|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A former employee said he repeatedly warned Pleasanton City Manager Gerry Beaudin and others about illegal, unsafe or negligent practices involving Pleasanton’s utilities systems – including one issue that resulted in another current lawsuit against the city.
But, Dan Repp claims instead of heeding the warnings, Beaudin fired him.
Repp alleges Beaudin terminated him, not for swearing in the workplace as was the initial reason Beaudin gave Repp, but because Beaudin wanted to silence a whistleblower to “cover up incompetence”.
According to Repp’s lawsuit, which was filed on Nov. 17, 2023, Repp claims Beaudin resented Repp reporting serious issues with Pleasanton’s water and sewer systems to Beaudin, other employees and outside agencies between mid-2022 and early 2023.
The document reads, “(Repp’s) performance of his job, with the assistance of his staff, uncovered illegal, unauthorized and unlicensed conditions that the City Manager and other interested employees and agents did not want made public and did not want to deal with.”
The Whistleblower Protection Act protects employees against retaliation for reporting suspected violations of state or federal laws, or local, state or federal rules and regulations. Violation of the WPA is one of Repp’s six legal claims; others include retaliation for disclosing working conditions, age discrimination, wrongful termination and emotional distress.
In an April 2024 response to the lawsuit, the city stated, that it “denies, generally and specifically, each and every allegation contained in the complaint, and further denies that (Repp) has been damaged … in any other amount, or at all, by reason of any act or omission on the part of the city, or by any act or omission by any agent or employee of the city.”
Repp was hired as the managing director of utilities and environmental services for Pleasanton on June 29, 2020 – under prior city manager Nelson Fialho’s administration.
In June 2021, Repp was given a 5% salary increase. In August 2022, Repp received a “exceeds expectations” on his performance review and earned a 6% salary increase.
Repp’s claim is that because he was vocal about fixing issues that had been done either without authorization or illegally, Beaudin silenced him.
One example of problems surfaced by Repp was when he and his team identified underpayment to the city’s water wholesaler, Zone 7 Water Agency. The city installed water meters that allowed increased water delivery on new and existing residential and commercial properties starting in 2015. The city’s water wholesaler, Zone 7, was not informed of the change or the increase in water supplied at that time.
Repp and his team identified the problem in 2022, developed a new fee structure, and informed the city and Zone 7. Zone 7 filed a claim with the city – which must be filed before a lawsuit – in November 2022 to recoup the estimated $18.5 million-plus it is owed for underpayment of water delivered between 2015 and 2022.
Repp contends the Zone 7 filing the claim angered Beaudin and the staff was told to stop cooperating with Zone 7.
The issue with Zone 7 calls into question how much Beaudin knew – or didn’t know – about the meter installations because, prior to being named city manager in May 2022, Beaudin was Pleasanton’s director of community development between July 2015 and August 2019.
In April, Beaudin was asked during a deposition if he, as community development director, was responsible for billing clients in accordance with the new meters.
Beaudin testified, “You’ll note that the responsibility for setting the fee is with Zone 7, and so we collected the fees that Zone 7 asked us to collect in community development. So the buck does stop with me and I was collecting the fees that Zone 7 authorized at the board level.”
The city is now involved in a lawsuit with Zone 7. In addition to the $18.5 million-plus in fees allegedly owed for underpayment between 2015 and 2022, Zone 7 is asking for interest and its legal fees to be paid by Pleasanton, if the agency is successful in its lawsuit. A hearing is set for July 22; a jury trial is set for Aug. 25.
Other issues uncovered by Repp in the roughly nine-month period between his “exceeds expectations” review and when he was placed on leave include an independent audit that showed deficiencies in the sewer maintenance program, an illegal stormwater connection at the Alameda County Fairgrounds and a report showing Pleasanton’s inability to meet future water needs, according to his lawsuit.
