Correspondence - Item 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Becerra, Alexis From: Hieu Pham < Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2025 12:01 PM To: eComment; Amezcua, Valerie; Phan, Thai; Vazquez, Benjamin; jessie.lopez@santa- ana.org; Hernandez, Johnathan; Penaloza, David Subject: Opposition to Item #16-City Manager Employment Agreement Amendment and Salary Increase (April 1, 2025 City Council Meeting Agenda) -Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Dear Mayor Amezcua and members of the Santa Ana City Council: I am writing to express my strong opposition to Item #16 on the April 1, 2025, agenda, which seeks to amend the City Manager's employment agreement and provide a salary increase to Alvaro Nunez. I urge the City Council to vote NO on this item and reject this unwarranted and fiscally irresponsible pay raise. The City Manager is an appointed public official responsible to Santa Ana residents, taxpayers, and City staff. The decision to increase his salary must be justified, transparent, and in the best interest of the community. However, there has been no public disclosure of his accomplishments or justification for a pay increase. What has Mr. Nunez done to merit a raise? Where is the public discussion on his performance? Lack of Qualifications and Transparency Mr. Nunez was appointed despite lacking prior experience as a City Manager and not holding a master's degree — qualifications that many consider essential for this role. He is already the highest -paid public official in Santa Ana, and this proposed raise would further increase that burden on taxpayers. Furthermore, while City Council compensation is publicly available online, the full details of the City Manager's employment agreement, including benefits, retirement contributions, and any additional allowances (such as a vehicle stipend), are not readily accessible. The public has a right to know the total cost of his compensation, including his fully burdened rate. Why is this information not made transparent? Irresponsible Use of Public Funds The City of Santa Ana is facing a structural deficit, yet this proposal seeks to increase spending by raising the salary of the City Manager. The Council should be focused on fiscal responsibility, not handing out raises without clear justification. A salary "adjustment" is simply a misleading term for a pay increase, and the public deserves honesty and transparency in this decision -making process. The City Council should act as responsible stewards of public funds. Instead of rewarding the City Manager with a pay increase, the Council should be addressing critical issues such as: • The City's financial instability and ongoing budget deficit. • The declining quality of City services and unmet community needs. • The lack of a public process in evaluating and approving this raise. According to reports from sources like Voice of OC and the OC Register, there have been serious concerns about the City's financial management and leadership. Why is the City Council moving forward with a pay raise when there is no clear evidence of exceptional performance or improved City outcomes? This item lacks transparency, public input, and fiscal justification. I strongly urge the City Council to vote NO on Item #16, reject the amendment to the City Manager's employment agreement, and prioritize the responsible use of taxpayer dollars. I am particularly disappointed in my Ward 1 councilmember, Thai Viet Phan, for not demonstrating more leadership in identifying these kinds of issues as they are presented to the full Council.