City Council Role in Supporting Selection Process for new Chief of Police and PD Operational Improvements

[Karen Van Ness]

The City of Lago Vista has faced challenges in recruiting and retaining qualified officers, including the Chief of Police, within the Lago Vista Police Department (LVPD). Recent issues with specific events, as well as the opportunity to improve management and culture, enforcement and visibility, dispatch, and training - combined with the growth of our city - necessitate a thoughtful and thorough recruitment and selection process.

Under our City Charter, the City Manager is responsible for conducting the hiring and appointment of the Police Chief, "subject to approval by the Council." The Charter gives the City Council the responsibility to approve or deny the appointment. Because Council has the statutory authority to decline approval, Council also has the inherent authority to discuss what information or evaluation process it needs to make an informed decision. To support our City Manager in this critical recruitment and selection process, I have submitted an agenda item for our next CC meeting to discuss the expectations and review steps Council intends to use before voting on whether to confirm this critical department head. This item is time-sensitive in that our City Manager wishes to commence the recruitment and selection process as quickly as possible.

The objective is for Council and City Manager discuss and agree on the framework supporting the recruitment, selection and approval process for Chief of Police, to include the following:

• Establishment of a nonbinding selection advisory committee or panel to include retired, qualified law enforcement resources who are residents of Lago Vista. These resources will advise the City Manager during the recruitment, interview, and selection processes.
• Mechanism, if desirable, for gathering of community or stakeholder input (in addition to advisory committee).
• Possible inclusion of council in finalist interviews.
• Evaluation of the finalist candidate, including information council will require before a confirmation vote.

Additional Recommendation: The following may be assigned to the January Strategic Planning Meeting, but I am also including because the City Manager, Mayor and I have discussed:
I have recommended the City Manager consider tasking the law enforcement resources involved on the search advisory committee / panel, on an unpaid volunteer basis, to perform a review of LVPD to provide initial feedback and suggestions related to potential areas of improvement. The work output of this review would include an initial plan of attack on key components of a solid agency, including:

• General Order and SOPs
• Training priorities and resources
• Management and leadership
• Compensation and retention
• Visible enforcement and community outreach

Hopefully the incoming chief, having been vetted by these law enforcement resources as part of the selection process, would appreciate the initial recommendations as supportive of his or her success in transforming our PD into the agency our city deserves and needs. Additionally, providing the framework and training our existent officers need to better perform their duties as vital members of our community is critical for staff development and retention.

 

[Adam Benefield]

I appreciate the thought and work that went into outlining a recruitment timeline and possible structure for the Police Chief selection. I share the goal of getting this hire right and improving culture, management, and retention within LVPD.

That said, I have several concerns about process, precedent, and alignment with our Charter, and I want to put them on the record.

​

1. What the Charter and attorney’s interpretation actually give Council:​

The City Attorney has advised that all director-level positions, including the Chief of Police, require Council approval. The Charter is clear that:

• The City Manager is responsible for hiring and managing staff, including department heads.
  
  
• The Chief of Police is appointed by the City Manager, subject to Council approval.
  

So I agree with the following part of the statement:

“Because Council has the statutory authority to decline approval, Council also has the inherent authority to discuss what information or evaluation process it needs to make an informed decision.”

Council absolutely has the right; and obligation, to say what information it needs in order to vote to confirm or not confirm a recommended candidate.

Where I disagree is with the leap from that premise to Council shaping or co-managing the recruitment process itself, especially through a formal Council-created advisory body tied specifically to this hire.

Approval authority means:

• We review the candidate presented by the City Manager;
• We can ask for background, references, findings, and other information;
• We can vote yes or no.

It does not mean Council directs how the City Manager structures interviews, shortlists applicants, or builds internal/external review panels. That would start to blur the line the Charter draws between Council’s policy/approval role and the City Manager’s administrative/hiring role.

​

2. Consistency with directors and past practice:​

Under the attorney’s interpretation, every director requires Council approval, not just the Chief of Police. Historically:

• The City Manager has conducted the recruitment process for all directors.
• Council’s role has been to evaluate the final recommended candidate and vote to approve or deny.
• We have not previously created special advisory panels, nor have we inserted ourselves into director-level recruitment processes.

If we now say that, because Council approves the Chief of Police, we should:

• create a formal, Council-blessed selection advisory committee, and
• consider participation in finalist interviews, and
• structure specific “review steps” as an action of Council,

then logically we should explain why we are not doing the same thing for every other director-level position that requires Council approval.

From a governance perspective, that’s difficult to justify. Either:

• Council approval justifies deep involvement in recruitment for all directors (which I do not support), or
• Council approval means what it has historically meant: we evaluate the recommended candidate and the supporting information and then vote.

3. Advisory committee vs. City Manager authority:​

I am not opposed to the City Manager seeking input from retired, qualified law-enforcement professionals who live in Lago Vista. In fact, that’s a smart idea.

My concern is who owns that process and how it is framed:

• If the City Manager chooses to convene an informal advisory group to help review applicants and provide professional input, that fits well within his Charter authority.
• If the Council, by formal action, begins designing or mandating advisory bodies as part of the hiring workflow for a specific department head, we are getting closer to telling the City Manager how to conduct recruitment, not just what information we’d like to see before voting.

That’s a subtle but important difference.

4. Timing and the agreed “work session first” structure:​

We only recently agreed that major topics; especially ones with policy implications, should go through:

1. Work session first for discussion and alignment, and then
2. Action item later, if action is still necessary.

Looking at the timeline the City Manager provided, I see no practical reason this item had to be structured as an action item:

• The application period runs from November 18 to December 13.
• Initial screening and first-round interviews continue through mid-January.
• We have a full Council meeting on January 6, which falls squarely inside that timeline.

