Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the City Manager Compensation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City council approves $115,000 salary for city manager after public criticism

City of Live Oak City Council · April 15, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City of Live Oak council voted 3–2 to set City Manager Mr. Sessions’s salary at $115,000 after public commenters disputed his performance; council members noted the change will require a budget amendment and did not identify funding sources at the meeting.

The City of Live Oak City Council approved a motion to raise City Manager Mr. Sessions’s salary to $115,000, a change council members said will require a formal budget amendment. A roll call vote recorded Offer yes, Owen yes, Brown no, Jefferson no and Campbell yes, and the motion passed 3–2.

The vote followed public comment sharply divided over the manager. A commenter identified in the record as Miss Williams urged the council not to approve a raise, asserting that the manager had “mismanaged almost a half million dollars” and questioning how that performance could earn a “highly effective” evaluation. “That money could have gone to do so much for this city,” she said. Another commenter, Virginia Smith, told the council it should treat the city manager and staff with respect: “You guys have got to work together. You’ve got to support your city manager as your city manager would support you too.”

Council members who moved and seconded the salary change were not named on the public record; council members acknowledged at the dais that identifying the funding source would require a budget amendment and that the change would be handled through the upcoming budget process. No specific line item or funding source was identified during the meeting.

The council’s action was a formal ordinance-level personnel decision only in that it amended the compensation of a city official; council members asked staff to identify the appropriate procedural steps and to bring any required budget amendment back for formal adoption. The council did not vote on a budget amendment at the meeting.

The item concluded with brief procedural direction: staff will identify where the funds would come from during the budget process and prepare necessary paperwork for a future council action.