HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - Item 16Becerra, Alexis
From: Jorge Rivera <
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2025 8:35 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Item 16 Council Agenda
Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am writing about Item 16 on your upcoming council agenda, which proposes a raise for the newly hired City
Manager after only three months in the position. I believe this raise is unjustified and reflects poorly on the
decision -making process for our city's leadership.
In the short time that this individual has been in the role, his presence has been barely noticeable, and his
approachability has been limited. I have encountered him at different city events, and I have found him to be
rather unapproachable. His leadership is unproven, and it raises questions about the initial decision to hire
him. Was this an internal hire? How did he go from Code Enforcement Manager to City Manager? Why does
he deserve a raise only 3 months into his job?
There are concerns regarding the behavior of the City Manager and his inappropriate relationship with his
Deputy City Manager. While I understand that rumors should be approached with caution, the overall
situation is troubling, especially given prior allegations against him (https://voiceofoc.org/2015/10/sex-in-the-
city-hall ). I believe these concerns warrant further attention. It questions his professionalism and ethics.
Given the financial challenges our city is facing, including a projected budget deficit, it seems irresponsible to
give him a raise. Instead, I urge you to consider investing those resources in our community, such as libraries
and parks, which are good for all Santa Ana youths.
I ask that you reconsider this raise and explore ways to better serve the community with the available funds.
Sincerely
Jorge Rivera
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.
Sincerely,
Hieu Pham
Ward 1