In 2022, Repp’s staff identified an illegal stormwater drainage connection to the sewer system at the fairgrounds in Pleasanton. The connection was reportedly not documented or authorized by the wastewater authority, Dublin San Ramon Services District.
Potential problems connecting stormwater drainage to the sewer system include overload, in which too much wastewater reaches sewage treatment plants, disabling the plants; backups during severe storms, which can cause wastewater and raw sewage to back up into buildings and homes; and wastewater runoff into nearby bodies of water during heavy rain.
Approximately a month before Repp was suspended, he advised the fairgrounds’ property owner, Alameda County, that Pleasanton and the county would need to correct the issue. Alameda County notified fairgrounds CEO Jerome Hoban.
According to the lawsuit, Hoban met with Beaudin and city engineer Steve Kirkpatrick to express his displeasure that the county was informed of the illegal connection. Repp’s direct supervisor, Tamara Baptista, also heard from Beaudin and Kirkpatrick, who were described as “irritated”.
Also in 2022, under Repp’s direction, an independent audit found that the city’s water and wastewater utility enterprises are “not capable of performing basic system maintenance because it lacks a management system to oversee maintenance of water and utilities. As a result, customers are paying for services they do not receive because (Pleasanton) lacks (the) method, plan, equipment and knowledge to run the sewer maintenance program it charges for.”
Pleasanton’s sewer maintenance program was severely deficient and, according to the audit, possibly the worst the auditor had ever seen in California. The audit found that, among other issues, 97% of gravity sewer lines had likely never been cleaned; there was no functioning inspection program; and the city lacked basic management systems and trained staff.
Repp claims he repeatedly informed Beaudin and senior city staff about the results of the audit, but was met with indifference.
In early 2023, Repp attempted once more to draw Beaudin’s attention to serious deficiencies in Pleasanton’s utility management. Repp proposed a set of policies be adopted by the Pleasanton City Council to ensure accountability of city staff, including Beaudin.
Beaudin rejected the idea of council involvement and insisted the problems with utility management should be handled internally by his office. Repp interpreted this as resistance to addressing the utility system’s defects. Their final discussion on the topic occurred just weeks before Repp was placed on administrative leave, according to Repp’s lawsuit.
In March 2023, Repp authored a council staff report showing that Pleasanton’s water system could not meet future demand without upgrades.
According to Repp, “the report was used by members of the public to harshly criticize the city and the way it manages the water utility” which “apparently irritated the City Manager.”
The agenda item was continued; the staff report was pulled from the City Council agenda and rewritten.
Also during this timeframe, Repp identified two proposed housing developments that would strain Pleasanton’s existing water storage capacity. He determined that new water storage infrastructure would be needed, and the fee would be approximately $500,000.
After informing a developer of the estimated cost, the developer’s attorneys expressed concern and indicated they would contact Beaudin.
In mid-March 2023, Repp was placed on administrative leave following a complaint by a female city employee claiming Repp “created an abusive and hostile work environment by demonstrating a lack of tolerance for dissent, yelling and screaming at employees, making gestures of anger, swearing in an angry manner … and devaluing the complainant’s position.”
The city hired Karen Kramer of Kramer Investigations to investigate the complaint, a process that took more than three months to complete at an unknown cost.
Kramer interviewed the complainant, Repp, his supervisors and direct reports and concluded Repp had not engaged in bullying or harassment, nor had he created a hostile work environment as defined by city’s policy.
The only allegation Kramer sustained was that Repp swore in the workplace, which Repp confirmed during his interview. Repp and other witnesses, including Beaudin and the employee who filed the complaint against Repp, told Kramer that swearing was commonplace.
Beaudin, however, terminated Repp on June 30, 2023, with an email that read, “This decision is based on among other things, the memorandum dated June 30, 2023, where the City determined that your use of profanity in the workplace toward a city employee was unprofessional and does not meet the expectations for your position as a Managing Director of Utilities & Environmental Services.”
