Stockton Severes Ties with Lathrop City Manager as Consultant Amidst Controversy
The city of Stockton announced the termination of its consulting agreement with Lathrop City Manager Stephen J. Salvatore, ending a brief but contentious engagement that drew sharp criticism and raised questions about transparency and fiscal responsibility. Salvatore’s hiring in February, orchestrated by interim City Manager Steve Colangelo just days into his own appointment, was intended to provide "strategic guidance" and "transition support services" to Colangelo, who lacked prior city management experience. The contract, valued at up to $99,000, was awarded without council approval or competitive bidding, further fueling public scrutiny.
The city’s official statement characterized the termination as a mutual agreement, with Salvatore voluntarily waiving a portion of his compensation. It emphasized that Colangelo had demonstrated competency in city operations, rendering Salvatore’s services no longer necessary. However, this explanation clashed with the initial justification for the hiring, which presumed Colangelo’s need for extensive guidance. Critics questioned why the city would hire someone whose need was predicated on the interim city manager’s lack of demonstrated competency.
The controversy surrounding Salvatore’s contract deepened with revelations that it was funded using unspent Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) funds from the city manager’s budget. This raised concerns about the appropriate allocation of resources, particularly as the city faced a $15 million budget shortfall requiring cuts across various departments. Councilmember Jason Lee, who initially supported Colangelo’s appointment, publicly expressed frustration with the expenditure, questioning the prioritization of a consultant’s fee over essential city services.
Scrutiny intensified as details of Salvatore’s work emerged. Invoices obtained through public records requests revealed his involvement in addressing homelessness, exploring financial department options, and reviewing a request for proposal for a forensic audit. These tasks, while relevant to city operations, did not necessarily align with the narrative of "transitional support" for Colangelo. The city’s assertion that Salvatore’s contract was intended to be short-term was also contradicted by documents indicating a six-month term with options for extension.
Colangelo, however, defended the hiring decision, characterizing the $22,000 paid to Salvatore over two months as a bargain compared to the typical cost of similar expertise. He credited Salvatore’s "intimate knowledge" of San Joaquin County’s governmental landscape as a valuable asset, justifying the expenditure as a strategic investment. Colangelo emphasized that he retained full decision-making authority and accountability, portraying the consultancy as a proactive measure to address his own acknowledged lack of experience.
The episode casts a shadow over Colangelo’s appointment, which was met with initial skepticism from some council members and community members due to his unconventional background. Councilmember Michael Blower, who voted against Colangelo’s appointment, voiced renewed concerns, suggesting that Salvatore’s perceived expertise, as touted by Colangelo himself, might make him a more suitable candidate for the city manager role.
The city’s handling of the situation also drew criticism for a lack of transparency. Officials initially avoided responding to media inquiries about the specifics of Salvatore’s contract, and the subsequent news release was accused of containing inaccuracies and downplaying the cost and duration of the agreement. This lack of forthrightness further eroded public trust and raised questions about the city’s commitment to open government.
Mayor Christina Fugazi defended both Colangelo’s appointment and the decision to hire Salvatore, characterizing the latter as "smart investing" and "standard municipal practice." She maintained that the consultancy was intended to expedite Colangelo’s transition and address pressing city issues, not a reflection of his capabilities. However, critics pointed out that hiring an external interim city manager with no prior city government experience deviated from Stockton’s established practices.
The fallout from the Salvatore consultancy underscores broader concerns about governance and accountability within Stockton city government. The lack of council oversight in awarding the contract, the use of DEI funds for a seemingly unrelated purpose, and the discrepancies between the city’s official narrative and documented evidence raise serious questions about transparency and fiscal responsibility. The incident also highlights the challenges of navigating leadership transitions and the importance of ensuring that public funds are utilized effectively and ethically. The city’s response to the controversy will be crucial in restoring public trust and demonstrating a commitment to responsible governance. Moving forward, greater transparency and adherence to established procurement processes are essential to prevent similar incidents from occurring. The city council must also carefully consider its approach to filling key leadership positions, ensuring that candidates possess the necessary qualifications and experience to effectively manage the complex challenges facing Stockton.