Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1990-04-04 MinutesINDEX MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING APRIL 4, 1990 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ITEM SUBJECT LEGISLATION PAGE NO. NO. 1. SPECIAL MEETING CALLED BY MAYOR XAVIER M 90-244 1-9 L. SUAREZ TO CONSIDER AN EVALUATION OF 4/4/90 THE JOB PERFORMANCE OF CESAR ODIO, AS CITY MANAGER. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETI14G OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 4th day of April, 1990, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in Special Session. The meeting was called to order at 2:34 p.m. by Mayor Xavier Suarez with the following members of the Commission found to be present: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miriam Alonso Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins Mayor Xavier L. Suarez ABSENT: Commissioner Victor De Yurre ALSO PRESENT: Cesar Odio, City Manager Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney Matty Hirai, City Clerk Walter J. Foeman An invocation was delivered by Mayor Suarez. Vice Mayor Dawkins then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SPECIAL MEETING CALLED BY MAYOR XAVIER L. SUAREZ TO CONSIDER AN EVALUATION OF THE JOB PERFORMANCE OF CESAR ODIO, AS CITY MANAGER. Mayor Suarez: One of the problems that. all Commissioners share is that we're not particularly well compensated for our functions as Commissioners and, sometimes, in all the cases, I guess, up here, it means that we must have other jobs, so it`s not always difficult to... it's not always easy to extricate yourself from whatever it is you have to be doing to make a living and make it here for the Commission meetings. Nevertheless, all the Commissioners have been advised of the time of this hearing and so I think we should be moving on very quickly so maybe we'll just give him another minute or so. Do we have any indication, Carlos, of Commissioner De Yurre? Is he in the chambers? Is he in the building? Give him a few more minutes. The purpose of the special session called by myself is stated in a memorandum. Mr. City Attorney, I guess you probably have in front of you, Madam City Clerk, Mr. City Manager. It says, basically, to consider an evaluation of the performance of the City Manager and that, I think, is the understanding of all the Commissioners. That's what's stated in this memorandum calling for a special session. Commissioner Plummer: Mr. Mayor, just for clarification. Reading from the memo, it says, "...the purpose of the meeting is to propose an evaluation." I guess I have to ask, since you made the call to propose the evaluation today, tomorrow? It doesn't say to do the evaluation. It is to propose the evaluation. So I'd ask for clarification as to the record if what was the intent meant by proposed to? Mayor Suarez: Well, I really wanted to hear from the Commission on that. That's why I left it in as general a terms as I could. We've seen large memoranda going back, and forth, including one by myself which is lengthy, 30 pages, and I received about 3 hours ago, an even lengthier one from the Manager which responded to my memorandum and I think, with exhibits, it's 163 pages. And so I didn't what readiness the Commissioners would have and also didn't know, I suppose, what willingness they would have, to begin an evaluation and that's why I wanted to put before you today and see what your feeling was so we don't do this in the newspapers, we do it as we're supposed to, under the Charter, in a Commission Meeting. 1 April 4, 1990 Vice Mayor Dawkins: Mr. Mayor... Mayor Suarez: Yes, Mr. Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor Dawkins-. I appreciate that because due to the Sunshine Law, we can't discuss it, but I'd like to read my response and we take off from there. =_ If my memory serves me right, the City Manager's anniversary date will be December 14th, 1990. Again, if my memory serves me right, prior to Mr. Odic - becoming City Manager, the City Manager, City Clerk, and the City Attorney were evaluated annually on their anniversary date. Since Mr. Odic has been= Manager, I cannot recall this Commission coming together to discuss an ®_ evaluative performance of. the City Manager. Generally, and in fact, in most instances, administrators hold an evaluation conference to determine what has been achieved, how well it was done, when and if there are means of making improvements in the way whatever was accomplished or not accomplished. In my _ opinion, an evaluation should never be a negative, but should be done in a — positive manner to improve performance and productivity. This should be done in a public forum which allows the City Commissioners to discuss their _ concerns and for the Manager to be allowed to respond. The Mayor provided the