Brockhouse Calls for City Manager’s Resignation After Voters Approve Prop B

Print Share on LinkedIn Comments More
Councilman Greg Brockhouse comments on the fiscal year 2019 budget following a presentation by City Manager Sheryl Sculley.

Scott Ball / Rivard Report

Councilman Greg Brockhouse comments on the fiscal year 2019 budget following a presentation by City Manager Sheryl Sculley.

Councilman Greg Brockhouse (D6) called for City Manager Sheryl Sculley’s resignation in the wake of this week’s election, in which 59 percent of voters approved a firefighters union-backed proposition that will limit the tenure and salary of future city managers.

“I think she should resign,” Brockhouse, a longtime critic of Sculley, told reporters Thursday at the firefighters union headquarters. “Sheryl has been successful, I’ll never take that away from her, but I think [her] power has become absolute. I think it’s time to revert that back to the people through their elected officials.”

Sculley said attempts by her and previous mayors to balance public safety contracts and have police and firefighters start paying for health care was the underlying cause for the union’s propositions as well as its attacks on her.

“The union launched this campaign five years ago … [because] I had the courage to address the unsustainable cost of these public safety contracts and I’ve had support from three councils to do this,” she told the Rivard Report on Thursday. “For me to do otherwise would have been financially irresponsible.”

This week, after voters approved two of three proposed city charter amendments placed on the ballot by the firefighters union, City officials also are analyzing the ramifications of Proposition C, which gives the fire union an impasse advantage in its contract negotiations with the City. Proposition A, which would have redefined referenda rules, was rejected by slightly more than 54 percent of voters.

Under the new Prop B rules, the next city manager’s “annual compensation” cannot exceed that of 10 times the annual salary of the lowest-paid full-time city employee and whoever is appointed cannot hold the position for more than eight years, according to the new, voter-approved charter language. That caps the salary at about $300,000 per year.

Sculley said she believes that would limit the City’s ability to hire top talent to run the day-to-day operations of the local government, which include overseeing its 13,000 employees, nearly $3 billion annual budget, and large municipal bond programs.

“A professional city manager is not going to take a job with salary caps and term limits,” she said.

The new rules don’t apply to Sculley, who will receive a $475,000 salary for 2018 and is eligible for a performance bonus up to $100,000. Her contract, established when she was hired in 2005 and amended several times, does not have an expiration date. 

Essentially, Proposition B created an incentive to keep Sculley in her job as long as possible.

City managers in cities with a council-manager form of municipal government are appointed to carry out policy that City Council establishes while making sure city services are delivered to residents.

Sculley’s salary exceeds that of her peers in other council-manager cities. Hired nearly two years ago, Dallas City Manager T.C. Broadnax is paid $395,000. When his predecessor, A.C. Gonzalez, left that position, he was paid $400,000. Phoenix, the nation’s largest council-manager city with 1.6 million people, paid City Manager Ed Zuercher roughly $333,000 in 2017. The Rivard Report did not find any other U.S. city with the similar term and salary constraints as the ones voters just approved.

In an email response to Brockhouse’s comments calling for Sculley’s removal, Mayor Ron Nirenberg acknowledged her salary has become an issue.

“[Voters] made clear they are tired of the conflict over the fire union contract and unhappy with the City Manager’s compensation,” he said. “I hear them loud and clear and will keep their concerns front and center as we keep moving forward.”

Mayor Ron Nirenberg

Scott Ball / Rivard Report

Mayor Ron Nirenberg

During her tenure, Sculley has hired all but one new department heads, created a more efficient and transparent City Hall, and overseen increasingly large bond programs to complete infrastructure projects across the City. Most city leaders credit Sculley for San Antonio’s AAA bond ratings.

“Sheryl has done a great job, and because of her fiscal stewardship the city is a national model,” Nirenberg said.

