Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel And Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident tells Mendocino County supervisors to settle suit, says elected auditor-controller faces hostile work environment
Summary
At the June 4 Mendocino County Board of Supervisors meeting, a public commenter urged the board to apologize and settle with the county's elected auditor-controller-treasurer-tax collector, alleging a hostile work environment and criticizing administrative actions.
A resident addressing the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors on June 4 urged the board to apologize to and settle with the county's elected auditor-controller-treasurer-tax collector, saying recent actions by county management and the board have created a hostile work environment and strengthened the elected official's civil suit against the county.
The resident said the county's chief executive officer, Darcy Antle, preapproved a training for the auditor-controller just before the official returned to work and that board members did not reverse that decision when they learned of it. "This was an insulting welcome for Kubbison," the commenter said, adding that the auditor-controller had been "exonerated" and should have been welcomed back and given support.
The commenter also said Sarah Pierce, described in the remarks as a purchasing agent and acting assistant CEO who filled in for the auditor-controller during her absence, was allowed to determine how the two officials communicated. The speaker said the board president subsequently wrote the auditor-controller a letter implying she should leave if she could not perform and said those actions amounted to a setup and helped define a hostile work environment that strengthens the official's civil case. The commenter urged the board to "show some sense, show some remorse, and choose the right course. Apologize to her. Settle with her. Provide a healthy collaborative work environment for her and move on." The speaker said they drove three hours to deliver the remarks.
The comments were made during the public-expression portion of the supervisors' meeting and were not part of an agenda item. The board later adjourned to closed session; when it reconvened, the board reported "nothing to report." The board did not take any formal action on the matters discussed in public comment during the open meeting.
The claims in the public comment, including references to specific letters and internal decisions, were presented by the speaker as their account and interpretation of events; the board did not make any public findings or statements on the record during the open session that confirm or deny those assertions.
