El Cerrito Quietly Renews City Manager’s Contract

On October 3, 2023, Resolution 2023-77 was quietly and unanimously passed by the City Council. The renewal included a hefty $450 car allowance although the City Manager lives in El Cerrito, a few miles from City Hall.

In a recent turn of events, the City Manager, fresh off a contract renewal, displayed questionable judgment. Notably, during a Public Works meeting held via remote access, the City Manager was overheard directing a profane outburst towards the Director of Public Works.

This incident has sparked considerable unrest within the community, casting a shadow over the City Manager’s capacity to embody the city’s values and ethical standards. Concerns are mounting over whether extending her tenure serves the city’s best interests. Several points of contention have since then emerged:

  1. The City’s expenses continue to outpace revenue, yet the City Manager continues to assert that El Cerrito has addressed all of the State Auditor’s concerns. 
  2. Despite the implementation of Measure V, a transfer tax intended to finance a library project, over $15 million raised has been diverted to offset poor financial management instead of its designated purpose. This diversion has eroded trust in the city’s ability to manage future tax initiatives properly.
  3. A significant discrepancy remains unaddressed regarding the Real Property Transfer Tax, flagged in 2022 as a looming budgetary concern. Despite warnings from financial experts about a potential million-dollar shortfall in projected revenues, still no corrective actions have been taken to address the budget shortfall.
  4. The City Council’s delay in addressing the fiscal year-end closure, contrary to the Government Finance Officers Association’s (GFOA) guidelines, reflects a disregard for financial reporting standards.
  5. El Cerrito’s financial reserves fall woefully short of the GFOA’s recommended two months’ worth of operating expenses, risking the city’s financial stability.
  6. The Unfunded Pension Costs ballooned from $65 million to $85 million which is higher than a year’s operating budget.  Yet the city calls the changes a fluctuation that will correct itself.
  7. The state auditor’s evaluation placed El Cerrito among the worst-managed cities in California, highlighting critical pension funding issues that remain unresolved, exacerbating the city’s financial challenges.
  8. The City Manager’s frequent official trips have been scrutinized, suggesting a misalignment of priorities away from addressing local concerns.
  9. Excessive credit card spending further indicates a lack of financial oversight and governance within the city.

The City Council is urged to reconsider the perpetual renewal of the City Manager’s contract in light of these concerns, prioritizing the city’s reputation and the well-being of its employees and residents. This moment demands a leadership that is transparent, accountable, and dedicated to rectifying past missteps to guide El Cerrito towards a more stable and prosperous future.

Here’s how you can help:

  1. Share this post with other residents.
  2. Attend the monthly Financial Advisory Board meetings in person.
  3. Council meetings are both remote and in-person. The City Council meeting will be on tonight. The schedule is here.
  4. Share your voice with the Council Members, the Mayor, and the City Manager.

5 thoughts on “El Cerrito Quietly Renews City Manager’s Contract

  1. Dredging up that hot mic story I wonder if the actual tape was even listened to. It was clearly not the voice of Karen Pinkos on the mic. But maybe facts don’t matter. Listen again.

    The actual comment reflected what most of the audience was thinking at the moment. Laugh it off.

    Like

    1. You can argue that the lapse in professionalism was not the City Manager, but the fact remains that the comment was overheard in real time by many people both present and tuning in remotely. Several members of the community wrote to the council about it, quoting verbatim Furthermore, at the next meeting, the city manager acknowledged making the remark. Although she apologized for being overheard and claimed she wasn’t referring to anyone specifically, it’s worth noting that there’s only one person on city staff with that name.

      Like

  2. About the car allowance, does that mean she must provide evidence for expenses claimed? That is, she doesn’t get $450 per month out right, but only what she proved she spent? Are citizens able to see her documentation for these expenses?

    Like

Leave a reply to Jan Woo Cancel reply