Town Square

Post a New Topic

Rojas temporary contract approved

Original post made on Jun 16, 2011

It's official: City Manager Glen Rojas will retire on July 15, then return to serve on a temporary contract until December or until Menlo Park hires a replacement.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, June 16, 2011, 10:15 AM

Comments (9)

Posted by Bob, a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Jun 16, 2011 at 11:36 am

[Portion removed; terms of use.]

Was the info just released?

Two years to pay back $41grand while he's making $15,000/mo plus pension!

Our city council is insane!


Posted by Scholar, a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Jun 16, 2011 at 12:39 pm

Double dippity-do
for him, not me or you


Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 16, 2011 at 12:59 pm

Does anybody think that the rehired City Manager will be a change agent?

Insanity is doing the same thing again and thinking that you will get a different result.


Posted by Retiree, a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Jun 16, 2011 at 1:44 pm

What a turkey. Don't know who's worse - the dipper or the council.


Posted by wondering, a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Jun 16, 2011 at 3:37 pm

Remind me what Rojas has accomplished that merits his earning two salaries and having us pay for his house?


Posted by peter carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 16, 2011 at 3:41 pm

peter carpenter is a registered user.

Remind me why the citizens of Menlo Park allows this kind of stuff to keep going on and on.


Posted by wondering, a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Jun 16, 2011 at 4:02 pm

Anyone who has observed (or participated in) MP politics knows that it is not that simple. Most residents do not actively care and would just as soon remain blissfully ignorant. They don't know the council candidates, and tend to vote based on the glossiness of the campaign materials (often union-sponsored) and/or the attractiveness of the candidate's family. As a result, we have a council comprising well-meaning but mostly naive members.

It's in the city manager's best interest to cultivate a strong relationship with the union. Yes, it means that expenses will rise, but the bigger the budget, the better the manager's resume looks. Individual council members are loathe to question the city manager, partly because they don't have the confidence to assert their position (they are volunteers; he's a paid professional), partly because they want to pretend that all is love in peace in Menlo Park, and partly because they are afraid of retribution.

The most reform-minded candidate got slammed in the 2010 election. People thought he was too outspoken, even angry, and they were probably right. But you know, he wouldn't have rubber-stamped the status quo. I guess the bottom line is that we've got the government we deserve...and we are paying the price.


Posted by Joanna, a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Jun 16, 2011 at 6:16 pm

This disgusting! This is egregious! This council has gone too far!

Rojas is laughing all the way to the bank... at us, the fools that we are!

We put those clowns (the council) in office and we, unfortunately, get what we deserve.


Posted by Thomas, a resident of Menlo Park: Sharon Heights
on Jun 16, 2011 at 8:07 pm

While some of the posts are pointing fingers at the unions on the matter of the pay increase for the commanders, it does not make sense that the union would support a freeze on an increase for the sergeant's compensation and not do so for the commanders $13K increase. It's my belief that the commanders are part of management and therefore not part of any police union. Perhaps someone more informed can provide greater details.

While I very much support reform on public salaries and pensions, I strongly criticize management for not following suit. This would seem to support the idea that at least the unions are starting to get the message but management, who has a direct relationship with city managers, council members and board members of the special districts, does not. Clearly this is political payback for the council members that approved the decision and the city manager that cleverly buried it in the agenda. I would, however, like to know what the distinction is between the sergeant's who no doubt are part of the union and agreed to a salary freeze and the commanders who had no problem taking the increase and some insight that it would get approved by the council. There would seem to me enough blame to go around on all sides but it would be unfair to keep blaming organized labor if the commander's were not part of the same union.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Indian street food and ... bitcoins?
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,167 views

Most Seniors do not Need Senior Housing But Could Benefit from other Choice to Remain in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 31 comments | 1,468 views

I Spy
By Cheryl Bac | 4 comments | 996 views

Life, Death and Rails
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 784 views

Live! Menlo Park’s New Website
By Erin Glanville | 9 comments | 688 views