Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Mail Packet - 3/31/2020 - Memorandum From Teresa Roche Re: Update On Chief Judge Recruitment Process - March 30 Agenda And March 2 And March 23 MinutesHuman Resources 215 N. Mason Street 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6535 Date: March 26, 2020 To: Mayor Troxell and Councilmembers From: Teresa Roche, Chief Human Resources Officer CC: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Kelly DiMartino, Deputy City Manager RE: Update on Chief Judge Recruitment Process Executive Summary The purpose of this memo to share with you where we are at in the process including the minutes from both our March 3 and March 23 ad hoc committee meetings, the agenda for our meeting on Monday, March 30 and the two page summary of the themes we culled from the numerous stakeholder meetings held January through March. I appreciate deeply the engagement of the ad hoc committee and full Council. Highlights • Agenda for March 30 Meeting. • Minutes from March 2 and March 23 meetings which will be approved as is or amended. • Summary of themes from stakeholder meetings held January through March. TR Human Resources Department 215 N. Mason, 2nd Floor PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 AGENDA Chief Judge Recruitment Ad Hoc Council Committee March 30 4:00 pm to 5:00pm Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/4699474250 +1 669 900 6833 Meeting ID: 469 947 4250 Committee Members: Mayor Wade Troxell Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens Councilmember Susan Gutowsky, District 1 City Staff Members: Teresa Roche, Chief Human Resources Officer Catherine MacGowan, Human Resources Business Partner for Judicial Services Jenny Lopez Filkins, City Attorney Lynda Byrnes, Human Resources • Call Meeting to Order • Findings related to Emergency Ordinance Number 054, 2020: 1. Does the Mayor determine that the meeting with all Councilmember present in person would not be prudent because of a public health emergency? 2. Does the Mayor approve the meeting go forward in this manner because the matters to be considered at the meeting are pressing and require prompt action by the City Council? • Approval of Minutes 1. Approve minutes from March 2, 2020 meeting 2. Approve minutes from March 23, 2020 meeting • Public Comments (limited to approximately 2 minutes per speaker) • Discussion Items: 1. Overview of work completed by recruiter and City staff since last meeting 2. Consideration of a motion to adjourn into executive session “I move that the Chief Judge Selection Process Committee go into executive session, as permitted under Article Two, Section Eleven of the City Charter, Section 2-31(a)(1) of the City Code and Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(f)(roman numeral one), for the purpose of discussing personnel matters involving the recruitment and selection of a new Chief Judge.” 3. Consideration and Committee decision regarding candidates to be considered top finalists 4. Means for interviews and other processes in light of COVID-19 developments There are three or more members of City Council that may attend this meeting. While no formal action will be taken by the Council at this meeting, the discussion of public business will occur, and the meeting is open to the public. Chief Judge Recruitment Ad Hoc Council Committee Minutes March 2, 2020 11:00 am to 12:15 pm Members in attendance: Mayor Wade Troxell; Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens; Council Member Susan Gutowsky; Teresa Roche, Chief Human Resources Officer; Jenny Lopez Filkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney; Catherine MacGowan, HR Business Partner; Lynda Byrnes, HR Business Support A meeting of Chief Judge Recruitment Ad Hoc Council Committee (“Committee”) was held on Monday, March 2, 2020 at 11:00 am in the City Manager’s Conference Room. Agenda: 1. Call meeting to Order a. Approve Minutes from December 31, 2019 Meeting b. Review Today’s Agenda 2. Public Comments (limited to approximately 2 minutes per speaker) 3. Discussion Reviews a. Review And recommend Recruitment Timeline b. Review and Recommend Finalists’ Interview “hold” dates and outline c. Review and Recommend Resolution d. Review and Recommend Assistant Municipal Judge Reappointment Plan 4. Adjournment Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens and Council Member Susan Gutowsky participated by phone. Mayor Troxel called the meeting to order at 11:12 am. Mayor Troxell called to approve the minutes. Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens moved to approve. Council Member Susan Gutowski seconds the motion. All in favor. Ms. Roche discussed the agenda items. Mayor Troxell invited the single member of the public in attendance to speak. Patty Netherton, representing the Municipal Court Staff as a community member shared her concerns and gratitude for the process and will share back with the staff. Mayor Troxell thanked her for her attendance and invited her to share feedback and questions the staff may have. Ms. Roche recaps what has been done to date with stakeholder groups, referencing the many interview/conversation sessions Ms. MacGowan has facilitated. Ms. Roche submitted a high-level timeline to draw attention to where Council needs to note key milestones and where Council needs to be involved. She also included a very detailed timeline that