Palatka commission approves 30‑day cure plan for city manager, requires trainings and written notice

The Palatka City Commission on Oct. 20 approved a 30‑day cure period for the city manager that requires the manager to complete specified trainings and to engage a coach, with post‑cure 30/60/90‑day evaluations and a written notice to trigger the period.

Commissioner Michelle Davis, who moved the action, said the commission must "provide the city manager with written notice of the circumstances giving rise to termination as well as a 30 day opportunity to cure the deficiencies" and later added, "I believe a legally and ethically fair path is that she receives a written notice and allow the 30 day cure period." The commission directed the mayor and human resources staff to draft the formal notice for review and dissemination the following day.

Why it matters: The action followed an external investigation prompted by three written complaints to human resources and interviews with multiple employees. Commissioners framed the decision around three priorities — stabilize city operations, protect employees, and respect contractual due process — and said the cure plan balances employee protections with continued oversight of city management.

Most important facts: The commission's amended motion requires the city manager to return to full duty and to be "actively engaged in and complete" a set of trainings that commissioners listed during the meeting: public sector leadership and ethics, employee relations, implicit bias, time management, delegation, and ICMA local government coursework (Local Government 201, and Local Government 101 if required). The commission said proof of active engagement or completion of the trainings shall be required before the manager's post‑cure evaluation, and the commission will evaluate performance 30, 60 and 90 days after the cure period using HR's approved evaluation form. The commission also authorized a lateral transfer option for the one current employee who filed a complaint, to avoid direct reporting to the manager during the cure period.

Investigator's findings: Investigator Jonathan Hammer of Jill Schwartz & Associates told the commission he received three written complaints to HR, interviewed those three employees plus three public‑works staff who voluntarily submitted short emails, and ultimately interviewed the city manager and about 10 others. Hammer said the report described "an environment in which employees are afraid of retaliation," though he said whether a legal retaliation claim exists would require a separate legal determination.

Public comment: The commission heard competing views from the public. Allegra Kitchens, a former commissioner and resident, urged the commission to follow Davis's plan and keep the manager, saying, "I am amazed that Ms Cardi only had 3 complaining out of 185." Several former employees gave accounts of mistreatment and called for termination; Daphne Brusso, a former employee who filed a grievance, said she had been treated personally by the manager and urged the commission to act on employees' allegations.

Additional action: Commissioners also approved a motion that if previously requested trainings from an earlier grievance were not completed, a written reprimand be placed in the city manager's personnel file and that a reprimand for findings that employees were used for personal tasks be documented in the file.

Process and next steps: The commission voted to have the mayor and HR draft the written notice spelling out the cure plan and timeline; commissioners agreed the 30‑day clock will begin when that notice is provided. The commission directed HR to circulate the draft notice to commissioners the next day.

What the vote does not show: The commission did not terminate the manager and did not set a specific effective date in open session; commissioners agreed the formal clock for the cure period begins when the written notice is delivered. The investigative report and the commission's planned steps were discussed at length, and commissioners explicitly distinguished investigation findings, individual concerns and procedural protections for the manager.

Looking ahead: The commission will review proof of training engagement and the manager's performance after the 30‑day period and at 60 and 90 days; if deficiencies persist, commissioners said the documentation and process would inform any later termination decision.