4.2 ERMUSR 06-03-2025______________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 1
UTILITIES COMMISSION MEETING
TO:
ERMU Commission
FROM:
Mark Hanson – General Manager
MEETING DATE:
June 3, 2025
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
4.2
SUBJECT:
Annual Commission Performance Evaluation
ACTION REQUESTED:
None
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION:
Per the Governance Policy G.2c Agenda Planning and consistent with the 2025 Governance
Agenda, the Commission conducts a formal evaluation of its own performance annually. The
intention of the Commission holding themselves accountable through an evaluation process is
to develop a culture of excellent governance. Following evaluation, the Commission works with
the general manager to address specific needs or gaps identified. These may include or be
related to governance, legal requirements, or specific knowledge and skills required for
decision-making related to upcoming initiatives and/or results-oriented goals.
Following the Commission’s recommendation in July of 2023, the evaluation was changed from
a self-evaluation to a 360-degree review by incorporating manager input.
The 2025 Annual Commission Performance Evaluation Results are attached for review and
discussion.
ATTACHMENTS:
• 2025 Annual Commission Performance Evaluation Results
50
2025
Commission Performance
Evaluation
ERMUMN.COM | 763.441.2020 | 13069 ORONO PARKWAY | PO BOX 430 | ELK RIVER, MN 55330-0430
51
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Comments:
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Average 4.60
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Average 4.13
Overall Average 4.31
• The commissioners may not always
agree on how to get to the outcome but
after discussion the group unanimously
agrees on the best way to handle the
issue.
• Integrating the governance policy review
into the commission meetings has
been helpful in aligning commissions
decisions with ERMU’s purpose, mission,
vision, and values.
Question 2: The Commission partners with
the City on opportunities to bring greater
value to the community, while maintaining its
responsibility to ERMU customers as well as
its governance and conduct policies.
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Average 4.40
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Average 4.00
Overall Average 4.15
Comments
• Both commercial and residential
developments
• Good balance is maintained between
ERMU Customer responsibilities and City
opportunities. That is appreciated.
• I think we benefit from having council
members on our commission, but it was
nice to see that there was enough trust
in the partnership that the council was ok
with not filling commissioner Bell’s spot
with another council member.
Question 1: The Commission makes
decisions in accordance with ERMU’s
purpose, mission, vision, and values to
achieve desired results and collectively
supports those decisions.
5 - Strongly Agree 4 - Agree 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree
52
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Comments:
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 5.00
Average 4.80
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Average 4.25
Overall Average 4.46
• There has been more opportunities for the
commissioners to go to different events and it
allows a broader training and learning experience
of how utilities operate across the country.
• They put time and thought into decisions without
making rash or rushed decisions. They are open
to extra opportunities and open to staff attending
extra education and industry training.
• We’ve had some lengthy meetings and difficult
conservations recently with the water service
lines but the commission seemed well prepared
and up to the task!
• I’ve noticed that the commissioners really
took last year’s feedback to heart and made a
strong effort to be present and engaged during
meetings—even when they’ve run longer than
expected.
Question 4: The Commission as a body
and its individual members never provide
direction or job performance evaluation,
either formal or informal, to any employee
other than the general manager.
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Average 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Average 4.25
Overall Average 4.15
Comments
• I assume this to be true!
• Follow chain of command correctly with
all I have witnessed
• I think this has gotten better as the
relationship between Mark and the
commission has grown.
Question 3: Commission members are
present and engaged during official
meetings, prepared to perform their assigned
duties, participate in discussion, and make
decisions. Members also take advantage
of opportunities for continuing education,
development, and industry networking.
5 - Strongly Agree 4 - Agree 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree
53
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Comments:
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Average 4.20
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Average 4.25
Overall Average 4.23
• I think the commission has a good set of
metrics monitoring performance
• I think they ask good questions during
meetings and will ask for additional
information to be provided in subsequent
meetings/discussions when they feel it’s
necessary.
Question 6: The Commission demonstrates
the ability, through governance and oversight,
to plan for immediate and future needs by
effective budgeting and planning consistent
with policy.
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Average 4.40
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Average 4.38
Overall Average 4.39
Comments
• No commissioner comments
• They take approving budget seriously,
and strive to keep the company in a
healthy position
• Similar to the last question, I think they
ask good questions and aren’t afraid to
postpone decisions when necessary so
staff can provide additional information
at future meetings. The trust between
the commission and staff is evident and
appreciated.
