A standing committee of the Lakeland City Commission presented a recommended package of updates to the city manager and city attorney employment agreements during the Oct. 17 municipal boards and committee meeting, asking the full commission to consider the revisions at its next session.

The committee — consisting of Commissioners who led a months‑long review and supported by city staff — recommended changing both contracts from an annually renewable term to a continuous term that remains in place until resignation or action by the city commission. Committee members said the change is intended to provide stability to the positions and make the jobs more attractive to prospective applicants.

Commissioners and staff discussed aligning termination provisions and definitions of "cause" across both contracts. The recommended language clarifies examples of cause to include, but not be limited to, "inability or refusal to perform the duties and responsibilities under the agreement and city charter; engaging in criminal conduct; violation of the code of ethics for public officers and employees (Chapter 112, Florida Statutes); and violation of city policies or behavior that diminishes the city's goodwill in the community." The recommendation keeps the commission’s ability to terminate for convenience but makes termination triggers clearer.

On severance, staff said state law limits severance paid to a city manager to a maximum of 20 weeks’ salary; the committee recommended a severance cap equal to the 20‑week maximum and described limited exceptions that would preclude severance (for example, termination for cause as defined in the contract). The committee noted that a 20‑week cap reflects Florida statutory limits and common practice in municipal manager contracts.

Other recommended changes included:
- Clarifying compensation language to display current salary figures in redacted contract insertions and to note that advertised ranges for future recruitment may differ from the current base.
- Treating insurance/indemnification in line with other employees: the city would identify and defend employees acting within the course and scope of employment without the previous sovereign‑immunity limitation language in the attorney contract; employees acting outside the scope of employment would remain responsible for indemnity as appropriate.
- Removing a clause that required a public, annual performance evaluation meeting from the contract text while preserving the commission’s discretion to hold public reviews; the committee recommended that a standing review committee be established to manage performance review processes and timelines.

Committee members discussed market comparisons and midpoints for city manager compensation. Staff presented a number of local comparables and a national market midpoint from a consultant study. The committee discussed proposed figures including $270,000 (presented by the committee), $275,000 (one committee member’s higher suggestion) and the consultant midpoint near $282,000; committee members said the final number will be set by the full commission after review of updated comparables (some of which increased after Oct. 1 salary updates in peer cities).

Commissioners emphasized that the committee’s recommendations are a starting point for the full commission and that any contract changes will require negotiation and mutual acceptance by the city employee and the commission. The committee plans to present the updated draft contracts and the standing review committee resolution to the full commission for public discussion and vote.