Irvine City Council convened a special meeting May 26, 2025, to hold a closed-session performance evaluation of City Manager Oliver Chi after public comment noted an external job offer; the council returned from closed session at 1:55 p.m. and the city attorney reported there was no reportable action.

The closed session was called under California Government Code section 54957, the council was told, which allows public agencies to meet privately to evaluate a public employee’s performance. City Attorney (unnamed in the meeting transcript) described the closed-session item as a public employee performance evaluation and identified the position under review as the city manager.

Public comment before the closed session included both praise for Chi’s work and criticism of his transparency. Doug Elliott, identified in the transcript as a Community Services Commissioner speaking for himself, congratulated Chi on an offer he said came from the City of Santa Monica and described Chi’s decision as an understandable career move. “I’m Doug Elliott, Community Services Commissioner, speaking only for myself,” Elliott said. He cited what he described as a Santa Monica base salary of $410,000 and said, “by my calculation” benefits would raise that to about $582,000 and that his “best guess” was the total package was “probably worth over $700,000.”

Several commenters urged the council not to move quickly on any employment agreement to retain Chi. A woman identified only as Mona said the manager had cost the city millions and accused him of lacking transparency, including alleging she had seen “evidence” of a deal that would have offered a $300,000 city job contingent on a person winning a council seat. In the meeting transcript she said, “We know the 1 deal that we lost a million dollar on,” and that she had seen evidence of a conditional job promise. The comments were presented as allegations by Mona and were not accompanied in the meeting by documentary evidence presented on the public record.

Jeremy Figueroa, identifying himself as an Irvine resident, echoed both praise and concern: he commended the manager’s role in stopping a Live Nation deal and said Chi is “action oriented,” but added he was “very nervous” about some contracts and transparency around them and cautioned against a retention offer that would match or exceed the reported Santa Monica package.

Michelle Johnson, identifying herself as an Irvine resident in District 1, urged the council to “take no action on the proposed employment agreement for the city manager” and asked the council to plan for an interim manager. She suggested Pete Carmichael as a potential interim city manager, saying he has a “proven track record of honesty, integrity, [and] transparency” and could provide “a seamless transition.”

Leslie (no last name given) thanked Chi for his work on local issues including a landfill matter and the All American Asphalt issue and said residents hope the council will provide greater opportunity for resident input on future agreements.

The council recessed into closed session shortly after public comment. The meeting minutes record the dais leaving at 12:18 p.m.; the council returned at about 1:55 p.m. When the council reconvened, the city attorney said, “there’s been no reportable action this afternoon.” The council then approved a motion to adjourn by roll call vote; the transcript records the roll call as yes votes from Council Member Goh, Council Member Liu, Council Member Martinez Franco, Council Member Trecedor, Vice Mayor Mai and the Mayor (as read aloud at roll call). The motion closed the special meeting.

No personnel action, hiring decision, or employment contract was announced or placed on the public record at the meeting. The closed session was limited to the city-manager performance evaluation identified by the city attorney under Government Code section 54957 and to the Brown Act’s closed-session allowance for such evaluations; the city attorney reported no reportable action at the session’s end.