Get email alerts on the Personnel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates whether to require annual performance plan for inspector general
Summary
Board members recommended creating a performance plan and annual review for the inspector general, but counsel and staff said the practice is not expressly required by county code and advised consulting HR; the board agreed to discuss procedures with HR and consider amending rules later if needed.
Board members raised whether the advisory board should prepare a formal performance plan and conduct annual reviews for the inspector general. Several members said a review is important to set expectations and determine merit or step increases; one board member said preparing the plan seems like a core duty and should be included in the rules.
Steve summarized the sentiment: "I do think it's important that somebody does, a performance review for the inspector general." Counsel (Amanda) noted there's no explicit code language requiring a performance review but recommended consultation with HR about processes and signatures for evaluations. The board agreed to prioritize a discussion with HR at a future meeting and to consider amending the rules after getting HR guidance and experience with one cycle of reviews.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