The latest Council-approved amendment to Sculley’s contract, which allocated incremental raises for the past three years to bring her salary to $475,000 in 2018 and beyond, ends in December. Sculley received a $450,000 salary for her work last year in addition to a $75,000 performance bonus. The terms of her contract continue until she leaves the job or City Council votes to remove her. City Council votes publicly on her contract, but not on her performance pay, which takes place in closed executive sessions.

The new compensation rules apply to salary and performance pay, City Attorney Andy Segovia said in an email, but other benefits the city manager receives, such as a vehicle allowance, could be exempt from the new provisions. Capping the city manager’s salary would have a reverse wage-compression effect, Segovia said. Executive staff in Sculley’s office make between $200,000 and $300,000.

Brockhouse is in favor of parting ways with Sculley now and beginning the search for a new city manager, or, at the very least, renegotiating Sculley’s contract to the lower pay available under the new rules. Brockhouse has taken issue with Sculley’s compensation and performance review process in the past. He disagreed with the salary cap of $300,000, but said before the election that it could be adjusted in the future. 

“Is [Nirenberg] going to amend [her contract] and give her more money?” Brockhouse said, “or is he going to reduce it and right-size this power structure at city hall?”

Brockhouse said its time to start giving Council members more responsibilities and authority, shifting towards a mayor-council, or “strong mayor,” form of government. In a mayor-council form, the mayor has much more authority and responsibility – and pay.

San Antonio has had a council-manager form of government since 1952 and there have been 19 city managers since. Most cities with populations over 100,000 use the council-manager form, according to the National League of Cities. The structure is aimed at removing politics from the day-to-day operations of a municipal government and professionalizing management. Typically, strong mayor systems mean the Council has legislative power, but the mayor has veto power.

True changes to responsibilities and authority, however, would require more changes to the city charter, which can only be changed every two years. Brockhouse said he would pursue a process to put those changes on the ballot in 2020.

“[Let’s] start to ratchet up power to the Council, strip it from the manager position,” said Brockhouse, who noted he plans to run for mayor but is unclear whether it will be next year.

Sculley declined to comment on her future plans or her contract.

“Contract negotiations are between the City Council and me,” she said.

Nirenberg and others are skeptical the new rules would allow the city to hire a city manager with the required experience and skills to maintain City operations and services at the same level Sculley has achieved.

“We will find out,” Nirenberg said. “I will say that it impairs our ability to find the very best.”

21 thoughts on “Brockhouse Calls for City Manager’s Resignation After Voters Approve Prop B

  1. Brockhouse is a utter idiot and it’s obvious what he’s gunning for. He’s a tyrannt in sheep’s clothing. He will fail though.

    • Wow… Derek. Can you be more specific? I see there is no actual detail is support of this statement. What constitutes an “utter idiot?” How is he a “tyrant?” Does he really have “sheep’s clothing?” If so I would like to see that. “Fail” at what? Carrying out the will of the public?

      Please know that I have no particular concern for Brockhouse. I just want to know what you mean by all of this so I can take away some actual information to inform me of this situation.

      • I agree with him that Brockhouse is an idiot and wanna-be tyrant.
        First, and most importantly, a city-manager with the required ability and experience to manage day to day operations of a city the size of San Antonio CANNOT BE FOUND for that compensation and limits.
        ( Look at the salaries of commensurate city managers. The new amendment caps would eliminate any city manager with the skills needed. Do you want to trash our bond rating so that a larger par of the city budget goes to interest? Do you want to weaken out bargaining position with the Firefighters Union, which already has unsustainable benefits far exceeding every other municipal employee group. [including police officers]?
        As to the second, Brockhouses’s desire to gut the city in order to get more power for himself (he admits that in this article) has to be considered a naked power grab from a man who wants to be king.

  2. Well, please clarify that statement concerning that City Council votes to remove the City Manager and whom has authority to amend/extend the current contract . I was at a Wednesday Northwest Neighborhood Alliance this week and CCD6 council member answered my question that only the Mayor decides amend/extend her service. My response was that her tenure should continue.
    Also, enough with this change to stronger Mayor/Council form of government, have ya’ll forgotten reason we have gone to 2 year election/ 8 year term limit?

