City Manager Benched—Gets a Raise

City Hall sign in front of a red-brick municipal building — Photo: The Brownfowl collection / Shutterstock

A city manager on paid leave just got a raise because his contract told the city to pay it.

Story Snapshot

The Brentwood City Council approved a 3% raise for City Manager G. Harold Duffey while he remains on paid leave.
Human resources said a “compaction clause” required Duffey’s base pay to stay 5% above his highest-paid report.
The council put Duffey on paid administrative leave by a 4-0 vote in June during an outside review.
The trigger came after Walter O’Grodnick became police chief, which lifted the top subordinate pay.

What triggered the raise and why it happened now

The raise followed a math problem, not a mood shift. Brentwood’s interim human resources lead said Duffey’s contract requires his base salary to sit at least five percent above his top-paid direct report. When Walter O’Grodnick became police chief on July 16, that gap fell below the floor, which triggered a pay adjustment. The council then voted to lift Duffey’s salary by about three percent to meet the spread the agreement set out.

Voters see the headline and wonder why any official under a cloud gets more money. That reaction is fair. But pay rules and personnel actions travel on different tracks. A raise driven by a formula can move even while an inquiry runs. If the agreement says “keep the gap,” payroll keeps the gap unless the council lawfully changes or ends the deal. That is why the clean test now is whether the city can show the clause, the numbers, and the vote lined up.

How the leave works and what the council actually decided

The council put Duffey on paid administrative leave in June to clear space for an independent review. The vote was reported as 4-0, with the vice mayor abstaining. City leaders framed the step as a way to keep city business steady while a third party looks into claims and recent publicity. Paid leave means the city keeps paying the base rate while the employee stays off duty during the review window.

The leave did not end the contract. It paused day-to-day control while the executive team handled operations. That is a common move in government when claims surface and the top role could influence witnesses, data, or morale. The facts so far show procedure, not a verdict. An allegation is not a conviction, and a leave is not a reward. It is a firewall while the city tests the claims.

The complaints, the texts, and the public anger

Employee groups urged an independent probe and said members felt concern about how women were treated by the city manager. A male staff member said he saw women spoken to differently and carrying extra burdens. These accounts, plus reports that Duffey took part in crude text exchanges tied to Oakland officials, fueled calls from residents to cut ties now. One speaker said the “evidence” showed Duffey should not remain in city government.

Brentwood City Manager G. Harold Duffey, who has been placed on paid administrative leave since June, has received a 3% pay hike, due to his employment agreement. https://t.co/DtraUewHk8

— Mercury News (@mercnews) August 13, 2026

This anger is easy to grasp. Taxpayers expect respect, fairness, and value for money. But the question in front of the council last week was narrower: did the contract force a pay bump when the police chief’s salary rose? If yes, the fiscally conservative answer is to honor the agreement now and claw back later if cause is proven. If no, the prudent answer is to freeze the raise and show the clause that allows a pause. The city says it was the former.

What accountability should look like next

Transparency closes the gap between what is legal and what feels right. The council should release three items: the signed city manager agreement pages with the compaction language, the human resources worksheet that shows the before-and-after pay gap, and the minutes that record the advice from the city attorney. Those documents would show whether the raise was a must-pay or a may-pay. If it was discretionary, the council should explain the timing choice plainly.

Taxpayers deserve a fast, fair resolution. That means finishing the outside review on a short clock, naming the investigator, defining the scope, and publishing the findings with redactions only for privacy. If the facts confirm misconduct or bias, the council should enforce the contract’s discipline or removal terms and seek any allowed repayment. If the facts do not, the city should restore leadership and keep clear standards on conduct and respect for all staff.