Manager with a list of his concerns. I think that each Commissioner deserves the right to provide the Manager with a list of their concerns also, to allow the Manager to respond to those concerns, just as he is responding to those of the Mayor. My compiled list of concerns must be shared with the Manager, for an appropriate and timely response. If the Manager's response to the - Commissioners concerns are not satisfactory or unacceptable, then the particular Commissioner should sit down with the Manager and develop some benchmarks and a timetable in which the Commissioner can expect the Manager to accomplish or correct the concerns. Once the concerns are identified, we would have to determine how, what, and when to evaluate the Manager. What would be the benchmarks to evaluate the current Manager or any Manager. In my opinion, the given or written concerns of the Manager is not the proper way to -- evaluate the performance of the Manager. Since my concerns would be mine and are not agreed on categorically, then it would be unprofessional for me to expect my peers on the Commission to arbitrarily agree with me and my concerns. This is no way to objectively evaluate the Manager. If the desire of the Commission is to fire the Manager, then call for the vote to dismiss the Manager. But let's not make a mockery of the evaluation system using this as a tool to fry the Manager. Today, by putting the Manager on notice, giving him our concerns and then developing the criteria for which we evaluate the Manager on his anniversary date, irregardless of who the Manager is on that = date. To do anything less, would, in my opinion, prevent other professionals from wanting to apply for work in an atmosphere where one's livelihood is at - the whims of emotional majority. We should not compromise the evaluation process. I would suggest that we submit our concerns to the Manager in writing and that he be evaluated on his anniversary date which is December 14, 1990. This does not preclude any member of this Commission who feels that - they are desirous of calling for the dismissal of the Manager from doing so. Dismissal may be the results of an impartial, objective evaluation. But dismissal should be the objective of an evaluation. e.� (Applause) NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Commissioner De Yurre entered the meeting at 2:39 p.m. during Vice Mayor Dawkins' statement. Mayor Suarez: Very good. The... please, please. The proposal is to carry out as each Commissioner deems fit, through memoranda or otherwise, meetings, with the existing City Manager looking to a complete evaluation on the anniversary date which you're telling us is December 14th. Vice Mayor Dawkins: Yes.... Mayor Suarez: OK? Anything further from anyone else? I... Commissioner Alonso: Commissioner Dawkins... Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Alonso. 2 April 4, 1990 Commissioner Alonso: are you making this in the way of a motion that we vote on deciding that Mr. Cesar Odio should have his next evaluation in December of 1990? Vice Mayor Dawkins: Yes, Madam Commissioner. What I'm saying is, we have not evaluated him and I feel that since his anniversary date is December, and usually you evaluate people on their anniversary date, I will, at the proper time, make that motion, yes, ma'am. Commissioner Alonso: OK, if Commissioner Dawkins makes that motion, I second that motion and I have a stated publicly my support of Cesar Odio. I have seen him working for the City of Miami. I think that administrator needs the support. The City of Miami needs the stability to function properly, to carry on our duties, and I hope that by our action here today, we will be able to continue working for the City of Miami and everything in our actions today will be completed in a way that a final vote is taken here today and this problem is put aside in a professional way that allow all of us to go back to the business at hand. That is the betterment of the City of Miami. (Applause) Vice Mayor Dawkins: Mr. Mayor... Mayor Suarez: Please, please. Vice Mayor Dawkins: Mr. Mayor since there... Mayor Suarez: Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor Dawkins: ...since there is discussion, I make the motion that the Manager be evaluated December 14th, which is his anniversary date. I make that... Mayor Suarez: So moved. Commissioner Alonso: Second. INAUDIBLE COMMENTS NOT ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD. Mayor Suarez: You may not speak at all at this point, but you - if, depending on what we do, you may be able to speak at some other point. It doesn't seem like we're going to heading towards a public hearing or this, ma'am, please. Commissioner De Yurre: Mr. Mayor... Mayor Suarez: Commissioner De Yurre. Commissioner De Yurre: I think that there are two