Shasta supervisors renew county counsel contract after tense public debate

Shasta County supervisors voted to renew the employment agreement for County Counsel Joseph Larmer on Aug. 12 after extensive public comment and board discussion. The motion passed 4-0 with Supervisor Long recording an abstention. The item had been removed from the consent calendar for separate discussion at Supervisor Long’s request.

The board’s discussion centered on whether to continue the practice of multi‑year, rolling appointments for the county counsel position. Monica Fugate, director of support services, explained the revised agreement would “restart the four‑year period” of the appointment while retaining an 18‑month cap on severance. She said some provisions from the original hiring agreement — including a one‑time sign‑on payment — had been eliminated.

Supervisor Long said he supported Larmer’s work but asked for a chance to review whether a rolling four‑year appointment matches industry practice and whether it constrains future boards’ flexibility. Long made a motion to delay the action to a later meeting so staff could provide precedent research; that motion failed for lack of a second. Supervisor Plummer then moved to approve the agreement and his motion was seconded and carried.

During public comment dozens of speakers addressed the item, with some calling for more transparency and others defending Larmer’s performance. Several commenters pointed to litigation and personnel controversies tied to the counsel’s office and urged the board to consider process and legal risk when renewing the contract. After the vote Larmer announced he would abstain from further public comment on the matter.

The board did not change other key elements of the counsel’s duties or statutory authorities. The record shows the action was deliberated in open session following a period of discussion and related closed‑session consultations; the board reported the open‑session vote as described above.