Ms. MacGowan, Mr. Williams (Baker Tilly-Executive Recruiter) and Ms. Roche worked on to guide the overall process. Ms. Roche mentioned that dates were needed where Council action was required: to identify a top candidate and to name Councilmembers who would be involved in negotiations with a top candidate. There was a discussion amongst all attendees about whether a resolution was needed for the negotiations. Mayor Troxell said they could have a resolution at a Council meeting. Council will name the finalist in an open meeting. Ms. Gutowsky asked about how the finalists will come to be presented to Council for consideration and decision. Ms. Roche replied that the Committee will do a deep review of the candidates being put forward by Mr. Williams and recommend a group of top candidates to the Council. After the Council is involved with the interview process, there will be a conversation among Council in an Executive Session to discuss finalists and then in an open meeting, the Council will consider a resolution to identify and negotiate with a top candidate. Mayor Troxell discussed different scenarios/contingencies wherein Council will be involved in negotiations should a consensus of Council on the final candidate not emerge. Ms. Roche then transitioned to a working document Chief Judge Recruitment On-Site Interview Planning Options to review with the Committee. The document represented a framework for blocks of time based on Council calendar and Committee Calendars when they can bring candidates on site. Ms. Roche asked for direction to be provided because all the planning and orchestration depends on some of these decisions. The dates put forward for the onsite interviews with top candidates are April 21, 22 and 23, 2020. The key questions being thought through is what involvement might the full Council want in the on-site interview process, how much involvement do the Council members on the Committee want and how do they want to engage the public. Ms. Roche asked if the Council Members on the Committee have suggestions for participants for the on- site interviews and then discussed the continuum of options for Council and Council members on the Committee. Mayor Troxell suggested there could be two things: a meeting with the Committee and another open meeting with the Council, such as a breakfast. Council may want to have a panel opportunity to deep dive with the candidates. In response to a question by Mayor Troxell regarding if the candidates will be all together when on site, Ms. MacGowan discussed how the candidates may be all together at times and meeting individually with stakeholders such as the municipal court staff at other times. Ms. Roche talked about the groups, which are not necessarily interview panels, but represent recommendation for levels of engagement of certain people: 1. Group 1- Significant participation, more engagement in the on-site interviews. 2. Group 2-All internal participants that represent a talent pool to draw from during the day. 3. Group 3- All external participants, again participation is recommended, and they are potential panelists. 4. Group 4: people who would be good to do tours, lunches, provide insight about the city and Municipal Court, but who are not doing a panel with scripted questions. A menu of suggested activities was presented to “plug and play” in order to create the best on-site experience for candidates, Council, staff and members of the community. Council Member Gutowsky suggested an informal social interaction with the candidates that encouraged “mobility,” so Council Members could mingle and get to know the candidates a little better. Committee discussed this possibility. Committee members agreed to have Council participate in an informal, more social gathering such as a casual meal/dinner followed by a panel where Council Members will get to ask all the candidates more formal questions, with all the candidates in the same room at the same time. Council will have three interactions-- a meal where each candidate will respond to questions by the Council, an informal gathering where others will be present and a public forum. Ms. MacGowan indicated that Wednesday, April 22 would be the day that all the Mayor and Council Members would meet as agreed. Members from the ad hoc committee could be involved on panels to participate in interviews, if desired. Discussion ensued about the involvement of Council regarding participation in the panel interviews. It was decided that Council has opportunities within the structure of the “plug and play” activities to get to know the candidates in order to make informed decisions. The other panel interviews can ask the important questions desired and then provide feedback to Council on that. Decision made that Council Members will NOT be on any interview panels other than the one agreed on and discussed earlier. Discussion transitioned into the best way to have public participation. Ms. Roche indicated that the public would be invited to a forum that would be designed for engagement. Ms. Roche inquired how Council wants to hear the panel feedback. Mayor Troxell asked for the panel interviews to be summarized in some way and then have a debrief with the ad hoc committee and Council. Mayor Troxell asked for a motion made to approve Timeline and Milestones and to recommend it to Council. Mayor Pro Tem Stephens made the Motion. Council member Gutowsky seconded the motion and the motion passed. 