issues at hand. First of all, one issue is whether there should be an evaluation or not. And the second issue is, if there is to be one, when it's going to take place. I think that by putting them both together, we may not be doing it in the best manner possible. We may not have to set a date for an evaluation if there aren't three votes here for one. We haven't had one since I've been here, so, you know, if we're talking about doing an evaluation around the anniversary date, you know, there could be an argument for saying well, this could apply to last year, because he didn't have one or the year before. At "least in the two and a half years that I've been here, there hasn't been any for the City Manager or anybody else, for that matter, that holds a position... Mayor Suarez: Appointed by the Commission. Well, I think that breaking them up is quite acceptable to me. I think my views are clear... Commissioner. De Yurre: I wouldn't... Mayor Suarez: ...I'm trying to... Commissioner De Yurre: ... you know, if there's a substitute motion, breaking it down and saying, you know, let's deal with the issue of an evaluation, then I would like, you know, I would think it should be in order to come in as a substitute motion at that time. 3 April 4, 1990 � c 1 Mayor Suarez: OK, if you don't move it - If YOU move it, I'll second it. If you don't move it, I'll move it and you can second it. However. you want to do - _ �c it. Commissioner De Yurre: Well, I'll just put it on the floor, you know, I would _ make a motion that there be an evaluation and then, you know, we'll take .it from there. Mayor Suarez: OK, I'm disposed to second that. Mr. Vice Mayor, does that, in - any way, contradict what you're proposing or are you saying that the timing of _ an evaluation, from your perspective, cannot be prior to... -- - Commissioner De Yurre: No, no. What I'm saying is, that the whole reason for =— this meeting, as far as i know, and I think the reason why most of the people — _ are here is because the issue is an evaluation. And if that is the issue -- then, I think we should take the votes to see whether there should be an evaluation or not and if there is to be one, then we should then deal with the issue at what point in time it's going to be done. If it's going to be done today, next month, December 14th, or whenever. That's my position. �= Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Alonso. �— Commissioner Alonso: I think that Commissioner Dawkins has made a motion that states and speak of an evaluation and he has given the date, December, 1990. Commissioner De Yurre: OK, but how... Commissioner Alonso: He has spoken of both... Commissioner De Yurre: OK... Commissioner Alonso: ...evaluation and .he has given a date. Commissioner De Yurre: OK, well I'm saying is, that there may be those up here that don't feel that a need - there is a need for an evaluation, much less a date to be set at this point in time. Vice Mayor Dawkins: Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Jorge Fernandez: Yes. Mayor Suarez: Vice Mayor Dawkins. Vice Mayor Dawkins: We have two motions. A motion made by me and seconded, and if the seconder does not agree with what I'm saying, tell me. My motion said that we should evaluate the Manager and that the evaluation should take place December 14th, which is his anniversary date. I made that motion and the second seconded it. Now, the seconder, is that the understanding that you seconded? Commissioner Alonso: Yes, indeed. Vice Mayor Dawkins: OK, now, Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Vice Mayor Dawkins: We have a substitute motion on the floor which says that we should vote if there should be an evaluation at all. Now, we have two separate motions. Is that correct? Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Vice Mayor Dawkins: So, we vote on the substitute motion first. Mr. Fernandez: Correct. Vice Mayor Dawkins: OK, now is itanyone up here who does not understand what we're doing? -I mean, on the Commission? Commissioner Plummer: Well, let me understand. Let's go back a little bit. I guess the old man of the Commission has got to bring up a little history. The evaluation of a Manager came about for the purposes of giving him a raise 4 April 4, 1990 or not giving him a raise. And the evaluation T17as done to determine whether or not this Conamissi.on felt that he had done a good job and as si.ich, should be compensated or not done a good job, remain the same, or contrary, a bad job that he be terminated. I have no problem with doing an evaluation, none. Matter of fact, let me say, for the record, as far as I'm concerned, I evaluated him every day and the job that he does. (Cheering and applause) Mayor Suarez: Please. Commissioner Plummer: That doesn't necessarily mean that I agree with him. (Cheering