City of Sacramento
Personnel and Public Employees Committee Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2025-01686 10/7/2025
City Attorney Recruitment - Process and Next Steps
File ID: 2025-01686
Location: Citywide
Recommendation:
1) Receive update from Chair Jennings on CPS HR Consulting (CPS) information on Mayor and Council Member feedback for the City Attorney executive Recruitment; 2) receive the City Attorney total compensation information from CPS; and 3) pass a Motion recommending to City Council that CPS proceed with the executive recruitment process.
Contact: Rick Jennings, II, Chair, Personnel and Public Employees Committee, Office of Councilmember Jennings, District 7
Presenter: Rick Jennings, II, Chair, Personnel and Public Employees Committee, Office of Councilmember Jennings, District 7
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-CPS HR City Attorney Total Compensation Report
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: The position of City Attorney will be vacant effective October 24, 2025. The City Council has begun the recruitment process for the position of City Attorney.
On October 22, 2024, the City Council approved entering into professional service agreements with five firms for executive recruitment services. With that action, the Council pre-approved executive recruitment vendors who had successfully met the requirements of the City's Request for Proposals (RFP No. P24081111002) for Executive Recruitment Services on an as-needed basis. The rationale provided for this Council action (Agenda File ID 2024-01810) was that since each of the five firms on the list met the qualities the City sought such as unique experience, recruitment approach, geographic reach, fee schedule, and diversity profile, their pre-approval would give the City much needed flexibility and agility in meeting its executive recruitment needs. CPS HR Consulting (CPS), one of the firms on the list, was selected to conduct the executive recruitment for the City Attorney.
File ID: 2025-01686 10/7/2025
From September 3-19, 2025, CPS conducted interviews with the Mayor and City Council members to solicit feedback on the recruitment process and the qualifications of the next City Attorney. CPS will present to the full City Council on October 21, 2025, detailing the feedback from the interviews of the Mayor and Council which will include marketing materials and timeline for completion of the recruitment. It is anticipated that the recruitment process will be completed by the first quarter of 2026.
Salary
In May 2025, CPS completed a salary survey for comparable City Attorney classifications in various California jurisdictions. Based on the results of this survey (Attachment 2), the City Attorney salary is
10.63% above the market average for salary alone, and 18.30% ahead when considering total compensation. Given the low risk of turnover, no market-driven adjustments to the salary are recommended at this time. The current annual salary range for City Attorney is $178,300.18 - $351,048.19.
Policy Considerations: The City Council alone is vested with the authority to appoint a City Attorney.
Economic Impacts: Not applicable.
Environmental Considerations: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This action is not a project that is subject to CEQA because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. (CEQA Guidelines § 15378(b)(5)).
Sustainability: Not applicable.
Commission/Committee Action: Not applicable.
Rationale for Recommendation: The City Attorney has resigned effective October 24, 2025, and the City Council intends to proceed with the executive recruitment process to fill the position of City Attorney.
Financial Considerations: Not applicable.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.
1 To: Shelley Banks-Robinson City of Sacramento HR Director From: Teddi Anderson, Project Consultant, CPS HR
RE: Total Compensation for City Attorney City of Sacramento
Summary
The City Attorney compensation for the City of Sacramento was reviewed. This memo describes the methodology, data obtained, and considerations based on the analysis. Based on the following analysis, the City Attorney salary is 10.63% above market in salary only and 18.30% ahead for total compensation. Assuming little to no risk of turnover, no market-driven changes are recommended at this time.
Background
The City of Sacramento is the capital city of the state of California. Based on the U.S Census, the population estimate for 2023 was 526,384. The City Attorney is classified as a Charter Officer.
