South San Francisco has picked Laura Snideman, who resigned this summer as Calistoga’s city manager, to be its next city manager, with a contract up for City Council consideration next Wednesday. If approved, she’s slated to start on January 5, 2026. The move lands while a severance dispute from her Calistoga exit remains unresolved.
In a release from the City of South San Francisco, officials touted Snideman’s “strategic vision, operational excellence, and deep regional insight.” Mayor Eddie Flores called her “a dynamic and values-driven leader who understands the power of local government to transform lives.” Outgoing City Manager Sharon Ranals is set to stay through December to help onboard Snideman and keep the transition steady, according to the city.
Snideman’s selection arrives as questions linger over a potential severance package tied to her departure from Calistoga. The Napa Valley Register reported that documents indicate she was entitled to a package worth at least $292,000, which was negotiated before she began in Calistoga. The Register also reported that she signed a waiver of claims on Oct. 24 and then withdrew that waiver on Oct. 31.
How we got here
Snideman resigned in late August following a closed-session performance evaluation, according to the Calistoga Tribune. The paper noted department heads and members of the public spoke at the meeting; afterward, the city issued a joint statement thanking Snideman for her service and named Assistant City Manager Mitch Celaya as interim.
The hiring process
South San Francisco launched a recruitment after announcing Ranals’ planned December retirement and brought on executive search firm Peckham & McKenney to run it, the City of South San Francisco said. The firm recommended candidates in September, and the council members interviewed finalists in person on Oct. 1 and Oct. 2 before making their choice.
About that waiver
Federal rules under the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act, as interpreted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, require that any waiver of age-discrimination claims include a brief window to revoke after signing. EEOC guidance states that a valid waiver must include a seven-day revocation period following execution, a safeguard intended to ensure that any release of claims is made knowingly and voluntarily. That framework lines up with the timetable the Register reported for Snideman’s signed and then withdrawn waiver…