and applause) Commissioner Plummer: If I vote on the substitute motion for evaluation, I will vote, yes, because I think that the Manager, as we have prescribed in policy, is entitled to be evaluated for a pay raise, no raise, or possibly, bye-bye. So I have no problem with voting to do an evaluation in the proper manner, in the proper perspective. I think it's good that he should be evaluated by this Commission. Now, I still feel that the original motion covers both aspects of which I agree with and that. is to do the evaluation on the anniversary date. So, I have really no conflict with voting for the first part of the substitute, but I feel that it is incorporated in the initials motion so, just for clarification.... Commissioner De Yurre: WelI., the thing is, that one may agree to one part of it and not agree with the other... Commissioner Plummer: OK, all right... Commissioner De Yurre: ...so, just to break it up and... Commissioner Plummer- Well, but my understanding of your intent was that there might not be the feeling to have an evaluation at all. Commissioner De Yurre: There may be that. Commissioner Plummer: OK, I just don't... Commissioner De Yurre: There may be a feeling of saying yes, that we want an evaluation, but the date, December 14th, may not be acceptable, so you would be forced to vote no on the issue on the evaluation because you don't agree with the date that's tagged on to that motion. Commissioner Plummer: All right, the only other area of concern in checking with the calendar, December the 14th, the actual anniversary date, does fall on a regular Commission Meeting in December. I think if we're going to do a proper procedure, that it would be better that other than maybe the 13th or the 15th. Mayor Suarez: We can adjust that as we approach that date. I think the general feeling if that motion passes is that... Commissioner Plummer: Yes, so thatit doesn't - we're not rushed and we're not pushed and we can do it... Mayor Suarez: Please, ma'am. Commissioner. Commissioner Plummer: ...in a perspective manner. So, I'm just stating for the record how I will vote on both of the motions, I guess. Mayor Suarez: OK, I second the substitute motion. Mr. Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor Dawkins: OK, substitute motion has been moved and second. Madam Clerk, read the substitute motion. Ms. Hirai: The second substitute motion states as to whether - asks as to whether there should be an evaluation at all. Commissioner Alonso: Yes, I'd like clarification. So, we are going to vote on this substitute motion only to make clear the vote of certain members of 5 April 4, 1990 E El this Commission that might like to vote no In the original motion. Is that it? That's the intent.. Commissioner De Yurre: No, the intent is to see whether... (Applause and shouting) Commissioner De Yurre: First of all, the intent is to see whether there are three votes here to have an evaluation or not, and if there are the three votes, then we'll proceed to the next issue which would be a time for the evaluation. Commissioner Plummer: Well, I guess what you're saying is, is there's not three votes for evaluation, that you don't have to set a time, is what you're saying. Commissioner De Yurre: Then it's time to go home. Commissioner Plummer: OK. All right. Commissioner Alonso: All right. OK. Mayor Suarez: Ma'am... Vice Mayor Dawkins: Any further discussion? Hearing none, call the roll, Madam Clerk. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner De Yurre, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 90-244 A MOTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION STIPULATING THAT AN EVALUATION BE MADE OF CESAR ODIO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CITY MANAGER. Upon being seconded by Mayor Suarez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miriam Alonso Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: Vice Mayor Dawkins ABSENT: None. COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL: Vice Mayor Dawkins: That is on the substitute motion? COMMENTS MADE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL: Mayor Suarez: OK, the motion to have an evaluation carries. We have a motion that I think we've all expressed is not inconsistent with the other motion and, in any event, is still pending. I think we should take it to a vote, should we not, Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Fernandez: Yes, you come back to your original motion, which is to have an evaluation on December 14th. Vice Mayor Dawkins: No, no, that lost. The substitute motion wiped that out. We come back now... Mayor Suarez: I guess procedurally, I think... Commissioner Plummer: OK, so now make a second motion. Vice Mayor Dawkins: We come back now to decide what date... Mayor Suarez: Right. 