Rojas temporary contract approved


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.

The City Council approved the contract during its June 7 meeting. Mr. Rojas will earn $15,000 a month, while also collecting his pension. The council granted an extension on repaying a $1.2 million home loan from the city; he'll now have two years from his last day as interim manager to pay back the approximately $41,500 left.

Meanwhile, the council is searching nationwide for a new city manager.

We can't do it without you.
Support local journalism.


Like this comment
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!

Like this comment
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

Like this comment
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.

Like this comment
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.

Like this comment
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?

Like this comment
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.

Like this comment
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.

Like this comment
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.

Like this comment
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.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Be the first to know

Get the latest headlines sent straight to your inbox every day.

Peek inside the fine-dining Selby's, opening in Redwood City this summer
By Elena Kadvany | 6 comments | 4,778 views

If you do nothing else, do These Three Things
By Sherry Listgarten | 35 comments | 2,004 views

Premarital and Couples: "You're Not Listening to Me!" may mean "I don't feel heard."
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,310 views

Lentil Brownies
By Laura Stec | 5 comments | 450 views

Finding Balance
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 261 views


The Almanac Readers' Choice ballot is here

It's time to decide what local business is worthy of the title "The Almanac Readers' Choice" — and you get to decide! Cast your ballot online. Voting ends May 27th. Stay tuned for the results in the July 17th issue of The Almanac.