BOCC rejects new contract for Bishop; votes to extend existing contract through 2026

BRADENTON — Manatee County Commissioners changed course on board consideration for a renewal contract for the county administrator. Commissioners instead voted unanimously on Tuesday to extend the administrator’s existing contract through the end of the calendar year.

Earlier this month, commissioners moved to send a first-draft renewal contract for Manatee County Administrator Charlie Bishop for further negotiation and selected revisions, after finding that some provisions were not agreeable to the majority of the board. 

Tuesday’s meeting agenda included two items related to Administrator Bishop’s contract: a County Attorney item providing a revised draft renewal contract in accordance with board direction, and a Commissioner item seeking approval of an extension of the administrator’s existing contract instead of a renewal.

Added to the agenda by Commissioner Bob McCann, item number 38 proposed that the board chair and county attorney execute an amendment to the administrator’s current contract, extending the term of the existing contract for six months, “under all current conditions, and compensation levels.”

While conducting the meeting, Chair Tal Siddique opened McCann’s proposal for an extension to Bishop’s existing contract in tandem with the attorney’s contract renewal item. Immediately upon doing so, Siddique made it clear that he would support McCann’s proposal for an extension.

Siddique told commissioners that during his conversations with Bishop following the board’s last meeting on the matter, Bishop requested that the board consider extending his existing contract, “until such time as more conversation can be had on the review of the contract."  

Commissioner George Kruse agreed that an extension made the most sense, but he also noted that public discourse and debate about the terms of the proposed renewal contract contained some misinformation. 

“There’s a lot of less-than-accurate information out there, but that’s neither here nor there,” said Kruse, adding that upon his having reviewed a copy of former administrator Cheri Coryea’s contract, he found it nearly identical to Bishop’s proposed new contract. 

Despite the similarities, Kruse said he still agreed that having a contract renewal immediately before an election cycle was “not good for the public or for the board as a whole.”

“The board should have someone overseeing their staff that they support,” he suggested. “And trying to cram additional payout provisions in looks and feels—even if it wasn’t the intent—as more of a poison pill, and that poison pill is born at the expense of the citizens of Manatee County, who would have to pay it.”

Kruse was referring to the 20-week lump sum severance that Bishop would be due if he were fired without cause under the terms of his proposed renewal contract, should a new slate of commissioners move to terminate him following the next election cycle. The termination severance clause has been included in prior county administrator contracts, but is not included in Bishop’s current contract.

Bishop’s current contract was set to expire on August 8.

Before a motion was made, Siddique remarked, “I think our staff are owed a good administrator. Charlie (Bishop) is one of the rare ones who has good experience and (also) institutional knowledge. After 30-plus years, there are few people I can go to, even about things that are not strictly pertinent to the county, just to get the history of things here, and that’s something that’s rare, especially with the amount of turnover within the county administration.”

Siddique continued, “And, I think we need someone who has been around to help to build the next bench. I think he is doing that with deputy county administrators, with new directors, or directors that have been promoted up the ranks.”

Siddique suggested that extending the existing contract and deferring the renewal decision to another day would provide the administrator and county employees with stability. “To continue continuity of operations,” he said. 

Commissioner McCann made a motion in accordance with his agenda item, motioning for a six-month extension to Bishop’s existing contract, but adding that he also felt the board should approve paying the administrator’s personal attorney fees in relation to negotiations.

“I believe we should pay, as part of this motion, the county administrator’s attorney’s fees of up to $3,000 for this, because we are stopping the negotiation at this time and we are going to let the next board make the decision,” explained McCann.

McCann’s motion was seconded by Kruse, and without any debate or deliberation on the reimbursement of Bishop’s attorney fees, the board approved the motion 5-0, with Commissioner Jason Bearden absent.