Owat. OKs contract for Tuma’s review

Consent agendas, by their very nature, are considered routine and non-controversial.

They typically include items like minutes from previous meetings, or licenses and permits, or standard department reports.

Though members of the board or council may ask to pull an item out for further information, the items are usually expected to generate no discussion, and are all passed with a single motion.

But one item on the Owatonna City Council’s consent agenda caught the attention of several members of the public – and at least one council member, prompting several minutes of confusion at the Aug. 18 meeting.

It was described as the 2026 City Administrator Performance Evaluation Proposal and Engagement Plan by Employee Strategies.

What it meant was that Employee Strategies, a “culture strategist” firm from the Twin Cities, would be paid $12,000 to conduct a job review of City Administrator Jenna Tuma, who just completed her first year in the role.

The city has already administered a “360 survey” and collected initial input independently; the council was tasked with deciding between two options from Employee Strategies as the process continued. The second option was $16,000, which was not recommended.

According to the material in the city council’s packet, a closed council session would be held “to help Council and the Mayor prepare for the review process…”

The closed session was scheduled for 8 a.m. Aug. 24.

Councilor Dan Boeke didn’t even wait for the consent agenda to make his request, asking for the performance evaluation to be removed from the agenda as the first order of business.

“We’re approving the agenda,” said Council President Kevin Raney, indicating they had not yet reached the consent agenda items.

“OK, but I’d like to remove that from the consent agenda,” Boeke said.

Raney believed Boeke wanted the performance evaluation proposal to be an action item – meaning the Council would discuss it openly and vote on it separately.

“I’d like to remove it altogether,” Boeke clarified. “If you’re looking for an explanation, I don’t know if I’m ready on Monday to proceed with the review. I don’t know what other council members are thinking, but I don’t know when the last time we’ve all gotten together for a private personnel meeting was. I think that’s something I would like to do before we … proceed.”

Additionally, Boeke said, there “seemed to be some misconception” with what, exactly, Employee Strategies does.

It is “not an investigative firm,” he said. “We’ve used these folks three times with (former administrator Kris) Busse, so this certainly isn’t something that’s new or unusual.”

Boeke went on to call it “a very good investment in our time and money … so I’m not against that. I would approve we do that when the time is right, but I’m not ready to do that.”

Raney voiced concern that a closed meeting with council only would violate open meeting laws; City Attorney Mark Walbran said it would not.

Boeke’s motion to remove the item from the consent agenda failed for lack of a second.

When it came time to approve the consent agenda, with the performance evaluation still listed, Councilor Nate Dotson asked for clarification on the review process, including the Aug. 24 closed session.

Human Resources Director Rachel Boss said it would be a “typical administrator review, where you sit down with that third party and go through the review comments.”

There would be no conversations about contracts, she said, and after the review, a summary would be presented at the next council meeting.

Tuma would be present during the closed session review discussion.

“Is that your concern, Dan, that we don’t have the ability to have that conversation without Jenna being there?” Dotson asked Boeke.

In a word, yes, Boeke said.

“I would like to have a private conversation about personnel with councilors only,” he said. “I don’t need an outside consultant. I want just us.”

Council members would be allowed to discuss Tuma’s review alone in a closed session, said Emily Thamert, assistant city administrator, “but not general staff performance or personnel issues.”

Dotson proposed the seven members of the city council meet privately at 8 a.m. Aug. 24, pushing back the meeting with the Employee Strategist consultant.

“I think that’s a reasonable request, to have us meet prior,” Dotson said.

Boeke agreed.

The results of both gatherings are expected to be shared at the Sept. 1 city council meeting.