. City Attorney Waugh explained that repeated code violations on properties can be difficult to resolve through the current system, as the board is limited to issuing fines,which may not provide a long-term solution. He noted that while violations are often corrected temporarily, recurring issues require stronger remedies. He informed Council that under Florida law, the City has the authority to pursue nuisance actions through the courts, including injunctions and potential liens or foreclosure, to achieve permanent compliance. He emphasized that these measures are not intended to punish but to provide necessary leverage to protect the community and prevent ongoing violations. Discussion ensued on the challenges with repeat nuisance properties and the limitations of the City's current ordinance,which was described as too narrow and lacking strong enforcement tools. It was noted that while fines and compliance processes are being used, they often fail to provide lasting relief for residents. There was discussion on potential improvements, including stronger enforcement options, revising ordinances, tracking repeat violations more effectively, and allowing staff-initiated cases rather than relying solely on citizen complaints. Deputy City Manager Matthys clarified that the city has authority to initiate code enforcement without a citizen complaint but has generally operated reactively. He noted that shifting to a more proactive approach would require clear Council direction and could have resource implications, and staff are actively developing potential solutions to bring forward. Council was informed that no ordinance changes were needed, emphasizing the importance of a balanced approach that strengthens enforcement while considering community impact, legal requirements, and Council guidance on future practices. Mayor Murry raised concerns about challenges with the Code Enforcement Board, noting some members are reluctant to handle nuisance cases and suggesting the city consider using a special magistrate, particularly for nuisance abatement. There was support for using a magistrate for nuisance abatement only, while maintaining the existing Code Enforcement Board. Deputy City Manager Matthys asked Council for a timeline to develop the evaluation criteria, and Council reached consensus to provide an initial list within 30 days. 4 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 ADJOURN: With no further comments, this workshop adjourned at 4:47pin. APPROVED: Tim Murry, Mayor ATTEST: Tracy Ackroyd Howe, MMC City Clerk 5 Cih,of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 CALL TO ORDER The City Council met in a workshop session on Tuesday, March 17, 2026, in the Clermont City Center.Mayor Murry called the workshop to order at 3:00 pm with the following Council Members present: Council Members Strange, Bain, Myers and Petersen. Other City officials present were City Manager Van Wagner,Deputy City Manager Matthys, City Attorney Waugh and City Clerk Howe. City Manager Van Wagner gave the invocation. AGENDA ITEMS Item No. 1 —City Manager Review Criteria Deputy City Manager Matthys stated that an email was recently distributed to all Council Members containing sample evaluation criteria used by other jurisdictions for City Manager performance reviews. The purpose of providing those examples was to assist the Council in developing clear and consistent evaluation standards and expectations. He explained that establishing defined criteria will help ensure alignment between the Council and the City Manager regarding performance goals and priorities. Deputy City Manager Matthys turned the matter over to Council for discussion and direction on the next steps to proceed. Mayor Murry stated that Council has historically not conducted formal City Manager evaluations and noted past challenges in reaching consensus on evaluation criteria despite prior efforts. He stressed the importance of having clear standards in place,noted that other cities struggle with this too, and stated his preference for evaluations to be done privately rather than in public, though public input could still be considered. Council Member Bain asked if reviewing the City Manager requires a public meeting under Florida's Sunshine Law, and City Attorney Waugh confirmed that formal reviews must occur in a City Council meeting or workshop, though individual feedback can be given privately, and noted that cities use various methods like collecting forms or consultant summaries to facilitate the process. Council Member Bain stated that since there has been no formal goal setting for the City Manager, there is no clear path to the way they should prioritize beyond day-to-day duties. He suggested establishing annual strategic priorities or goals, conducting a yearly review of progress, and providing consolidated feedback from Council. Council Member Bain emphasized focusing on objectives rather than personalities, allowing adjustments based on circumstances, and creating a recurring cycle for goal setting and evaluation to guide City Manager performance and support the community's long-term vision. Council Member Strange agreed on the importance of goal setting and praised the idea of reviewing standards while keeping feedback constructive. 1 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 She highlighted transparency to avoid the appearance of secrecy, suggested a twice-yearly review cycle to balance accountability and politics, and supported establishing clear standards to guide the City Manager and hold the Council collectively accountable. Council Member Petersen noted that the City Manager is already under constant informal evaluation by the Council. The value of a formal review depends on the framing and weighting of the questions and the design of them. He cautioned that poorly designed evaluations could be meaningless and emphasized the need for a thoughtful, well-structured process to ensure the review has real significance. Council discussed using the evaluation process to strengthen the City Manager's effectiveness in executing the Council's vision,improve communication between individual Council Members and the City Manager,and establish clear,measurable criteria, such as financial audits,crime statistics, departmental goals, and state-of-the-city presentations, that can be tracked objectively. They also supported a twice-yearly review cycle to monitor progress, link staffing and budgeting decisions to strategic priorities, and provide transparency and accountability to the public. Council Member Myers agreed on the need for clear standards so the City Manager knows what is expected,acknowledged the challenge of conducting evaluations publicly,expressed uncertainty about the frequency of reviews, and suggested using examples from other cities' evaluation processes as a starting point that could be adapted. Mayor Murry proposed a six-month check-in using standardized criteria, developed by a neutral party, focusing on measurable areas like finance, budgeting, audits, and public relations. City Attorney Waugh summarized that,per Section 32 of the City Charter,the city manager serves as CEO