City manager’s annual evaluation scheduled for Tuesday

BY CHRIS LAMPHERE

CADILLAC NEWS

CADILLAC — The evaluation of Cadillac City Manager Marcus Peccia has been a source of heated disagreement among council members for a couple of years, and was not completed on time in 2024.

On Tuesday, a special meeting has been called to finally hash it out.

The special meeting is scheduled at 4 p.m., prior to the council’s regular meeting at 6 p.m. Council normally meets on the first and third Mondays of the month but due to the Martin Luther King Jr. Day holiday, was scheduled for Tuesday next week.

Tension among council members regarding the city manager evaluation process first boiled over in 2022.

Council member Stephen King voiced concerns about what he viewed as an improper communication between Peccia, Mayor Carla Filkins and council member Tiyi Schippers regarding benefits he’d like to receive as part of his contract renewal.

In particular, King said the correspondence included details about a request for a company car and other benefits that the rest of council wasn’t made privy to until weeks later.

While King maintained that Filkins, Schippers and Peccia were wrong to discuss these matters without the rest of council in the loop, Filkins and Schippers said that information was not deliberately hidden from council and that they were simply following an evaluation procedure that had been in place for years.

SEE EVALUATION ON A3

Cadillac City Manager Marcus Peccia addresses those who attended a zoning forum in 2023.

CADILLAC NEWS FILE PHOTO

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1A

In 2021, King brought up concerns about the process following Filkins’ and Schippers’ private meeting with Peccia and said he felt that council should have voted on who would be present with the mayor during this meeting.

At that time, there was a discussion about changing the process moving forward, although no official vote was taken on the matter one way or the other.

Last year, the topic of city manager evaluation again elicited controversy when Peccia asked for his contract to be amended at a meeting that King did not attend.

Peccia requested that his contract be changed to read that evaluations “may” be held annually as opposed to “shall.” He also asked that his contract be modified to require a four-fifths majority of council to vote to terminate his employment, as opposed to a mere majority.

These requests were made at the same time that Peccia asked council members to approve a cost-ofliving adjustment to his salary to match what has been approved for non-union employees and make it retroactive to the date that increase went into effect. In the future, he also requested that these cost-of-living adjustments occur automatically whenever they are approved for non-union staff and department heads.

King said he felt the request was grounds for Peccia’s termination because it was an attempt to circumvent the city charter and “handcuff” the council in its ability to make future decisions about his employment.

King was not in attendance at the council meeting when Peccia made the request but he said he did ask beforehand if any major decisions would be made and Peccia told him told that none would be.

During a meeting in November, Peccia interrupted King as he repeated this claim, saying that it was not true that they had a discussion prior to the meeting about his evaluation or contract change request not being on the agenda.

Council member Tiyi Schippers said the request also was included in an email to every member of council before the October meeting, although it turns out that it was toward the bottom of the email in a bullet point, so not every council member noticed it, including King.

The confrontation between King and Peccia sparked infighting between members of council and debate as to the merits of the current evaluation system.

Council member Robert Engels commented that past evaluations haven’t been very constructive, since the responses from each council member are predictable year after year.

“Makes me wonder what’s the point,” Engels said. “It makes the process seem less valuable.”

Filkins said she believes council should come up with a different format for evaluating the city manager’s performance — one that doesn’t involve sharing publicly everything they have to say.

Based on feedback she and other council members received at a Michigan Municipal League conference, Filkins said she thinks council should share their feedback with Peccia in private, then release a statement afterward to the public about his general performance.

“I feel like our process is broken,” said Filkins, who has shared with council members in the past that she doesn’t think the current evaluation system is effective in improving Peccia’s performance.

King said he doesn’t agree with the idea of doing the evaluation behind closed doors, as it would make it less clear to the public what council members think of Peccia’s performance; it’s important the public knows this, King said, because managing the city manager is one of the primary functions of the city council.

Peccia’s evaluation normally occurs in the late spring but Filkins said she dropped the ball in getting the process started, which is why it hadn’t been undertaken until late in the year.

The evaluation initially was scheduled for a meeting in December but due to several council members not being able to attend, was tabled until Tuesday.

Council is scheduled to enter into closed session to discuss the evaluation. Any decision regarding Peccia employment, however, will have to be made in open session in full view of the public.

clamphere@cadillacnews.com