11:58 am Mayor Pro Tem Stephens left the meeting. Ms. Roche indicated as of today we have 9 candidates with a promising talent pool. These candidates have been screened by Mr. Williams. Deadline to apply is March 6, 2020 and the possibility is that more candidates may apply. Mayor Troxell wants to know how we determine a viable pool. Mr. Williams still doing passive recruiting and feels there are some very competitive candidates. The Committee will get packets to review of materials prior to March 19 on each candidate showing how the candidates answered the questions, a short video from each candidate and answers to background questions asked. Mr. Williams will be providing insights on the candidates. Council will get an overview of the entire talent pool and then the recommendations for semi-finalists to consider. Ms. Roche indicates that so far of the 9 candidates there are: 1. Four of them are municipal or assistant judge 2. Three of them are prosecutors 3. One of them has a similar State or Federal role A discussion about the in-depth application process occurred and Ms. MacGowan asked if there were any other questions Council would like to see. Mayor Troxell suggested it will be helpful to understand highlights of the applicants when presented. Council Member Gutowsky and Mayor Troxell are interested in the rubric Mr. Williams is using to weigh the viability of all candidates and then what rubric is being used to go from the semi-finalists to the finalists. Mayor Troxell is wanting to see what distinguishes a candidate that proceeds to the next level or does not make it to the next level. Ms. Lopez Filkins raises question on timeline to see if Mayor Troxell is envisioning being able to recommend moving forward on semi-finalists on March 19 to evaluate those candidates that Mr. Williams will be recommending. Through Mr. William’s screening, the semi-finalist pool will have more vetting than just the application process would have revealed. Ms. Lopez Filkins asks if they would like the language amended for March 19 meeting to say Council will meet to review and identify finalist candidates. Committee members agree that the timeline should be amended this way. The Committee’s objective on March 19th is to review semi-finalists and select finalists. Ms. Lopez Filkins will not attend the March 19, 2020 Council meeting. City Attorney Carrie Daggett will be in attendance instead. Last item Ms. Roche brought up is the need to consider the contract extension for Judge Ablao, which will be discussed at the March 19 ad hoc meeting and a resolution to be forward by Chief Judge Lane on May 5. 12:35 pm Meeting stands adjourned. Chief Judge Recruitment Ad Hoc Council Committee Minutes March 23, 2020 10:00 am to 12:15 pm Members in attendance: Mayor Wade Troxell; Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens; Council Member Susan Gutowsky; Teresa Roche, Chief Human Resources Officer; Jenny Lopez Filkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney; Catherine MacGowan, HR Business Partner; Lynda Byrnes, HR Business Support; Edward Williams, Executive Recruiter- BakerTilly. A meeting of Chief Judge Recruitment Ad Hoc Council Committee (“Committee”) was held on Monday, March 23, 2020 at 10:00 am in the CIC Conference Room. Agenda: 1. Call meeting to Order a. Approve Minutes from March 02, 2020 Meeting b. Review Today’s Agenda 2. Public Comments (limited to approximately 2 minutes per speaker) 3. Consideration of a Motion to Adjourn into Executive Session a. “I move that the Chief Judge Selection Process Committee go into executive session, as permitted under Article Two, Section Eleven of the City Charter, Section 2-31(a)(1) of the City Code and Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-402(4)(f)(roman numeral one), for the purpose of discussing personnel matters involving the recruitment and selection of a new Chief Judge.” 4. Discussion Items: a. Provide Update on Assistant Judge Contract Extension Mayor Pro Tem Kristin Stephens, Mayor Wade Troxell and Mr. Williams participated by Zoom video conference. Mayor Troxell called the meeting to order at 10:09 am. Councilmember Gutowsky was physically present for the meeting. Pursuant to Emergency Ordinance Number 054, 2020, the Mayor determined that the meeting with all Councilmember present in person would not be prudent because of a public health emergency and approved that the meeting go forward in tis manner because the matters to be considered at the meeting are pressing and require prompt action by the City Council. To be most efficient today, it was suggested that the Minutes from March 2, 2020 not be approved and instead be put on the agenda for the next Committee Meeting, TBA. The committee considered the agenda items. No members of the public were in attendance; no public comments received. Councilmember Gutowsky moved to allow the Committee to adjourn into an Executive Session at 10:11am for the purpose described in the motion above. Mayor Pro Tem Stephens seconds it. Vote by roll call: Councilmember Gutowsky votes yes. Mayor Pro Tem Stephens votes yes. Mayor Troxell votes yes. Decision is unanimous. At 11:55 am, the Committee concluded the Executive Session and returned to the open session. Ms. Roche encourages committee to include in the motion to follow up on two or three candidates with some