Port Richey council discusses city-manager role, communications and staff evaluations

Port Richey elected officials reopened a months‑long conversation about whether the city should remain a council‑manager government or shift toward a stronger mayoral role during a July 1 council workshop focused on the structure and execution of city government.

The discussion mattered because Port Richey has had high turnover in the city manager position since 1994, and council members said that turnover has complicated delivery of services and long‑term projects. Council members also debated how councilors should interact with staff, whether the mayor and council should routinely copy department heads on constituent emails to speed responses, and whether the city should add clearer evaluation and performance incentives to retain senior staff.

City Manager Andrew Butterfield outlined the background for the discussion and the city’s history with the council‑manager model, noting that "we're currently in the council manager form of government" and that the city has averaged roughly 2–3 years per manager depending on whether interims are included. He said the intent of the workshop was to "take a deep breath and talk about things" rather than to make an immediate change.

Councilman Robert Hubbard pressed for changes that would let elected officials be more responsive to residents while preserving the manager’s authority, saying the city needs to "strike a happy medium" so the council can gather information from staff without improperly directing or interfering with operations. Hubbard outlined problems that long manager turnover creates for continuity and said the council must be more diligent about performance reviews.

Several council members and staff described small operational changes the council could adopt without rewriting the charter. Butterfield and others proposed an email practice: when a council member forwards a resident complaint, send it to the city manager and copy the relevant department head(s) so staff have awareness and a running start on a response. Butterfield said that practice "would be the best course of action" to limit possible ethics or Sunshine Law issues while improving response time. Council members agreed to treat the city manager as the priority contact for requests but to use CC lines to improve situational awareness.

The council also discussed evaluations and pay as retention tools. Council members said annual or semiannual performance reviews should be routine, with Councilwoman Lisa Burke and others urging a six‑month check‑in after a new hire plus an annual review tied to pay. Hubbard and others raised the possibility of performance‑linked pay or deferred compensation to create financial incentives for senior staff to remain in post.

Budget and priorities were another focus. Mayor Johnnie R. Cooper and others highlighted a recent state appropriation of $4,300,000, saying the city should assume the funds will be available for water‑system and other infrastructure projects and prepare to spend them efficiently. Butterfield and department heads were asked to present budget priorities at an upcoming workshop so the council can align strategy and capital spending.

On the question of changing government form, opinions were mixed and no formal proposal was put to a vote. Some council members said a strong‑mayor model could centralize accountability; others warned that shifting the executive power to an elected mayor risks politicizing personnel decisions. The council asked the city attorney to review whether the charter can be drafted to provide temporary or ex‑officio authority in defined situations (for example, vesting certain duties in the clerk or another official for limited periods) and return with legal parameters.

Members reached several practical decisions and directions by the end of the workshop: they agreed to pause hiring an outside executive search firm to recruit a permanent city manager so the council could give Butterfield time in the position and collect more internal data; they asked staff for a short list of actionable changes to email/communication practices and a timeline for department‑level customer feedback; and they directed staff to prepare materials (department priorities, water‑system maps, and the 2024 strategic plan) for a combined strategic‑budget workshop scheduled in July.

Resident feedback appeared repeatedly during the discussion. Linda Rodriguez, who identified herself from 5917 Lantern Court, said when she joined the council she was instructed to bring constituent requests to the city manager first and then follow up with the manager if staff did not act. Council members repeatedly returned to that point: the group agreed the city manager should remain the official conduit for operational directives while the council and mayor should be able to gather information and sensibly assist constituents without directing staff.

The workshop closed after the council asked the attorney to report back on charter language options and set the next budget/strategic planning session; a motion to close the workshop was then carried. The council did not take a formal vote to change the city’s form of government.

If the council wishes to pursue a charter change in the future, members said they would expect a public process and likely a voter referendum before making any structural shift.