At issue is the city’s use of progressive discipline, which is “the use of a structured corrective action process to address employee behavior and performance issues” with at-will employees. Progressive discipline typically includes warnings and performance improvement plans (PIPs).
The attorneys for the city – from the San Francisco law firm Burke, Williams and Sorensen – contend Pleasanton does not have a progressive discipline policy or a practice of using progressive discipline with at-will employees.
However, according to witnesses deposed by Repp’s attorney, Judith Wolff, the city “generally does not just fire employees” but has a policy of implementing progressive discipline. One former employee stated he used progressive discipline with an at-will employee by establishing a PIP for the employee with assistance from the city’s human resources staff.
Repp said he was not given a written warning and a PIP was not offered to him at any time prior to his termination.
During her September 2024 deposition, Pamela Ott, assistant city manager at the time, said she discussed possible actions other than termination with Beaudin, including progressive discipline.
Ott testified, “As best I recall, I said … the options would range from counseling, the performance improvement plan, any other action that would have been appropriately taken as directed by our HR policies up to and including termination, and we would have talked through those.”
Baptista, Repp’s supervisor, testified that she gave Repp a verbal warning but failed to document the conversation. Baptista also stated that she sought advice from Beaudin, Ott and the former director of human resources and labor relations Veronica Thomas, and agreed to prepare a performance improvement plan for Repp, which she never completed.
While Ott didn’t recall if she had suggested implementing progressive discipline with Repp, she did say in her deposition that Beaudin terminating Repp was “a pretty significant step”, adding later that termination was one of the options available to Beaudin.
While the cost to the city if the plaintiff prevails is unknown, the complaint filed in September 2023 sought lost earnings (including salary increases and benefits) for five years – approximately $1.4 million – and $250,000 for emotional distress. Repp’s attorney’s fees will also be sought.
When the complaint became a lawsuit, though, damages and other costs became unlimited.
When asked for a statement, Pleasanton’s communications manager Heather Tiernan, responded, “The city cannot comment on pending litigation.”
A jury trial is set for Nov. 3.
'The first leader of the Falcons': Remembering Foothill High founding principal SweeneyDecember 19, 2025 5:22 pm
City Manager Beaudin should be fired for this—but thanks to the last City Council majority (former Mayor Karla Brown, former Councilmember Valerie Arkin, and current Councilmembers Julie Testa and Jeff Nibert), if fired he’s entitled to nearly $500,000 in severance pay unless he’s convicted of a felony. That’s outrageous.
And here’s his own testimony (see article): “The buck does stop with me.” Yet somehow, Zone 7 was expected to know water meters had been replaced—without ever being told? That’s either gross negligence or willful misconduct.
$18 million is zone 7’s lawsuit. Let that sink in.
No wonder Beaudin was pushing so hard for a new tax. Now the public knows why.
If the City loses either lawsuit is there insurance to cover the settlement or are we the taxpayers on the hook for it? If the City loses and insurance doesn’t cover it, CM Beaudin should take a paycut to help contribute since he created the Repp mess at a minimum!
Why is this story being recycled if there is nothing new to report? Especially by someone so high up in the Embarcadero organization. Seems odd.
This article was informative.
I appreciate the manner in which the writer compiled information.
If I were to visit City Hall, I would expect to run into barricades.
The city administration is locked down like an armed camp.
People like me are not welcome when asking for information.
There was a time I could ask a question of anyone in the city workforce and get an answer.
That is not the situation today.
RE: City Insurance:
For fiscal year 24/25, the city’s total contribution to its risk pool was $3,416,843, which covers general liability, property, auto physical damage, crime, employment practices, cyber liability, and a risk management fund contribution.
Of this total, the liability-related coverage components amount to approximately $2,558,792, broken down as follows.
General Liability: $2,171,9173
Crime: $15,526..
Employment practices liability: $244,014.
Cyber liability: $127,339.
For fiscal year 25/26, the city has budgeted approximately $3.76 million