Question 5: The Commission effectively
monitors organizational performance
utilizing either internal or external methods,
measuring performance against expected
outcomes and clearly defined goals.
5 - Strongly Agree 4 - Agree 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree
54
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Comments:
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 5.00
Commissioner 4.00
Commissioner 4.00
Average 4.40
Manager 4.00
Manager 5.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Average 4.13
Overall Average 4.23
• No commissioner comments
• They will ask Jared directly for legal
opinions during meetings and/or
task staff to further research legal
implications.
Question 7: The Commission ensures the
protection of assets, the mitigation of risks,
and legal compliance through governance
and oversight.
Commissioner 4.43
Commissioner 4.43
Commissioner 4.43
Commissioner 4.29
Commissioner 4.43
Average 4.40
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.71
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.29
Manager 4.29
Manager 4.00
Manager 4.29
Average 4.20
Overall Average 4.30
Respondent Overall Average
5 - Strongly Agree 4 - Agree 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree
55
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
5 - Strongly Agree 4 - Agree 3 - Neither Agree nor Disagree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree
Commissioners 2024
Commissioners 2025
Managers 2024
Managers 2025
Mission
Focused
Partners
with City
Commission Evaluation Comparison
Prepared
to Perform
Directs
GM
Protects
Assets
Plans for
the future
Monitors
Performance
56
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Question 8: With respect to the Commission’s performance, what has been done well?
• Used different opinions on issues to come up with the best solutions.
• The freedom to express a different opinion on topics without feeling pressured by the other
commissioners.
• Discussion and compromise has helped to achieve unanimous decisions.
• The Commission has done a good job working with Mark to closely control expenses and
operate within our budget. The Commission also updated the competitiveness of ERMU pay
and benefits by working through and implementing the comp worth study.
• The commissioners have engaged in meaningful discussions over the past year, leading to
outcomes where every commissioner had a chance to be heard.
• Conversation’s Items have been talked through. Everyone is able to give their opinion. No
rushed discussion or vote taken.
• Commissioners consistently attend and participate in meetings.
• Commission members consistently demonstrate active engagement during meetings by
participating in discussions and asking questions of staff and each other.
• They have ERMU as a company in their best interests They listen to the company personnel
first and respond second Treat Company employees well They devote time to the
Commissioner role
• The relationship and trust with staff are very strong, making it a great place to work. The
commission does not shy away from asking for additional information when needed yet still
trusts staff’s opinion and recommendations as subject matter experts.
• This year, the Commission addressed several significant issues with both financial and
morale implications. They took the time to fully understand the impact of their decisions,
which was greatly appreciated.
• Effective discussions pertaining to some difficult issues.
57
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Question 9: With respect to the Commission’s performance, what should be done differently?
• Can’t think of anything. Think we have an outstanding commission
• Nothing.
• Continued education on industry trends to make informed decisions.
• I think the Commission is operating really well right now. I would note that the committee
structure could probably be utilized more to facilitate more in depth discussions before the
issues are brought to the full commission.
• This year has been good, if anything maybe have more interaction with staff. What I mean by
that is. Maybe just stop in and say hi. Show you care, have simply conversation on how things
are going. Donuts go along way here. :)
• Not sure if it’s different, but effort to onboarding and bringing the next Commissioner up to
speed is appreciated
• Nothing comes to mind, it will be interesting to see what, if anything, changes with a new
commissioner.
• While Mark is currently your only employee, it’s important to ensure that all managers are
given the same level of respect and time when presenting. There have been times when
certain managers were cut short while answering, or when the same question was directed
to another manager. This can give the impression that there’s a lack of confidence in the
original response.
• Caution must be used when making decisions that contradict existing policy or practices of
the utility. Bear in mind that these types of decisions may have adverse repercussions in the
future.
58
COMMISSION PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION 2025
Question 10: With respect to ERMU governance, what additional comments do you have?
• We govern well. The toughest issue is employee wages and benefits. I feel like the five of us
are on an island when it comes to that topic.
• I really appreciate seeing, and being a part of, an organization with such a high degree of
mutual respect between staff and management and between staff and the commission.
• Continue to ask thoughtful questions, seek deeper understanding, and approach
discussions with curiosity—this helps foster informed decisions and strong collaboration.
• The commission has become a very cohesive group with each commissioner having a
diverse background of experience that makes them together a well-rounded team.
59