The Philomath City Council reviewed and approved the process it will use for the annual evaluation of the city manager at its Oct. 13 meeting.

Councilors and staff described a process in which the city manager completes a self-evaluation and each councilor submits an individual evaluation; those submissions will be sent to the Human Resources director (Chelsea) for consolidation. The council will then hold an executive session to discuss group feedback and identify areas of joint strengths and improvement before the manager returns for a public summary meeting.

Why it matters: The city manager evaluation is a formal, periodic review that informs leadership expectations and any joint direction from the council. The council described changes intended to make feedback more balanced and actionable.

Key components

- Timing and confidentiality: Staff will distribute the evaluation instrument to council members promptly; individual responses will remain confidential and will be consolidated by the HR director. The council will meet in executive session to synthesize group feedback and then reconvene with the manager to present consolidated results.

- Form changes and guidance: Committee members noted past forms emphasized explanations only for low scores; the revised form invites explanation for any score (high or low) so that positive performance and areas for improvement are both documented.

- Expectations for comments: The council emphasized comments should back up numeric scores so the feedback is specific and actionable. Several councilors said in-person or one-on-one conversations are also appropriate and should not be replaced by the annual form.

- Anonymity and attribution: Councilors debated whether written feedback should be anonymous. Staff and HR advised that the city prefers identifiable input to allow follow-up and to enable HR to address any issues that require clarification. The council agreed responses will be identifiable to HR but not published as individual-attributed comments; the public-facing summary will be drafted afterward.

- Follow-up: The council discussed creating a short public statement after the evaluation and possibly scheduling a mid-year check-in so goals and improvements can be addressed earlier than the next annual review.

Ending

The council voted unanimously to proceed with the evaluation process as presented; staff will distribute the materials and HR will collect and consolidate responses ahead of a future executive-session review.