Hillis' Performance Doesn't Merit an Encore
Kerry Hillis's year as mayor has revealed a troubling pattern of self-promotion, questionable judgment, and disregard for the collaborative nature of local government. His conduct raises concerns that extend well beyond his suitability to serve as mayor. It calls into question whether he should continue serving on the Town Council at all.
Turning a ceremonial mayoralty into a strong-mayor role. Moraga has five Town Council members, not one. Its mayor is selected annually by fellow councilmembers, not independently elected to govern the Town. The mayor presides over meetings and represents the community, but does not possess the executive authority of a strong mayor.
Yet Hillis has increasingly conducted himself as though the mayor's title confers an independent mandate to set priorities, advance initiatives, and speak for the Council without first seeking its direction or authorization.
That disregard for established governance roles is troubling enough. So are the broader questions about honesty, judgment, accountability, respect for others, and a willingness to work collaboratively in the community's interests.
Consider the record.
Treating the mayoralty as an executive mandate. At his first Council meeting as mayor, Hillis publicly criticized the owners of Moraga Center, likened the property to a “West Virginia hellscape,” and declared that its condition “will not be allowed to continue by this council.” The Council had never discussed, deliberated on, or adopted that position. His remarks came despite his acknowledgment of the Town Manager's years of efforts to engage the property owners and rebuild a productive relationship.
Conflating personal initiatives with Town policy. Hillis has repeatedly acted as though his personal policy preferences carry the authority of the Town itself. His promotion of autonomous transportation initiatives prompted Town Manager Scott Mitnick to issue a written clarification confirming that the Council had neither discussed nor authorized them. Meanwhile, Hillis frequently uses social media to advance policy positions without consistently distinguishing personal advocacy from official Town policy. This is not merely a question of etiquette. Moraga's adopted Council protocols expressly require councilmembers to distinguish their individual positions from those authorized by the Council, and specifically discourage substantive social media advocacy on matters that may come before it. The protocols recognize precisely the confusion that Hillis's communications can create.
Declaring his own downtown. At his first Council meeting as mayor, Hillis also asserted that Rheem was already Moraga's downtown, notwithstanding the adopted General Plan's vision for Moraga Center and the Town's longstanding planning efforts focused on that area. He repeated the assertion two weeks later. Whether Moraga should reconsider its downtown development priorities is a legitimate subject for public discussion and Council deliberation. A mayor's personal declaration does not substitute for either.
Claiming credit and overstating accomplishments. Hillis has portrayed himself as responsible for initiatives involving years of work by others, including the Moraga Way evacuation study. He has also presented ideas and programs as his own despite their having been documented or pursued before he joined the Council. The accuracy of an elected official's account of public accomplishments matters, particularly when those claims form part of a reelection campaign.
Invoking unverifiable public consensus. Hillis frequently refers to the many residents who supposedly contact him or the overwhelming percentages who agree with his positions. Such assertions are not merely conversational flourishes when used to support policy proposals. They can create the appearance of a community mandate without representative evidence that one exists. Anecdotal feedback and unverified percentages are not substitutes for meaningful public engagement.
Mixing personal politics with official business. Hillis has repeatedly used Council proceedings to announce or discuss his personal endorsements of ballot measures, including Connect Bay Area (now Measure RTM) and a school parcel tax. Some remarks occurred during official councilmember reports, others during presentations on Town business. Even when identified as personal endorsements, they were delivered from the dais during official government meetings. The Town's Council protocols describe councilmember reports as a forum for official activities and matters of significant community interest. Hillis's recurring use of official proceedings to promote personal political positions raises questions about his respect for the distinction between individual political advocacy and the mayor's official responsibilities.
Outside political support and local accountability. Hillis has emphasized endorsements from individuals and organizations outside Moraga, including partisan political organizations and labor unions such as IBEW Local 302. In announcing the union's endorsement, he stated that workers who build and maintain infrastructure deserve a voice in conversations about Moraga's future. The prominent role of partisan and outside organizational endorsements in a nonpartisan Town Council election raises questions about the increasing politicization of local government. Outside endorsements and lawful campaign contributions do not themselves demonstrate improper influence, but their sources and accompanying statements are relevant to public scrutiny.
The treatment of longtime public servants. In January, Hillis publicly attributed Moraga's diminished bus service to decisions made during former mayor Al Dessayer's tenure in regional transportation governance. Dessayer, who had devoted decades to Moraga public service, died on February 25. According to accounts relayed to SMARTMoraga, former transportation board colleagues who served with Dessayer strongly disputed Hillis's characterization, describing his efforts instead as focused on preserving Moraga's bus service. When challenged, Hillis initially responded, "I stand by everything that I said." Two weeks later, he apologized for any offense caused but did not expressly retract the underlying account. The episode raises questions about factual care and the respect owed to those who have devoted decades to serving the community.
These concerns are not simply disagreements about development, transportation, taxation, or other policy choices. They concern how public officials exercise authority, represent facts, treat others, and respect the institutions they serve.
Moraga needs councilmembers who listen, collaborate, respect the Council–Manager form of government, accurately represent facts and accomplishments, and recognize that public service is not principally an exercise in personal promotion.
We recognize that elected service is demanding. We also recognize that criticism of an incumbent's conduct should be grounded in more than disagreements over policy or personality. SMARTMoraga has historically been reluctant to recommend voting against a candidate, and we do not make this judgment lightly.
But there comes a point when the accumulation of concerns about judgment, credibility, accountability, and respect for established governance processes cannot be dismissed as isolated incidents.
We believe Kerry Hillis has reached that point.
SMARTMoraga recommends that Moraga voters NOT reelect Kerry Hillis to the Town Council.
Moraga deserves leadership that values collaboration over credit, substance over publicity, and public service over personal ambition.
