White House aldermen debate administrator evaluations after contract extension

The White House Board approved a contract extension for the city administrator and then turned to a prolonged discussion about whether the city should change the timing and enforcement of annual performance evaluations.

During routine business the board approved a one-year extension of the city administrator’s contract; the agenda identifies the administrator as Gerald Herman. The motion to extend the contract carried with no recorded opposition.

Later in the meeting, the administrator addressed the board and described past practice: evaluations have been inconsistent since his appointment, multiple evaluation forms were tried over the years, and the administrator noted he had removed the evaluation requirement from his contract several years ago because it had been applied unevenly. He also reminded members that the contract contains termination and notice provisions, including a four-month payout requirement if the board ends the contract early and a 60-day notice requirement if he resigns.

Several aldermen urged compliance with the municipal code, saying the code requires an annual evaluation and that a consistent process provides important HR feedback. Others said an immediate evaluation would be counterproductive given the administrator’s contract timeline and recent service.

A motion to put an ordinance amendment on a future agenda — to change the evaluation month to May to align with employee reviews — was made and seconded and the board voted to place that amendment on a future agenda. No final ordinance change was adopted at the meeting; the board directed staff to add the item to an upcoming agenda for formal consideration.