Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Personnel topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Brooksville Council accepts evaluation and approves 5% merit increase for city manager

Brooksville City Council · January 26, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council accepted an annual evaluation that rated the city manager 'exceeds expectations' (average score 36.6) and approved a 5% merit adjustment effective the first pay period in February; one council member opposed timing and preferred waiting until one-year service.

The Brooksville City Council on Feb. 2 accepted the city manager’s annual performance evaluation and approved a 5% merit adjustment effective the first pay period in February.

HR presented the evaluation framework, noting council members rated the manager across 10 categories with an average score of 36.6 (in the "exceeds expectations" band). Under the employment agreement that rating aligns with a 4–5% merit recommendation. Council discussed timing and budget availability; staff said two vacant general‑fund positions make the partial cost available in the current fiscal year and that any mid‑year hires would be handled within existing funds.

One council member argued the manager has been in place only eight months and suggested waiting until a full year on the job before granting a merit increase; others cited the manager’s leadership, improved staff retention and follow‑through as justification for the increase. After discussion the council voted 4–1 to approve the 5% adjustment, with the mayor clarifying that HR and finance would implement the effective date in payroll.

The council also asked staff to provide written objectives and next‑year priorities that will guide the city manager’s evaluation cycle going forward.

Speakers in the discussion included HR staff presenting the evaluation framework and council members who debated timing and fiscal impacts.