St. Helens council workshop reviews governing policy, moves to limit council role in staff discipline

St. Helens council and staff spent several hours Jan. 31 reviewing the city—s governing policy, agreed to remove a provision that allowed council involvement in routine discipline of department employees and signaled a move to strengthen written performance reviews and clearer reporting lines.

The discussion centered on the policy language that currently gives councilors a formal liaison role to individual departments and allows unresolved administrative disagreements to be referred to the full council. City staff and councilors said the arrangement has created unclear reporting lines and operational risk.

"You're really creating kind of a muddy system of oversight and of direct reporting," a staff member told the council while explaining why the policy has caused problems when disagreements arose. Council President Chilton described past episodes where multiple points of contact complicated personnel matters. Don, a staff member who provided historical background, said the current form dates from 2019 and was intended to shift oversight to the city administrator but left some department-level liaison authorities intact.

Council members discussed options section by section. Several councilors, including Councilor Sandeep, said department heads should report to the city administrator and that the council should reserve hiring and termination authority for department head positions only. "Our job, in my mind, is to manage you. Your job is to manage the department heads. The department heads are to manage their employees," Sandeep said during the workshop.

After substantial discussion, the council signaled support for removing the paragraph that allowed councilors to participate in decisions about discipline or termination of department-level employees (subsection c). Instead, they directed staff to bring a revised policy that clarifies that: (1) department employees are supervised and disciplined by their department head, (2) department heads report to the city administrator, and (3) the council retains hiring and firing authority for department heads and the city administrator.

Council members and staff also highlighted gaps in personnel practices. Staff reported inconsistent or absent written performance evaluations for department heads and other employees. Participants recommended implementing annual written evaluations, 360-degree feedback for supervisors, training for managers on performance reviews, and periodic anonymous staff sentiment surveys to detect systemic morale or supervisory problems before they escalate.

City staff said the legal advice they—ve received warned that involving the council in routine discipline or multiple supervisors for a single employee raises potential legal and administrative complications. Councilors said they understand the legal risks and prefer clearer lines of authority but also insisted the council retains ultimate authority over department head appointments.

The workshop closed with the council asking staff to prepare a redlined governing policy that omits the problematic subsection, adds timelines and standards for annual evaluations, and proposes a schedule for regular departmental reports to the full council. Staff said they will return recommended language and an implementation timetable for council review.

The meeting did not include a formal vote; councilors asked staff to draft changes for a future meeting.

Ending — The council and staff agreed to reconvene the revised policy language and to add personnel-evaluation training for supervisors as part of the policy follow-up.