Market Factors
There are many factors that go into reviewing the elements of salary for City Attorneys and equivalent positions in local government, such as General Counsel and/or department heads. A common practice for these positions includes a more formal employment agreement updated Position Agency Population County
Adjusted
Salary
Adjusted Total
Compensation
City Attorney Bakersfield 413,381 Kern County 240,808 325,543 City Attorney Fresno 545,716 Fresno County 319,200 420,953 City Attorney Long Beach 449,468 Los Angeles
County 366,886 487,310
City Attorney Oakland-Strong
Mayor 436,504 Alameda
County 289,670 423,211
City Attorney Roseville 159,135 Placer County 322,452 453,145 County Counsel Sacramento
County 1,584,104 Sacramento
County 325,320 471,443
City Attorney San Francisco-
Strong Mayor 808,988 San Francisco
County 262,909
313,116
City Attorney San Jose 969,655 Santa Clara
County 352,879 489,767
City Attorney Stockton 319,543 San Joaquin
County 343,598 465,547
no strong
match State of CA 39.5 M
Average 313,747 427,782
City Attorney Sacramento 526,384 Sacramento
County 351,048 523,593
Variance 10.63% 18.30%
2 annually or during their performance review. These agreements go beyond just base salary to include other “perks” or economic adds of their employment.
All of these factors and considerations are taken into account when establishing and analyzing total compensation package for executives . Additionally, while focusing on retention or recruiting, it can help inform us about the risk of turnover or success of a strong candidate pool.
It can also help quantify the total cost of a position for budgeting purposes.
Market Pay
Market pay is typically defined as the average pay of actual salaries, salary ranges and/or total compensation for similar positions in comparable agencies. Depending on the agencies’ pay philosophy, the target market rate can vary. Rates can be determined or relative to the average of the minimum, midpoint, or maximum range or market average of actuals, or a combination of both. Additionally, whereas California is very transparent about sharing or listing salaries, current and actual salaries or related benefits are not always accessible and validated in a timely manner. Due to the volatility of the labor market, it is important to review market pay and include actual salary as well as ranges annually, or when there is a significant vacancy.
Although most of the surveys look at market average, it does not always reflect what candidates expect to earn or negotiate.
Pay Philosophy and Structure
A common philosophy and best practice related to range placement for market competitiveness is allowing for variation of data points that contribute to market pay including hiring rate and internal equity. The city’s practice of +/- 5% pay philosophy is a strong, valid practice. Although this can vary from agency to agency, having a desired market target rate or market target range is essential when determining pay philosophy. Additionally, in regard to salary structure, many executive positions do not have a range (min and max) but use a single hiring rate that can be adjusted annually based on a number of factors, in addition to internal equity, including qualifications, performance, cost of living and budget.
Budget
Budget is a critical consideration when determining market pay. Not everyone can afford the average market rate and regardless of your pay philosophy, once established, it is imperative to know how competitive your pay is. Looking at total compensation is also an ideal way to project the budget for the cost of an FTE. Many agencies supplement salaries with other economic adds to increase the overall total compensation package. Although we see these economic adds primarily in employment contracts for executives it can include other executive level positions. These pay elements should be considered in totality.
Comparable Agencies
Determining which comparable agencies to use are essential. Typically, agencies are chosen based on similar population, size of agency, size of budget, scope of duties and span of control (direct reports/FTE). A lesser-known element is using agencies with similar revenue sources.
These factors as well as others determined by the agency all contribute to their established
3 market pay. Many organizations and survey data show that an established market driven philosophy that includes proximity of agencies, which have or will draw talent can be helpful in preventing turnover. Should the City wish to expand or modify the list below, I can certainly do that. The following list reflects the comparable agencies surveyed:
• Bakersfield
• Fresno
• Long Beach
• Oakland-Strong Mayor
• Roseville
• Sacramento County
• San Francisco- Strong Mayor
• San Jose
• Stockton
• State of California
For the purposes of City Attorney analysis, these are solid comparable agencies. It is important to note that Oakland and San Francisco also have a Strong Mayor form of Government, and, although the salary is comparable, some agencies may choose to exclude it in their analysis.
Although there is no “rule” for number of comparable agencies you use, the more you include, the less the variance in the average if/when one agency changes pay and conversely, the smaller number of comparables, the more dynamic the change.
