Dallas ad hoc committee urges new procurement, adopts timeline to catch up appointee reviews

At an ad hoc committee meeting of the Dallas City Council, members voted to recommend that the full council begin a procurement process for human resources consulting services to conduct catch-up and ongoing performance evaluations of city council–appointed officials, after a briefing from Human Resources Director Nina Arias.

Arias told the committee the proposal would align evaluations for appointed officials with the City of Dallas fiscal year and add structured goal-setting and key performance indicators (KPIs). "This proposal includes aligning performance evaluations with the fiscal year as we do with all other employees at the City of Dallas," Arias said, saying the change would create consistency between budget, planning and evaluation and allow stakeholder feedback to be incorporated into appointee assessments.

The briefing laid out a two-part approach: a short "catch-up" review to cover years without evaluations since August 23, 2022, and a recurring annual cycle. Under the plan, council would set evaluation criteria and KPIs in February–March (to guide the upcoming budget), quarterly or semiannual check‑ins would track progress during the fiscal year, and a year‑end evaluation using staff self‑assessments and council feedback would be completed in October. Any approved merit increases would be implemented the following January under the proposed schedule.

Committee discussion focused on three practical questions: how frequently to hold check‑ins (quarterly vs. semiannual), whether to use an outside vendor or rely on staff, and whether to use Baker Tilly (which the city has under contract for other work). Donzel Gibson of the city manager's office recommended an outside vendor, saying staff would be "at a significant disadvantage" leading sensitive executive reviews and that an independent third party has traditionally been used to avoid perceived bias.

Several members said they preferred a vendor distinct from any firm that had recruited the current city manager, citing a potential institutional conflict of interest if the same firm both recruited a candidate and later evaluated that hire. Councilmember Moreno said an institutional financial interest creates a conflict even if different teams within a firm attempt a firewall. Councilmember Willis and others urged speed on the catch‑up reviews while concurrently conducting a procurement for the long‑term vendor.

City Attorney Tammy Palmino cautioned that written evaluations may be subject to the Public Information Act and advised that the committee consider conducting the evaluative discussions in executive session. "I would propose then is just to make sure that for the sake of the best possible evaluation ... that those evaluations happen in executive session and that they're verbal," Palmino said.

The committee voted on a motion, moved by Councilmember Ridley, to recommend that the full City Council start the procurement process for human resources consulting services to perform performance evaluations of council‑appointed positions; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote. The committee also asked staff to return with vendor options, and members expressed a preference that the committee be able to review potential awardees if the procurement falls below the administrative threshold.

Next steps recorded in the meeting: staff will prepare a procurement to present to the full council (the committee expressed interest that staff return to the ad hoc committee to review candidate vendors if the award is administratively allowable), staff will draft a resolution or document to memorialize the calendar and process, and a vendor — if selected for the catch‑up work — would assist with KPIs and the first cycle of evaluations.