Sarasota City Commission Workshop on City Manager Recruitment - April 11, 2025

The Sarasota City Commission held a workshop on April 11, 2025, from 8:59 AM to 11:28 AM, to discuss the process for recruiting a new city manager and to review the candidate pool. The meeting was a precursor to a special commission meeting scheduled for 1:00 PM the same day where a motion would be considered. Commissioners expressed significant dissatisfaction with the search process, particularly regarding transparency, candidate sourcing, and the lack of a unified commission vision on qualifications. No votes or formal decisions were taken during this workshop.

Discussion Items

• Human Resources Director Stacie Mason and Colin Baenziger, President of Colin Baenziger & Associates (the executive search firm), presented an overview. The original candidate pool consisted of 51 applicants. From earlier individual commissioner submissions, a tabulated list was created. The firm had identified six candidates that a majority of commissioners wanted additional background information on, and three candidates that two commissioners preferred.
• Commissioner Jen Ahearn-Koch expressed strong dissatisfaction with the process, stating she had not been adequately prepared and that the commission had failed to define its priorities collectively. She called for the process to be restarted from scratch, with a focus on sourcing candidates rather than merely receiving applications. She also clarified that she never described the applicant pool as "poor," contrary to a misquote.
• Commissioner Kyle Scott Battie echoed concerns about transparency and the process, noting that the search should have been more open and that the commission had not had a collective discussion about desired qualifications at the outset. He questioned why so few candidates from Florida applied and emphasized the importance of experience with disaster management (e.g., hurricanes).
• Commissioner Kathy Kelley Ohlrich initially supported restarting, but later after hearing from others, she leaned toward continuing with the current candidate list while acknowledging the flawed process.
• Vice Mayor Debbie Trice argued strongly against starting over, warning that the best candidates would accept other positions and that restarting would make the city appear disorganized. She advocated for proceeding with the current list, obtaining missing background information, and then conducting Zoom interviews before finalist selection. She also proposed a timeline: complete background checks by April 21 and hold a meeting around April 24.
• Mayor Liz Alpert suggested that each commissioner identify one or two candidates they felt strongly about and narrow the list from there.
• Colin Baenziger defended the firm’s process, noting that seven of the nine candidates presented were actively recruited (sourced), not just applicants. He stated that the firm followed the process outlined in its proposal and that the firm screens for likely success, placing a premium on city manager experience but not making it a strict requirement. He gave examples of two candidates in the top eight who had no city manager experience but were included based on other qualifications.
• Commissioners discussed the difficulty of comparing candidates who had full background reports (completed by the firm) with those who only had resumes and cover letters. Commissioner Ahearn-Koch noted that five of her eight preferred candidates lacked background reports.
• The commission debated whether to include candidates who were only supported by one commissioner. Vice Mayor Trice and Commissioner Ohlrich argued that such candidates were unlikely to secure the four votes needed for hire, but Commissioner Ahearn-Koch countered that interviews often change opinions, and she wanted an apples-to-apples comparison with full background reports on all 22 candidates that had at least one commissioner’s support.
• By the end of the workshop, the commission agreed to: (1) allow each commissioner to revise their individual lists of preferred candidates (additions/deletions) over the lunch break, (2) submit changes to Ms. Mason, and (3) reconvene at the 1:00 PM special meeting to decide how many candidates (likely between 9 and 22) to move forward with for full background checks.

Key Outcomes

• No formal decisions or votes were made during the workshop (per meeting rules).
• The commission agreed to recess and have each commissioner e-mail or submit handwritten changes to their candidate preferences to Human Resources Director Stacie Mason before the 1:00 PM special meeting.
• The special meeting at 1:00 PM will address a formal motion to determine how many and which candidates will receive additional background investigation.
• The timeline for background work and subsequent interviews will be discussed further at the special meeting.
• The workshop adjourned at 11:28 AM.