Crookston attorney summarizes Jan. 21 closed session on city administrator evaluation; council delays pay decision

City Attorney Tanner told the Crookston City Council that a closed session on Jan. 21, 2025, reviewed a six‑month performance evaluation of City Administrator Jeff Shoebridge and discussed a possible pay increase, residency expectations and next steps.

The summary matters because the council is weighing personnel and retention decisions that affect city leadership and budgeting; council members asked for additional information and agreed to consider the matter again in a subsequent closed meeting rather than decide a raise immediately.

Tanner said the Jan. 21 closed meeting was held under Minnesota statute 13D.05, subdivision 3(a), to conduct a performance review. Council members discussed whether to grant a raise to the city administrator, the importance of the administrator residing in Crookston and the difficulty of finding available housing in the city. Tanner noted the council members also discussed the challenge of hiring and retaining long‑serving city administrators in Crookston.

Council members told Tanner that evaluating someone after only six months on the job is difficult; the report recorded that Shoebridge had been in the position about six months when the review occurred. Members also discussed that the city’s audit office was “extremely short staffed” during the audit period and when Shoebridge started, and that staffing constraints complicated the administrator’s early performance period.

According to Tanner’s summary, the council requested a line‑by‑line review of the budget and emphasized the need to set key performance indicators and clear performance expectations going forward. The council discussed department heads attending council meetings, receiving information in advance of meetings and areas where they see strengths and where they would like to see change from administration.

Tanner said Shoebridge provided the council with salary comparisons for administrators in comparable jurisdictions. The council asked for additional time to review that information; members agreed that a subsequent closed meeting would be scheduled at the next regularly scheduled council meeting to continue consideration of any salary change. No formal pay decision was reported in the open summary.

Next steps: the council will reconvene in closed session at its next regular meeting to continue discussion of a potential raise after additional review of salary comparisons and budget details. Tanner said he excluded personnel data that is not public, such as specific evaluation documents, in his summary of the closed meeting.