Council Approves City Manager's Contract, With Modifications

After a slew of public comments strongly opposed a proposed extension on city manager Chris Jeffers’ contract during Tuesday’s city council meeting, the council approved the contract, but denied increasing the number of years to Jeffers' term.

The council approved Jeffers’ contract 4 to 1, but only on the condition that the term be reduced from four and half years to three years.

The proposed contract reflected reforms council members had hoped to make regarding Jeffers’ contract, namely an inclusion of a full contribution of the eight percent toward his employee pension, the elimination of administrative leave time benefits and deferred salary. These three items were reported to save the city about $100,000 over the proposed four and a half year term.

But the length of the proposed term, as well as other added benefits, were a major focus of debate among council members and audience members at the meeting.

“We hired [Jeffers] with a three year contract,” said Mayor Ken Herman. “I don’t have a problem extending it to a three year contract, but I do have a problem extending it beyond three years. I think it sets precedent that I don’t want to see made at this time.”

Instead of Jeffers’ contract ending July 10, 2015, the council voted to reduce the term to July 2014.

The proposed contract also included a $60 increase per pay period to his deferred compensation account, a cost of $1,560 annually for the city, an item also struck down by the council.

“Even as small as it is, I have a difficult time accepting this, especially in this economy,” said council member Gene Murabito.

Jeffers, who was hired to the city manager post in 2007, is currently working under an expired contract. Jeffers spoke little on the proposed contract during the meeting, offering only a brief summary.

“Based on discussions we had and some of the issues that has come forth, I tried to encapsulate that sentiment – PERS, administrative leave and salary – into this document,” Jeffers said.

The proposed contract was originally placed on the consent calendar, a move that would have allowed the council to approve all items with one motion without a public hearing.

After a heated open public comment session over the placement of the item, the council voted to move the item to the consent agenda.

Jeffers faced heavy criticism from residents and city employees, who questioned his honesty and transparency regarding his contract negotiations with the Glendora Municipal Employees Association. Jeffers also faced controversy over his nearly $500,000 cash out of unused leave time following his post as city manager in Monterey Park.

“His negotiations with us affected our morale and trust,” said GMEA representative Marisol Rilloraza. “The city manager should begin acting as if he truly cares about his employees.”

Comments in a recent city employee survey revealed a low number of employee trust regarding their relationship with city officials.

Yet, there were others who came to Jeffers’ defense. Mayor Pro-Tem Doug Tessitor called the accusations against Jeffers unfair.

“[Jeffers] is a man of great integrity and forthrightedness in all of his dealings with council members,” Tessitor said.

Herman added that Jeffers' cash-out of unused leave time after leaving Monterey Park was legal under the contract presented to him.

"I don't think there is anyone in this audience who would have done exatly the same as our city manager did," Herman said.

Other questions arose regarding the timing of the council’s decision on the matter. Herman, who offered the only dissenting vote of the evening, said he believed since a new council comprising of at least two new members would be formed, a decision should be postponed until after the March 8 election.

“This decision will be affecting them because this contract would go through the duration of their entire term,” Herman said. “I believe postponing the decision would be a courtesy to them, our new council members.”

Although the council voted on the contract before the March 8 election, Rilloraza said she was pleased with the outcome of decision.

“I see this, regardless of what happened, as a win for us,” Rilloraza said. “It felt like for the first time, the council truly listened to us.”