  3. Even if we did go to a mayor/council form of government, I would want to ensure that no one currently serving on council up to the council that somehow manages to get the city charter amended to that form of government can become mayor. I don’t support any changes suggested or made by a council member that ends up benefiting that member’s power or pay in later years as either a continuing council member or mayor.

  4. We didn’t have all this head knocking when city council was not given a salary but just paid but meeting, allowances etc. Maybe we need to go back to that? Money seems to have started a power grab.

  5. Brockhouse is a power hungry fool. I suspect a good bit of his rancor toward Sculley is that she’s a successful woman. He says she’s good at her job; he is clearly jealous of the money she is making. How dare a woman be so powerful? How dare she earn a big salary?

    He needs to take a seat and let the grown folk take care of business.

  6. I call for Brockhurst’s resignation. He doesn’t have the best interests of the city in mind and he wastes everyone’s time with his self-serving grandstanding.

  7. It appears to me that Mayoral Canidate Brockhouse is wanting to expand the salary and role of the office he hopes to be elected to, not look out for the future success of the City of San Antonio. The problems of the Mayor-Council form of government are numerous and typically lead to increased city debt.

    • Very True- Think of those “Rust Belt” cities of 80’s-00’s, increased debt due to healthcare/pension burden of municipal employees ( including Police/Fire).

  8. The petition and ballot anguage did not give Sculley a ‘pass.’ The Charter does not give the Mayor sole power to negotiate her contract. The media needs to show where in the Charter it gives the Mayor the sole power to negotiate her contract or not report that. The City Attorney is paid by We the People. I look forward to seeing if he sides with the people or his ‘Boss,’ the City Manager. Heck, she may have determined his salary as well as her 2 Deputy City Managers (over $300 K each) and 4 Assistant Managers (abt $ 275K). This should not be a legal fight. Clearly, the voters have spoken. No one can deny that. Hopefully Brockhouse is not the only one council member hat will listen to them.

  9. “The union launched this campaign five years ago … [because] I had the courage to address the unsustainable cost of these public safety contracts and I’ve had support from three councils to do this,” she told the Rivard Report on Thursday. “For me to do otherwise would have been financially irresponsible.”

    Iris, can you email me the council members who approved the above mentioned contract? Thanks. Seems readers never are reminded of who brought on the problem at hand.

  10. The average citizen does not like public employees who make a lot of money, regardless of their position. The council brought this about with all the compensation they approved for the city manager.

    Do an article that states the salaries of public university president’s and Chancellor’s compensation and you might want to include football coacher. It may put into perspective the value of a competent city manager.

  11. The only people in San Antonio to benefit from Sculley’s performance as City Manager are the bankers, developers. building contractors. The average citizen hasn’t benefited one iota.
    I do not agree with Brockhouse’s politics, but he’s right Sheryl Sculley needs to go.

  12. Brockhouse is a keeper. I trust him for vision and ideas that will benefit San Antonio.

    He was the only City Council member that supported yes for proposition B and C.

    Brockhouse was correct. Both propositions passed by San Antonio voters, in spite of significant opposition by “big money” groups.

  13. Since voters are so petition happy, someone in Brockhouse’s district should start a recall petition to remove him. He merely wants to be the next mayor and is the pocket of the fire union chief.

  14. This whole thing about the SAFD deal is this they want their family and kids to keep getting FREE HEALTH CARE from the city and the tax payers, the fire fighters I agree should get free health care BUT not their family they are not out their fighting fires they are home asleep while the men and women are out there.
    This is what has caused the whole mess in the first place is that the fire fighters think their family should get the same treatment as they do.

  15. How many corporations provide fully paid health care insurance for their employees today? How many provide fully paid health care insurance for employees’ immediate families? I would guess not many. The likely reason is that it’s not sustainable. Do we really want SA to move slowly toward rust-belt type insolvency? I think the firefighters should face financial reality and agree to pay part of their family members’ health insurance premiums.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *