Mayor Hayward still does not have working employee evaluation system (Update: but it’s coming)

Last May, we reported that Pensacola Mayor Ashton Hayward had discontinued the city’s job performance evaluation not long after he took office. The public records obtained by Inweekly show that city employees were given raises last year without a recent Annual Performance Evaluation form in their personnel folders. The annual payroll for the 14 departments reviewed by Inweekly totaled nearly $5 million.

At the time, we asked City PIO Vernon Stewart about the lack of evaluations, which are to be done by supervisors annually, according to City’s HR manual.

“We are working with Civic Plus, a government software as a service provider, to develop a new evaluation process,” said Stewart last May. “We intend to roll the new system out in October of this year.”

This past week, Inweekly requested the job performance evaluations done since July 1, 2016, for Finance, Mayor’s Office, City Attorney. City Clerk, Economic Development, Human Resources, Parks & Recreation, Planning Services, and Technology Resources.

The reply: “The City of Pensacola has reviewed its files and has determined there are no responsive records or documents to your request for public records.”

According to city records, Mayor paid $23,990 for the HR system in 2015. See CivicHR_invoices.

We have asked Stewart for clarification and will post his response when received.

—–Update—–

From City PIO: “The system went live in October, but the first cycle has not completed yet. Evaluations won’t be completed and/or show in the system until around this October.”

Share:

1 thought on “Mayor Hayward still does not have working employee evaluation system (Update: but it’s coming)

  1. There is a state law and a city law that govern the payment of bonuses to city employees. Hayward has violated both from the start. With respect to the city law, the penalty for violation is 60 days in jail, a $500 fine or both for each violation. We know about “at least” 775 violations just in 2011. Perhaps when Inweekly finishes up its work looking at the performance evaluation process, it could circle back around to 2011 and cross-check from January 10, 2011 to present to document bonus payments giving us an idea about the total number of bonuses paid in violation of state and city law and the cost to taxpayers. The quickest way for Council President Spencer to become Acting Mayor Spencer is to see Hayward go to jail, potentially for at least 129 years for the illegal bonuses given just in 2011. The first step is for the Council to direct the City Attorney to seek an Advisory Legal Opinion from the Florida Attorney General asking the following: 1) May the city grant a bonus to a city employee in violation of Section 215.425, Florida Statues?; and 2) May a Mayor violate, refuse to comply with or ignore a city law adopted by ordinance using the state law method provided in Section 166.041, Florida Statutes? Once the Council has the answer – NO in both cases – it then needs to drop the matter in the lap of the State Attorney’s Office for action. On the second question, Hayward claims that the city law in question – Section 9-3-24(5)(d) – is in conflict with the city’s municipal constitution, the voter-approved “Charter.” I know that is not true because I have read hundreds of Advisory Legal Opinions and what the Florida League of Cities teaches elected officials about separation of powers and checks & balances. Further, in 2010 the City Council reviewed Section 9-3-24(5)(b) during the process of conforming the Municipal Code to the Charter and left it alone. On that basis alone, Hayward will lose a legal challenge which is why he will not take the issue to the courthouse across the street.

Comments are closed.