TRURO — In an executive session on June 28, the select board voted 4-1 to extend Town Manager Darrin Tangeman’s contract, with Sue Areson voting no.
Two weeks later, the board met in a public work session to discuss their evaluations of Tangeman’s performance. Using an evaluation form from the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), board members had scored Tangeman in eight categories, with a maximum possible score of 93. Their scores varied widely.
Areson gave him a 28. Stephanie Rein gave Tangeman a 61. Bob Weinstein scored his performance at 69, and John Dundas gave him an 82. Chair Kristen Reed gave Tangeman a 64.
The average was 60.8, in the “good — exceeds expectations” range of the ICMA’s formula.
“The reason I was the lone vote against extending the contract is that the issues raised in this performance plan are issues that I and other members of the board raised during his first evaluation,” Areson said on July 11. “I didn’t see any efforts or progress being made on these issues, and I saw increasing dissatisfaction among taxpayers.”
The board conducted Tangeman’s review with the same approach they have used since 2018, Reed said. Each member completed the evaluation form and met individually with Tangeman, who had completed the same form reviewing his own performance.
Following those one-on-one meetings, the board convened in executive session, citing one of the legally permissible excuses: “To conduct strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with nonunion personnel or to conduct collective bargaining sessions or contract negotiations with nonunion personnel.”
Under the state’s open meeting law, evaluation of professional competence is not a valid reason for a closed session.
Mike Fee, a lawyer who lives in Truro, told the Independent that the select board’s practice sounded like “a work-around” of the law.
At the July 11 work session —an open meeting without a public comment period — the board discussed the value of confidential evaluations.
“Going forward, we should do this publicly,” Areson said, though she later added, “I agree that the one-on-ones are really important, and I think they should be done confidentially.”
Reed said that her meeting with Tangeman was “pretty extensive” and lasted “about three hours.”
Tangeman said he favors the one-on-one format “because it allows us to have really candid conversations.” He described the public work session on July 11 as “kind of experimental” because it combined private and public approaches. “This might be the way forward,” he said during the meeting.
The Numbers
Board members agreed that communication was a shortcoming in Tangeman’s performance. Four of them gave him aggregate communication scores between 6 and 9 out of 12. Areson gave Tangeman a zero.
“To begin efforts at community engagement two and a half years into a three-year contract seemed too little, too late,” Areson said.
Weinstein, who gave Tangeman a 7 for communication, pointed to the controversy regarding the damaged culvert on Mill Pond Road as an instance when communication was lacking. At the public information session held on March 8 to discuss replacing the culvert, DPW Director Jarrod Cabral and consultants spoke, but Tangeman did not. Weinstein described it as “a missed opportunity” for the town manager.
Tangeman said that he and Reed had decided together that he would not speak at that meeting “because we didn’t want to politicize it.” But Tangeman said he saw Weinstein’s point. “If I were to do it over again, I would be out front and introduce it and take responsibility,” Tangeman said.
In the subcategory of integrity, four members gave Tangeman a 9 out of 9, while Areson gave him a 6. In the “Truro specific criteria” category, Areson gave Tangeman a 2 out of 18, while Dundas gave him a 13.
Moving Forward
The board laid out nine goals for Tangeman “to improve outreach and communications with the town.” They include holding weekly community office hours, attending senior luncheons, and conducting at least two meetings with the Truro Part-Time Resident Taxpayers’ Association “to solicit feedback and ideas on community matters.”
The board also discussed ways to combat the spread of misinformation. Weinstein said that the recent campaign urging the board not to renew Tangeman’s contract was proof of “a public, almost across-the-board misunderstanding of what the manager’s job actually is.”
Weinstein suggested a public information session to clarify the roles of different parts of town government. It is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, Aug. 8.
“I agree that he’s been blamed for things that are not his responsibility, such as the budget, the direction of the town,” Areson said. “Those fall squarely on the select board and town meeting, so we need to take responsibility for that.”
Reed mentioned the investigation that will take place regarding Areson’s alleged unauthorized discussions with town employees about Tangeman’s performance. “Hopefully, moving forward all select board members understand how the charter works and what our role is, and how we work together,” she said.