and head of administration,responsible for appointing and removing employees,preparing and administering the budget, reporting on city finances and activities, advising the council on financial needs, attending council meetings, performing duties required by charter or ordinance, overseeing purchasing, setting salaries per council-approved schedules, and managing all city- owned utilities,public works, facilities, and improvements. Mayor Murry and Council Member Strange both suggested using the City Charter as the foundation for evaluating the City Manager. Mayor Murry suggested grouping charter responsibilities into key areas such as finance,human resources, and public relations,highlighting the importance of public engagement while acknowledging differing Council priorities. Council Member Strange recommended establishing a small set of clear, measurable criteria for each area and stressed the need for Council alignment on shared priorities to ensure a fair, consistent, and forward-looking evaluation process. Discussion focused on sharing evaluation criteria while complying with Sunshine Law requirements. City Attorney Waugh suggested that each member complete the same evaluation form independently, using agreed-upon criteria, and submit it to the City Clerk, to compile the results for collective review. 2 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 This approach allows input to be gathered without direct communication, avoiding Sunshine issues, with the option to later present the compiled results publicly. Council discussed developing evaluation criteria and expressed concern that independently developed criteria could vary widely, requiring a public process to review, refine, and reach consensus. City Attorney Waugh suggested that an impartial party compile potential criteria based on the Charter and existing evaluation models, creating a broad range of criteria for Council consideration. Council could then identify preferred criteria through a voting or tally process, selecting those with majority support for inclusion in the evaluation. Council also discussed the importance of using the finalized criteria as a foundation for setting clear, forward-looking goals for the City Manager. Council invited City Manager Van Wagner to share his ideas on the evaluation criteria and process. City Manager Van Wagner stated that his role is to carry out the will of the Council majority, even when it differs from individual preferences, which can create tension. He emphasized communication and relationship-building as key areas for evaluation and noted that feedback already occurs continuously through regular interactions. He also highlighted the importance of remaining neutral and relying on staff and professional guidance to implement Council direction effectively. Discussion ensued on creating an objective, personality-free framework for evaluating the City Manager, highlighting communication and public representation as key expectations, with a neutral party helping ensure fairness and consistency. Deputy City Manager Matthys agreed to work with City Attorney Waugh to develop eight criteria and define the standards for meeting, and exceeding expectations, creating a clear framework for review. Mayor Murry opened public comments. Brian Hess, 1166 Short Street — spoke about the groups progress, emphasizing the need for alignment and acknowledging the staffs hard work and dedication. Joe Fumasi, 2693 Jumping Jack Way — praised the council and City Manager Van Wagner for their professionalism,goal-oriented approach, financial transparency,and empowering leadership, noting the city's positive progress. Jim Cretti, 2177 Cedar Springs Way— suggested using the Florida City and County Management Association (FCCMA) performance dimensions as a ready-made framework for evaluating City Managers. Mayor Murry closed public comments. Council Member Strange suggested City Manager evaluation layout that begins with charter-based criteria, aspirations, and any additional proposed criteria not covered in the charter. Each council 3 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 member would submit input, which staff would compile into a manageable, refined list. This approach was generally supported by Council as a strong starting point, though there was discussion on the need to keep the process flexible and it noted that further discussion would be needed before finalizing the structure. Mayor Murry asked City Attorney Waugh to provide Council with an update regarding Code Enforcement cases including the property on Sunset Lane. City Attorney Waugh explained that repeated code violations on properties can be difficult to resolve through the current system, as the board is limited to issuing fines,which may not provide a long-term solution. He noted that while violations are often corrected temporarily, recurring issues require stronger remedies. He informed Council that under Florida law, the City has the authority to pursue nuisance actions through the courts, including injunctions and potential liens or foreclosure, to achieve permanent compliance. He emphasized that these measures are not intended to punish but to provide necessary leverage to protect the community and prevent ongoing violations. Discussion ensued on the challenges with repeat nuisance properties and the limitations of the City's current ordinance,which was described as too narrow and lacking strong enforcement tools. It was noted that while fines and compliance processes are being used, they often fail to provide lasting relief for residents. There was discussion on potential improvements, including stronger enforcement options, revising ordinances, tracking repeat violations more effectively, and allowing staff-initiated cases rather than relying solely on citizen complaints. Deputy City Manager Matthys clarified that the city has authority to initiate code enforcement without a citizen complaint but has generally operated reactively. He noted that shifting to a more proactive approach would require clear Council direction and could have resource implications, and staff are actively developing potential solutions to bring forward. Council was informed that no ordinance changes were needed, emphasizing the importance of a balanced approach that strengthens enforcement while considering community impact, legal requirements, and Council guidance on future practices. Mayor Murry raised concerns about challenges with the Code Enforcement Board, noting some members are reluctant to handle nuisance cases and suggesting the city consider using a special magistrate, particularly for nuisance abatement. There was support for using a magistrate for nuisance abatement only, while maintaining the existing Code Enforcement Board. Deputy City Manager Matthys asked Council for a timeline to develop the evaluation criteria, and Council reached consensus to provide an initial list within 30 days. 4 City of Clermont MINUTES CITY COUNCEL WORKSHOP March 17, 2026 ADJOURN: With no further comments, this workshop adjourned at 4:47pm. x APPROVED: 1\� i '"'+ �.►��+•«s Tim Murry, Ma or ATTEST: Tracy Ackro d Howe, MMC City Clerk 5