Cost of Living
Cost of living is also a significant factor to consider when establishing pay. When conducting analysis, it’s important to consider cost of living variances, especially as it relates to attraction and retention. For purposes of this analysis, I used a credible, validated source for determining cost of living, the Economic Research Institute Cost of Living Comparison Calculator | Living Cost Comparison Tool | ERI. Additionally, I used similar methodology when recently reviewing the City Manager.
The table below reflects the cost of living compared with the City of Sacramento. Additionally, if the % is green-this means that Sacramento has a lower cost of living than the comparable agency and conversely if the % is red it reflects a higher cost of living in Sacramento. The data was then adjusted accordingly. For agencies in Sacramento County, no adjustments were made. The results of using the aforementioned calculator are in the below table:
4 Attraction and Retention
All the factors above are driving factors in attracting and retaining quality talent in an organization. Savvy executive level candidates may utilize the same resources and calculators when making a decision to apply or go elsewhere . Candidates and employees may also expect that the previous incumbents’ pay or top of the pay range is available to them upon hire, promotion or achievable through established pay strategies.
Data Resources and Transparency
Although these resources are available to the public there are considerations when using one or more for analytical purposes. The primary consideration is the year in which the data was reported. Typically, these lag 1-2 years and are reported annually. If current data is not available, these numbers can be “aged” by adding the known cost of living increase or other monetary increases for those years not reflected. Its important to note that these numbers obtained are a snapshot in time.
• Actuals: Current data derived directly from agencies through current employment agreements, or from agency staff, this is the most credible and timely data. Data is adjusted for cost of living and includes value of vacation or other compensable leave.
Additionally, depending on the reason for the analysis, such as future recruitment, certain incentives may not be available to the future incumbent. Where actuals were unavailable, Public Pay was used for 2023.
• Public pay: Government Compensation in California through the State Controller’s Officer. They do not include value of all elements, including leave in their total comp calculations. Most recent data is 2023.
Agency Population County
Cost of Living
Adjustment
Bakersfield 413,381 Kern County 9.0%
Fresno 545,716 Fresno County 12.0%
Long Beach 449,468 Los Angeles County 0.12%
Oakland-
Strong Mayor 436,504 Alameda County -5.0%
Roseville 159,135 Placer County 3.0%
Sacramento
County 1,584,104 Sacramento County No change
San Francisco-
Strong Mayor 808,988 San Francisco County
-17.0%
San Jose 969,655 Santa Clara County -7.0%
Stockton 319,543 San Joaquin County 8.0%
State of CA 39.5 M No change
5 • Transparent pay: I did not utilize this resource. Represented as California’s largest public pay and pension database. Transparent California is provided by Nevada Policy as a public service. It is not known how the data is validated and by whom. They do not include value of all elements, including leave in their total comp calculations. Most recent data for is 2023.
The table below represents the three data sources. Although these sources can be used as a tool, those who use the data would need to make sure they understand each total compensation element. As you can see below the average changes from one data source to another.
Variations due to one or more of the following:
▪ Most recent data is from 2023
▪ Reporting & Collecting variables
▪ Inconsistent “total comp” elements
▪ Turnover, and/or difference in negotiated terms.
Methodology
The data for the incumbent position and comparable agencies were collected. As part of the analysis, I researched employment agreements, annual actual salary, salary ranges (if Position Agency Public Pay
Transparent
Pay Actuals
City Attorney Bakersfield 226,867 349,725 325,543 City Attorney Fresno 240,963 280,513 420,953
City Attorney Long Beach 401,165 468,541 487,310 City Attorney Oakland 280,944 417,713 423,211
City Attorney Roseville 291,266 426,309 453,145 County Counsel Sacramento
County 401,165 461,212 471,443
City Attorney San Francisco-
Strong Mayor No data 373,620 313,116
City Attorney San Jose No data No data 489,767
City Attorney Stockton No data 381,583 465,547
Average 307,062 394,902 427,782
City Attorney Sacramento 336,370 452,736 523,593 Variance 8.71% 12.77% 18.30%
6 applicable) and other related executive incentives or perks for those comparable agency positions. Most of the salary data was current as of April 2025. This data was translated into several tables for a visual representation throughout this memo. Additionally, these data points reflect a point in time obtained of April 2025. Unless validated by the comparable agency, the data was NOT aged to represent any projections or increases that are yet to occur in 2025.
