My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_1204_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_1204_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2014 4:32:36 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:41:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Special City Council Meeting-11/28/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 3 <br />Mr. �ysylyczy�a expressed his interest in having an opportunity <br />for the public to speak to the City Council as a whole regarding <br />the candidates and selection process. <br />Councilmembers each voted for their top three candidates: <br />TALLY 1 <br />Chris Miller (4); Scott Randall (0); Jim Norman (1); Bill Nla�inen <br />(4); and Amy Filice (5). <br />Upon consensus of Councilmembers, Mr. Randall and Mr. <br />Norman were removed from the candidate pool at this time. <br />At this time, Councilmembers individually and collectively <br />discussed their selection rationale and preferences, and what they <br />were looking for in a candidate. Discussion included weighting of <br />City Manager andlor leadership experience; internal and external <br />panel rankings and comments; personalities; strengths and <br />weaknesses identified during the individual interview processes; <br />ability to articulate personal visions and adapting to community <br />visions; day-to-day leadership qualities versus reacting to daily <br />crises; prior management experience and credentials; weight of <br />testing results; internal experience versus objectives and <br />qualifications of all candidates; balancing previous City Manager <br />experience and positives and negatives of that experience; <br />personal observations, responses, and reactions of candidates <br />during the individual interview process; and perception of abilities <br />to work with staff, residents and the business community. <br />Additional discussion included the candidates having the widest <br />breadth of experience; knowledge of the organization and <br />community; and negotiation of the employment agreement. <br />After further discussion, Council consensus was that each <br />Councilmember confidentially vote for their top two finalists from <br />the three remaining finalists. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.