6 April 4, 1990 Vice Mayor Dawkins: ...you will. have an evaluation. Mayor Suarez: I think he may be more right technically, Mr. City Attorney, than you are. Mr. Fernandez: Correct, you're right. Mayor Suarez: In any event, we're - he's becoming a procedural expert here. We are all back at the same juncture which is or juncture that we were, perhaps, heading in, which is to have an evaluation, but to decide on a date and I'm open to your suggestions on a date. Commissioner Alonso: I wish when I asked my question, I asked precisely, then we're voting just for the sake of clarification on certain members of this Commission that might have said no to the original motion and I said, "Are we going to go back to the original motion?" That was my question at one point. I wish we had, you know, some legal advice as that we were not going to do that. But anyway, let's set up the time now. Mayor Suarez: I don't think we have a pending motion then. Let me suggest this to the Commission and as my... Vice Mayor Dawkins: I make a motion that it. be December... Mayor Suarez: Mr. Vice Mayor. Vice Mayor Dawkins: I make a motion it be December 14th. Mayor Suarez: So moved. Vice Mayor Dawkins: I mean, not December... the second week in December. Mayor Suarez: Second week in December, 1990. Commissioner Alonso: And I second. Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Let me ask the Vice Mayor, if, in fact, in this particular case, we have in effect not had an evaluation for the last four and a half years, why do you feel that it has to be at the anniversary date if we haven't had - we've had, you know, four anniversaries. Why could it not be at any time that it seems fitting? In Commissioner Plummer's view of life, he's doing it on an everyday basis. I suppose in a way, we all are, but wily not a formal evaluation at some point prior to December 14th? Vice Mayor Dawkins: That's the beauty of the five members. A simple majority of three determines what the date should be. Commissioner Alonso: Of course. Vice Mayor Dawkins: And you are correct, Mr. Mayor, in that there has not been an evaluation. There is nothing firm and fast that it has to be on the anniversary date since it has not been done, sir, annually. So, it's nothing magical about the i4th, but I personally just feel that, hey, if we're going to do it, I'm accustomed to evaluating people on their anniversary date and that's the only reason I personally feel. Mayor Suarez: OK. Anything further from anyone else? Do we have a second on that motion? Commissioner Alonso: Yes. Commissioner De Yurre: This does not preclude, if this vote carries, from, because, you know... the concern that I have is that this whole community has been broughtup to a situation wherein there seems to be a crisis at hand as far as management is concerned. Whether it's factual or not, when, you know, a 30-page memo has gone out with a number of issues at hand and 30 pages carries a. lot of weight, I mean, as far as questions being asked an( departments being analyzed. I do not want, and I would not like there to linger, in this community, a feeling of, what's going on? Was that memo answered? What are the issues? Is the City running well? And I would - if this motion carries - I think that, you know, we should leave the door open 7 April 4, 1990 that if, at any time this Commission feels, and I think that that's the way legally that it can happen, that we feel that something has to happen sooner than December.- 14th in the best interest of our community, that we be in a position to say, "Hey, listen, we have to cleat this up. We have to let the community know that the job is being done and or it's not being done so that we can deal with it." But certainly, I think that the community has to feel comfortable with the job that is being done here by the City Manager and - go ahead. Vice Mayor Dawkins: Well, you know, I said in my opening statement, that anything that I said did not preclude any member of this Commission calling for an evaluation anytime that that Commissioner felt that that Commissioner could get three votes up here to accomplish what he desired. And I say again, this process says, that with three votes you can do something. Now, if anybody up here feels that, they can get three votes tomorrow for the evaluation, that's great. If you want to do it on Columbus Day, which is J.L. Plummer's favorite day, no problem. See? But you got to have three votes to determine what you're going to do and when. And that's all I'm saying. Now, I have one vote that says, I'm accustomed professionally at the college, of evaluating people on their anniversary date. That's what I'm accustomed to doing. Now, it doesn't say that it's written in stone that you have to do it, that way. The Mayor brought up a good point. We have not had an evaluation in such a long time, you may not have to wait for the anniversary date. That's one vote he has. So now, you have to decide up here, what three votes want to do and let's do that. Commissioner De Yurre: Let me ask you this so I can understand where you're coming from. Are you saying that in... or maybe you're not saying that, but let me ask it. Are you stuck on December 14th as far as an evaluation date or will you consider another time? Vice Mayor Dawkins: I am stuck on the second week in December, but I will be ruled by three votes of this Commission who decide to do what they want and the majority will rule as to what we do up here. Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Alonso. Commissioner Alono: Yes, I'd like to make a comment on this. What I like that once we leave here today, I think the decision of the majority of this Commission should rule and it should be respected to the extent that this case, at least for a period of time, should be put to rest. It does not prevent, as Commissioner Dawkins has expressed and quite well, that we can continue to work with the Manager in whatever way we find necessary to improve whatever we feel needs to be changed in the City and discussion as we always have with the Manager. But what is important for Miami is that we, today, whatever decision we agree today with three votes, make a decision to put this case to rest and to send a message that this Manager can continue to do the work or he's not going to continue to do the work because I don't feel that the citizens of Miami, the employees, the administration, and all of us, can continue the way we have been for the last few weeks. Arid that's actually what I want to request from this Commission that we don't call another special meeting next week or the week after that to do exactly the same that we doing today. If we vote and we have three votes for December of 1990, let's respect that and agree that this Commission has ruled and if nothing changes, from what we are facing here today, let's respect that, at least for a period of time. (Applause and cheering) Mayor Suarez: Please. Commissioner De Yurre: Mr. Mayor... Mayor Suarez: Please, please... ma'am, if you want that sign to be viewed by the television, you ought to put it right side up. You have it upside down. But please don't clap, because it just detracts from our proceedings. I'm sure he's going to catch it better that way. Commissioner De Yurre. Commissioner De Yurre: Yes, sir, I think that... Commissioner Plummer: Why don't we just. ask the cameraman to stand on his head? 8 April 4, 1990 Mayor Suarez: It happens all the time up here. Commissioner. De Yurre: this process, that we are embarked on, is one that no matter what the vote is today, let's say that it does fall on December _ - 14th, I think that certainly there is no administration that doesn't recognize that it can always do a little bit better. I feel that a .lot of things that I - question and Cesar and I have had many an argument about certain things in the - City, how they're done, that it's a matter of views, it's a matter of style of doing things, but certainly, I think that what should come out of this -- situation is that a better government will win out. I feel that if nothing =_ else, better government will prevail, better lines of communication will exist, better understanding and a better Miami for all of us. And, you know,_ sometimes people tend to get too comfortable in their seat and what they're doing and it takes something like this to say, "Hey, listen, we have to do — Jj better and you have to strive to do a little bit better." And, hopefully, _ that's the message that we have coming out of this meeting today. We continue to work together in improving our City and doing the best we can and let's continue in that spirit. Mayor Suarez: Very good. Anything further on the motion? If not, please call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 90-245 A MOTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION STIPULATING THAT THE EVALUATION TO BE MADE OF CESAR ODIO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CITY MANAGER, TAKE PLACE DURING THE SECOND WEEK IN DECEMBER, 1990. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Alonso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Victor De Yurre Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Miriam Alonso Vice Mayor Miller Dawkins Mayor Xavier L. Suarez NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Commissioners. Unless anyone has anything further, this session is adjourned. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, -THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 3:05 P.M. ATTEST: Matty Hirai CITY CLERIC Halter J. Foeman ASSISTANT CITY CLERK Xavier L. Suarez M A Y 0 R ( S E A L ) 9 April 4, 1990