Total Compensation Common Elements
Although the following elements are typically included in total compensation, it does not prohibit the agency from adding or excluding other unique or lesser-known perks negotiated by the candidate upon hire.
The common elements or total compensation included are:
• Base Salary
• Additional contribution and/or match to a 401 (or similar): Typically, a % of annual salary or lump sum amount.
• Performance/merit-based annual bonus or lump sum payment. • Car, phone allowances: Use of a vehicle, or a monthly allowance. Other perks can include an annual allowance to cover additional expenses, or less commonly longevity pay.
• Value of Health, Dental and Vision Benefits (Employer Paid) • Leave: Value of Vacation, SL or PTO Accruals
• Upon hire: Relocation or other hiring “bonus”
• Severance: Although not typically quantified for total compensation purposes, it can influence the candidate’s decision to apply as well as having significant impact on the budget upon separation.
Salary and Total Compensation Analysis
When comparing the analysis, to simplify and account for variances in negotiating terms of an employment agreement, I broke the visual table out by salary only and by total compensation.
Both were adjusted based on cost of living. As reflected in the table below, based on the current actual salaries only, the City Attorney salary is ahead 10.63% above the market average for salary only and 18.30% as compared to total compensation.
7 Total Compensation
Position Agency Population County Adjusted Salary
City Attorney Bakersfield 413,381 Kern County 240,808 City Attorney Fresno 545,716 Fresno County 319,200 City Attorney Long Beach 449,468 Los Angeles
County 366,886
City Attorney Oakland-Strong
Mayor 436,504 Alameda
County 289,670
City Attorney Roseville 159,135 Placer County 322,452 County Counsel Sacramento
County 1,584,104 Sacramento
County 325,320
City Attorney San Francisco-
Strong Mayor 808,988 San Francisco
County 262,909
City Attorney San Jose 969,655 Santa Clara
County 352,879
City Attorney Stockton 319,543 San Joaquin
County 343,598
no strong match State of CA 39.5 M
Average 313,747
City Attorney Sacramento 526,384 Sacramento
County 351,048
Variance 10.63%
Position Agency Population County
COL Adjusted
Total
Compensation
City Attorney Bakersfield 413,381 Kern County 325,543
City Attorney Fresno 545,716 Fresno County 420,953
City Attorney Long Beach 449,468 Los Angeles
County 487,310
City Attorney Oakland-Strong
Mayor 436,504 Alameda
County 423,211
City Attorney Roseville 159,135 Placer County 453,145
County Counsel Sacramento
County 1,584,104 Sacramento
County 471,443
City Attorney San Francisco-
Strong Mayor 808,988 San Francisco
County 313,116
City Attorney San Jose 969,655 Santa Clara
County 489,767
City Attorney Stockton 319,543 San Joaquin
County 465,547
no strong State of CA 39.5 M
Average 427,782
City Attorney Sacramento 526,384 Sacramento
County 523,593
Variance 18.30%
8 Ranges
Salary ranges are typically the most recent and visible data reflected on agency websites or listed in job announcements. Range placement and range movement can vary based on the agencies range structure, pay philosophy, internal equity, compression and budget. Obtaining pay philosophy for comparable agencies was outside the scope of this analysis. Only 1 of the 9 comparator agencies have ranges, which is not uncommon. Based on that information, it is difficult to compare the minimum however when comparing the max ranges, the City of Sacramento is above the market average at 20.27%.
Conclusion
Based on the recent analysis, the City Attorney salary is 10.63% above market in salary only and
18.30% above the market for total compensation. No market-driven changes are recommended at this time.