UPDATE: Los Angeles County has just approved a $2 million settlement for its chief executive officer, Fesia Davenport, generating immediate backlash from local officials and residents. Supervisor Lindsey Horvath expressed her dissatisfaction with the decision, stating that this expenditure raises serious concerns about fiscal responsibility amidst ongoing budget challenges.
During a recent luncheon at the Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum, Horvath addressed questions regarding the settlement, which was kept secret until now. She indicated that the county faced “two bad options” regarding Davenport’s demands, emphasizing the need to maintain a functional government while also being mindful of taxpayer money.
Context: The controversial payout stems from the fallout of Measure G, a voter-approved initiative passed in November 2022 that will restructure the county’s executive leadership by transitioning to an elected position by 2028. Davenport claimed the measure caused her “reputational harm, embarrassment, and physical, emotional and mental distress,” warranting the hefty settlement.
Critics are already vocal about the situation. Morgan Miller, who campaigned for Measure G, is urging constituents to express their outrage. “Los Angeles County residents should be outraged,” she declared, highlighting the apparent misuse of public funds.
Horvath, who played a pivotal role in crafting Measure G, previously assured voters that the initiative would not incur additional costs. Despite her vote for the settlement, she criticized its lack of provisions to mitigate future litigation risks, stating, “We must focus on what is best for taxpayers and the integrity of our county government.”
In response to the settlement, fellow Supervisor Janice Hahn defended her vote, citing legal counsel’s advice. She maintained that throughout her efforts to implement Measure G, she never criticized the current CEO, hoping for a collaborative transition to the new elected role.
Davenport, who has been on medical leave since earlier this month, did not respond to requests for comment but has communicated plans to return early next year. This incident is not isolated; large payouts to county executives are not uncommon, though they typically occur during transitions out of their role. Recent severances include payments to other former officials, hinting at a pattern of significant financial settlements within the county.
Legal expert David Loy noted that under the Brown Act, the county must report settlement votes immediately if finalized. However, the lack of public disclosure raises questions about transparency and accountability in governance.
As this situation unfolds, residents of Los Angeles are left questioning the integrity of their local government and the management of taxpayer funds. The implications of this settlement could resonate well beyond the immediate financial impact, potentially influencing future governance and community trust.
Stay tuned for further updates as this developing story continues to attract attention.
