Will Manatee County administrator stay or go? His contract is up for debate
Manatee County officials are working out the details of a new contract with County Administrator Charlie Bishop — and it could be his last.
County commissioners debated the terms of Bishop’s contract at an April 7 meeting, including the length, emergency overtime pay, annual raises, vacation time accrual and how the board could fire Bishop if necessary. If approved, Bishop’s new salary would start at $255,000.
Bishop’s contract expires in August, and commissioners need to approve a new contract by June. If both sides cannot agree on the terms by then, commissioners would need to find a new county administrator. While commissioners agreed that Bishop’s renewal contract needs some adjustments, they all seemed to support keeping him in the role.
Some commissioners raised concerns about the contract not having a definite end date. However, the contract allows Bishop to be removed at any time by a vote of the commission. Commissioner Tal Siddique also said Bishop intends to retire within a couple of years.
“Whether that’s two years, that’s three years, I would rather respect his wishes and leave it up to him, but I think we have to move beyond having these arbitrary time limits — as if the county administrator is an elected official — and just trust the will of the board with a very thorough termination clause to determine when he should be removed or fired,” Siddique said.
Bishop, who has held the role since September 2023, did not attend the meeting, and instead had his attorney, Robert Eschenfelder, negotiate on his behalf. Eschenfelder said “there was a discussion that occurred...that recommended that legal counsel be here instead, and so I think he feels a bit awkward being here.”
Commissioners debate terms of Bishop’s contract
Commissioner Jason Bearden started the discussion by identifying what he called “high-risk areas” in the contract.
“And I’m going to request that we have a more balanced contract with a lot of these different things that…after reviewing it, that I found,” Bearden said.
One of the main topics commissioners debated was how many votes it would take to remove Bishop. The proposed contract required a supermajority vote of the board — five votes — but commissioners agreed a simple majority — four votes — was more appropriate.
Another issue Bearden raised was the automatic salary increases proposed in the new contract, which would follow the same percent increase as commissioners. He recommended that Bishop’s annual salary increases either be tied with county staff, or be up for an annual review when the board could determine the amount.
Commissioner George Kruse said he agreed with almost all of Bearden’s points, but emphasized that he wanted Bishop to stay.
“I’ll preface it by saying, I think Charlie is doing a great job, and I want to make this contract work,” Kruse said. “I voted against him when we hired him, but I think he’s responsive. He works hard. I think he’s steered this county in a good direction, and I like him being our county administrator.”
Kruse was less concerned about the contract having an indefinite time period, especially because the county attorney’s contract works the same way.
Another topic commissioners debated was the possibility of emergency overtime pay. When Bishop works during emergency situations, like a hurricane, any hours he works past the standard 8-hour day would count toward a 120-hour threshold. After he reached the 120 hours, the hours worked past that would be eligible for emergency overtime compensation at an hourly rate.
“I don’t understand how a salaried employee can be paid hourly for something that he’s supposed to be on the clock anyway,” Commissioner Bob McCann said, adding that Bishop is in a role expected to respond to emergency situations.
Community members oppose Bishop’s contract
Though no vote occurred on Tuesday, several community members showed up to speak against Bishop’s contract renewal. Some expressed concern about how he handled the recent Bishop Animal Shelter situation that has drawn public controversy.
Others agreed with McCann’s concern about overtime pay for tasks that they believe are expected of a county administrator.
“Just because some salary employees may want compensatory and/or emergency pay for additional time on the job, it doesn’t mean that they deserve it or that they should be paid,” said resident Elizabeth Efferson.
Some residents, including Elizabeth Arnold, also said annual reviews should be implemented, and wanted more public input on Bishop’s contract before commissioners vote.
“I think things like that are really important, and this seems to be kind of a casual attempt at a contract, but there needs to be a lot more thought,” said Arnold, a candidate running for the vacant District 1 seat on the commission.
The contract will need to go back to the commission before they approve it, leaving at least one more public meeting for residents to provide input.
