The meeting began with an acknowledgment from the mayor regarding the importance of transparency in the city manager selection process, highlighting the months-long effort to find the right candidate. The commission had previously narrowed the candidates down to three after two finalists withdrew. Each commissioner presented their evaluations of the candidates, which played a role in the final decision.

Commissioner Pat Perno shared positive feedback on the candidates, commending Mr. Deweiler for his candidness and collaborative leadership style, Ms. Hart for her military background and listening skills, and interim city manager Lightfoot for his detailed vision and focus on future priorities. Perno expressed gratitude to all candidates for their dedication and effort.

A significant portion of the meeting revolved around the voting process to determine the preferred candidate. The outcome was a 4-1 vote in favor of Lightfoot. Despite a suggestion to select an alternate candidate, the consensus was to proceed with Lightfoot.

The discussion then shifted to the negotiation process for Lightfoot’s salary and benefits package. The mayor traditionally leads these negotiations with the assistance of the city attorney. However, one commissioner highlighted past instances where the lead negotiator was not the mayor, sparking a debate on the best approach to take. The city attorney clarified that while there are various methods for negotiation, it is customary for the mayor to assume this role. Ultimately, it was agreed that the mayor would lead the negotiations, with the city attorney also involved, and the final contract would be presented to the commission for approval.

Concerns were raised regarding the current salary of the interim city manager and how it might impact negotiations with Lightfoot. Commissioners expressed a desire to adhere to the advertised salary range for the position and ensure fairness in the negotiation process. A motion was made to authorize the city attorney and another commissioner to develop a contract with Lightfoot, which would then be brought back to the commission for final approval.

The meeting opened the floor to public comment following the motion. A community member expressed appreciation for the transparency in the selection process, acknowledging the high caliber of candidates considered. The public speaker also suggested that the commission should consider potential future opportunities for the candidates who were not selected. Another public comment proposed that the commission consider a two-year contract for Lightfoot, rather than the typical four-year agreement, to provide flexibility and caution in this initial hiring.