Biscayne Park commission advances amended manager contract amid strong resident opposition over pay, notice and workplace complaints

The Village of Biscayne Park commission advanced an amended employment agreement for Village Manager Albert Childers on July 28 after more than two hours of public comment and an extended commission debate over pay, transparency and unresolved workplace complaints.

The contract under consideration included a top salary figure residents repeatedly criticized — speakers repeatedly cited a proposed $210,000–$220,000 annual salary and benefits package that commenters said would amount to a materially large share of the village’s roughly $5 million budget. Dozens of residents urged commissioners to pause the vote, conduct a community‑impact study and resolve allegations that staff and former officers had raised about the manager’s conduct.

Why it matters: Residents and several commissioners framed the vote as both fiscal and personnel policy. Speakers said the compensation and the five‑year term would place a heavy strain on a small village budget and argued the commission should first resolve outstanding questions about prior procurement decisions (notably the removal of Australian pines and related contracting) and allegations of a hostile workplace before finalizing a long contract.

During public comment, one resident urged the commission to "pause this vote and commission a full community impact study before committing to such a contract for the next five years." Other speakers described a pattern of poor notice to residents, problems with the village app, and episodes they said showed a lack of transparency. Multiple commenters asked why Zoom access had been characterized in village notices as only a "courtesy" and urged that remote access remain a guaranteed option.

Manager’s response: The manager and his supporters said the figure reflected market rates for the experience the village sought and that past managerial turnover and missed grant opportunities had cost the village significant funds. The manager and allies highlighted instances where staff work and external relationships led to recouped funds, telling the commission that experienced management had delivered concrete budget recoveries and grant success that benefited the village.

Allegations, investigations and next steps: Commissioners spent substantial time parsing a set of workplace allegations and prior investigations involving the manager and former police leadership. The village attorney explained that previous outside investigators attempted to conduct fact‑gathering but that some alleged witnesses declined to cooperate; the attorney said that where a complainant or key witnesses do not participate, investigations can stall. Several commissioners proposed options ranging from a facilitated meeting between the parties to commissioning a fresh independent inquiry at village expense.

Commission action and safeguards: The commission reviewed edits to the contract requested at a prior special meeting and confirmed most changes had been incorporated (including clarified language on dues/subscriptions and benefit timing). Commissioners also discussed adding or using existing cure provisions in the employment agreement should future performance or legal issues arise. Several commissioners said they would be willing to approve the contract as amended but asked for clear six‑month performance goals, a formal review schedule and an explicit plan to resolve notice/Zoom access issues for residents.

Police chief appointment: Separately, the manager announced the completion of an advertised recruitment for police chief and named Carlos Avala as the selection; Avala spoke briefly and thanked the commission and residents. The manager said staff and residents had participated in interviews and a meet‑and‑greet for finalists.

What’s next: The commission directed staff and counsel to continue work on the open question about meeting notice and remote access, and scheduled follow‑up discussions/workshops to address communication practices. Commissioners asked the manager to provide a written set of six‑month goals and to participate in efforts to rebuild working relationships with colleagues. The contract language discussed at the meeting included a cure period and other standard provisions that would allow the commission to address breaches if they emerge after execution.

The meeting closed with calendar adjustments for upcoming budget workshops and a pledge from multiple commissioners to continue trying to reconcile differences before the manager’s next review.