Given that schedule, there was plenty of room to:

• Hold a work session in December to discuss what information Council would like to see before voting on a finalist; and
• If needed, bring a narrowly tailored action item on January 6 after that discussion.

In other words, both the Charter and the timeline support using the agreed-upon structure. Elevating this directly to an action item now feels like an unnecessary exception to the very process we just adopted.

5. Where I land:​

• I support a thorough, professional search for Chief of Police.
• I support the City Manager’s Charter authority to manage recruitment and staffing.
• I agree Council has the right to define what information it needs before voting to approve or deny a candidate.
• I am cautious about Council beginning to design or own recruitment processes, especially when we’ve never done that for other director-level positions that also require Council approval.
• Given the timeline, I see no reason this could not have followed our agreed structure: work session first, possible action on January 6 if still needed.

For those reasons, I would have preferred this item to be framed as a work-session discussion only, with any formal action deferred until our January 6 meeting, if warranted. That approach respects the Charter, maintains consistency with past practice and our new procedures, and still fully supports the City Manager in conducting a successful recruitment.

Adam C. Benefield

 

[Karen Van Ness]

Thank you for your inputs Adam and your concerns. I think we are on the same page. There is no intention to usurp the City Manager's responsibility for the recruitment and selection process. Mr. West has already expressed his intention to assemble a selection advisory committee and panel. Council has the inherent authority to discuss what information or evaluation process it needs to make an informed decision. The purpose of this agenda item is to discuss the expectations and review steps Council intends to use before voting on whether to confirm this critical department head. I think it advisable to hear from Mr. West on his plan of attack and understand if there are any gaps between this and Council's expectations on such a critical hire.

There may not be a specific action item or items arising from this discussion. But I thought it prudent to discuss this agenda item in the upcoming meeting, as Mr. West has conveyed an assertive timeline, and we have the holidays upon us.

 

[Adam Benefield]

My only two objections are placing this as an action item and overstepping our role with the hiring process. Beyond those, I think it's super smart to have a discussion to provide guidance as requested by the City Manager.

 

[Norma Owen]

I think we’re all on the same page that getting this Police Chief hire right is incredibly important for our community. This discussion gives the City Manager a chance to hear from Council about the qualities we believe would make someone a strong fit for Lago Vista. It also creates space for ideas and expectations that may help guide the process, without overstepping the boundaries of our council–manager form of government.
I believe there’s a balance here. We want to be thoughtful about where Council is included, making sure we’re supportive and collaborative, while also respecting that the hiring authority rests with the City Manager. When we approach it that way, everyone wins, especially our residents.

For awareness, here is a brief summary of the posting that has already gone out:

Summary of the Current Posting

• The Chief will oversee all department operations and maintain a service-oriented, community-focused approach.
• The department includes 20 sworn and 8 non-sworn staff with a $2.3M budget.
• Minimum qualifications include a bachelor’s degree, 3–5 years of command-level experience, and TCOLE certification (or ability to obtain it).
• Advanced leadership training such as FBI National Academy, SPI, SMIP, or LEMIT is highly preferred.
• Salary range: $120,000–$145,000 DOQ; residency preferred but not required.
  

At the same time, Lago Vista has some unique needs that aren’t fully captured in the standard posting. The following qualities may help us identify someone who is not only technically qualified but also the right cultural and relational fit for our community:

Additional Qualities That Align With Lago Vista’s Needs

• A servant-leadership style that works well in a small, high-engagement city.
• Strong relationship-building skills with residents, LVISD, POA, our nonprofits, and business community.
• Ability to build trust and morale within a medium-sized department.
• Experience with interagency collaboration, emergency management, and regional partners like TCESD1, DPS, and Travis County.
• Professional and calming demeanor with effective communication skills.
• Demonstrated success leading modernization efforts with limited resources.
• Familiarity with working effectively under a City Manager in a council–manager system.

Sharing these thoughts now may help the City Manager as he continues the recruitment and evaluation process. The City Manager has welcomed input during his tenure and I have high confidence that is not changing now. At the end of the day, our goal is simple: we want a Police Chief who will serve our residents well, strengthen the department, and be a positive long-term fit for Lago Vista.

 

[Charles West]

Counselor Benefield,

Thank you for asking questions regarding the hiring process for the Police Chief and the involvement of the City Council as it relates to the Charter. When this topic was first proposed on the agenda, I asked many of the same questions you raised. After discussing the matter with the Mayor and Counselor Van Ness, we agreed that the intent is not to interfere with or hinder my role in the selection process, but rather to clarify the Council’s role and expectations, as well as outline the process should the Council disagree with my selection for this position.

Before this topic was introduced, I had already decided to establish a review board comprised of experienced law enforcement personnel, possibly a civilian citizen, and potentially a current or former City Council member. This approach ensures a broad perspective during the selection process. I was fortunate in hiring our Development Services Director and Parks Director without needing such a rigorous process, but the Police Chief position requires greater scrutiny. While I consider all department head roles critical, the Police Chief position is highly public-facing and reflects directly on both the city and the department.

If I believed the agenda item crossed a line, I would have stated so. In fact, I voiced my concerns to the Mayor and Counselor Van Ness when the item was first submitted, as I initially only had the title and lacked full background information.

Thank you again for raising these questions and helping to ensure we remain within the bonds of the Charter.