OAKLEY – The Oakley City Council has solidified City Manager Joshua McMurray’s contract, with changes that include a restriction on when he can be terminated and an updated severance package.
In a 4-1 vote on Oct. 28, the council approved amendments to McMurray’s employment contract. Councilmember George Fuller dissented.
On the night of the vote, City Attorney Derek Cole also reported a memo from a closed session held on Oct. 21 in which the council authorized payment of up to $25,000 to McMurray for any “personal legal expenses” or representation related to a recent workplace investigation and its findings.
The latest amendment to McMurray’s contract makes it “an evergreen contract,” said Cole.
Currently, the city manager’s contract renews every two years in July, unless the City Council decides otherwise, in which case a one-year notice needs to be given, said Cole.
“It’s a little complicated, a little wonky, but we’re replacing that and just simply saying the agreement will remain in place permanently until somebody tries to terminate the agreement,” said Cole.
The agreement would be in place until McMurray chooses to terminate it either by retirement, resignation, taking another job, or if the council ends the contract with or without cause.
The amendment also establishes an election window period — a one-year span that begins six months before and ends six months after a new council is seated — during which McMurray cannot be terminated without cause.
During that period, a council “supermajority” or four-fifths vote would be required for any termination for cause. Any termination without cause outside of the election window period would also require a supermajority vote.
After October’s vote, McMurray’s severance package has extended from 11 months to 18 months if he’s terminated without cause.
Since taking over as city manager in November 2021, McMurray’s contract has been amended four times, primarily to increase his salary, severance, and contract extension. His current salary is $311,772.
Fuller opposed the supermajority changes, adding it was “taking another bite out of democracy.” He said if three new councilmembers wanted to remove the city manager, their attempts to do so could be blocked by two others.
Councilmember Anissa Williams said she disliked the supermajority vote, saying that it “handicaps” future councils.
“In ordinary circumstances, there’s no way I would vote for this, but in ordinary circumstances, I don’t think this would have even come up,” said Williams.
Williams said McMurray “has been harassed continuously,” making it difficult for him to perform his duties.
“And while I hate that we are literally handicapping any future City Council, I don’t think I could ever foresee a situation where something so egregious happened, we couldn’t get the four-fifths vote if needed,” added Williams.
She also wasn’t a fan of the election window period, but felt that the “behaviors of certain people on the council” made it a necessary safety step.
Mayor Shannon Shaw explained that she felt comfortable with the six-month pre- and post-election window period, as it gives the new councilmembers a chance to get to know McMurray.
“I want to make sure any new City Council member sitting up here has an opportunity, a six-month window, to make that decision for themselves, and not based on what they may or may not be, may or may not be reading online,” said Shaw.
Fuller also questioned why the council had authorized a payment of up to $25,000 to McMurray for personal legal expenses.
Cole advised Fuller not to participate in the discussion, citing a conflict of interest. Fuller also objected to the item being listed under the consent calendar,
Cole explained that it was done to meet the obligations of the Brown Act.
“The Brown Act has a standard of what’s called substantial compliance. And so this office, by my predecessors, has determined that it is substantial compliance for us to report out by placing the item that we took any action on the next agenda. It is a report out by the city attorney,” said Cole. “I do understand that it appears on a consent calendar, and so when somebody moves the consent calendar, you think that you’re approving this. But this is not an item that requires a vote. This is simply a report out.”
Previously in October, the City Council voted to censure and call for Fuller’s resignation for alleged “bullying and retaliatory actions” against city staff after a third-party investigation found that he had allegedly engaged in such activities. The city has yet to make that report public, despite requests from this news organization to do so.
Fuller has refused to step down.
He said that during a meeting in McMurray’s office, Fuller had bent down to tie his shoelace, and he heard two “loud clunks” from McMurray’s desk, prompting him to look over the desk.
“I saw that McMurray had his hands clasped and held a brown wooden object, which I recognized as the butt of a gun,” Fuller said in a prepared statement to the council on Oct. 14. “Based on my experience of 22 years of service to the Los Angeles Police Department and the United States Marine Corps during the Vietnam War era, I determined that McMurray had taken hold of a gun and was holding it between his legs at the low ready.”
Fuller apologized to residents for not reporting the matter to the police.
“I have no comments,” said McMurray in a text message to this news organization when asked to comment on allegations by Fuller.