questions the Committee has if need be. Mayor Pro Tem Stephens makes motion to further consider six candidates with the understanding that staff and the consultant will look into a couple questions about the top six candidates and follow up with the committee. Councilmember Gutowsky seconds the motion. From this point, a more in- depth process will be in place to move through these candidates. It was determined that because this is now public information, candidates may need to notify their supervisors that they are part of this process. Mayor Troxell asks for a vote on the motion. Vote by roll call: Councilmember Gutowsky votes yes. Mayor Pro Tem Stephens votes yes. Mayor Troxell votes yes. Decision is unanimous. Ms. Roche recommends a 1 hour ad Hoc committee meeting to further consider the top candidates, contemplate if further action will need to be completed virtually in the current climate of COVID-19 and to create the opportunity to hear any new insights from Edward and the committee’s reaction those insights. Ms. Roche shared that in talking to Chief Judge Lane, the recommendation relating to extending Teresa Ablao’s contract is to put forth a two-year extension for her as Assistant Judge. May 5th is the date on the timeline for a resolution to approve this. 12:13 pm Meeting stands adjourned. Themes and Insights from Chief Judge Recruitment Stakeholder Interviews Prepared for Council Review March 2020 Summary Over the course of several weeks in January, February, and March, meetings were scheduled with Municipal Court Stakeholders in order to learn a variety of perspectives on the role of Chief Judge. Meetings were facilitated by Executive Recruiter Edward Williams of Baker Tilly, Catherine MacGowan, Human Resources Business Partner to City of Fort Collins Judicial Services and Teresa Roche, Chief Human Resources Officer. It was explained to Stakeholders that the City Council is deeply interested in their perspectives on the role of the Court, current and future challenges and opportunities, and the experience and characteristics that would support a successful Chief Judge. The following themes represent what was shared in the various sessions. • Partnering and Collaboration: Stakeholders described a strong desire for the new Chief Judge to demonstrate a commitment to partnering closely and leveraging the co-responders, advocates, and offender experts across the community. Groups in the community such as CSU Conflict Resolution and Outreach Fort Collins are experts in the characteristics of the populations they serve. Several spoke about the “three-legged stool” that is strong by working together, including Policy (Council), Enforcement (Police & Special Commissioned Officers), and Accountability (Municipal Court). • Invest Time into Individual Offender Circumstances: Stakeholders expressed strong interest in a Chief Judge who is willing to take individual circumstances into consideration when determining the appropriate sentencing. With the shared goal of behavior change, not all offenders respond to the same type of sentencing. • Balance Accountability with Compassion: Stakeholders expressed strong interest in a compassionate Chief Judge who strikes an effective balance between leniency and consequences. Enforcement staff work hard to keep the community safe and a desirable place to live and back-up from the Court is essential for their roles. • Homelessness, Mental Health, and Substance Abuse: Stakeholders emphasized the importance of selecting a Chief Judge who has direct experience with homelessness and a community with comparable homeless, mental health, and substance abuse issues. Homelessness is the biggest challenge that the Court (and City) will face in coming years. Partnering with the new behavioral health treatment center being built in Larimer County will be an opportunity to deeply explore comprehensive options for offenders with mental health and substance abuse disorders. Specific comments mentioning: o Municipal Court is at the forefront for the most vulnerable populations (homelessness, mental health, substance abuse.) These are complex problems to solve, and require holistic, behavioral changes. o The makeup of the homeless community has changed. It is now mostly youth and young adult. They are travelling here for the marijuana and have no connection to the community at all. Marijuana and panhandling laws are primary causes of the issue. There are websites dedicated to sharing information about different cities to homeless transients; Fort Collins is at the top of the list for cities with the most resources and favorable laws. • Allow Time for the Chief Judge to engage in community learning and connection: Stakeholders understand that collaboration, partnering, listening, and understanding individual circumstances takes time. They expressed hope that the new Chief Judge would have the time to engage in these important activities. • Ensure Chief Judge understands the barriers and challenges of the undocumented population. • Budget Allocations: Stakeholders have expressed a strong interest in ensuring a level of support is given to the Chief Judge for staffing, technology, security, and programming. • Team Leadership: The Municipal Court Staff team described an interest in the new Chief Judge being approachable, an advocate for the team and who can lead innovatively to provide solutions for the Court.