Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel And Workplace Conduct topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters urge investigation of hiring, promotions and workplace conduct at Ventura County APCD
Summary
Three remote and in-person speakers at the Ventura County Air Pollution Control Board meeting on June 10, 2025, told the board they believe county hiring and classification practices at the APCD are irregular and unfair and asked for audits and reviews; the board took no formal action during the hearing.
Three members of the public used the Ventura County Air Pollution Control Board’s June 10, 2025, meeting to urge the board to investigate hiring and promotion practices and alleged workplace misconduct at the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD).
The comments came during public comment and the budget public hearing. Maria Cruz, a speaker on Zoom, said she was “submitting this comment to bring attention to the board to what appear to be serious violations of the county hiring practices, composition policies, and principles of fairness, transparency within the fiscal and administration division.” She cited a Ventura County Star article published June 8, 2025, and described alleged practices including conversion of “extra help” workers to full-time employees without public postings or competitive recruitment and the internal creation of higher classifications and pay levels without oversight.
A second remote speaker identified only as Renee echoed concerns about bullying and alleged retaliation, saying a former employee developed medical issues related to alleged harassment and that prior complaints had not been acknowledged by the agency.
A third commenter, identified in the record as Jane F., addressed the board during the public hearing portion of the meeting and repeated several specific allegations: that a manager named Nancy Mendoza had engaged in harassment, surveillance and unlawful promotion of employees, and that the APCD’s executive officer and other managers had allowed policy violations. Jane F. said some employees had been elevated without passing required county examinations and cited county policy sections in the complaint (described in the record as “section 5031103 a, b and c, and articles 12”). She also wrote that some scientists had not received promotions and alleged an “unallowed amount” of $10,000,000 in recent budgets.
Speakers asked the board to review hiring, reclassification and compensation histories and to audit the creation and approval process for new or reclassified positions in the APCD’s fiscal and administration division. Maria Cruz asked that her identity be kept confidential to the extent allowed by law; Jane F. asked the board to acknowledge the complaints and to investigate before the situation escalated.
The public comments in the record are allegations; the board did not announce any investigation or take a formal vote on the allegations during the meeting. The board proceeded with other agenda items; the public hearing on the APCD’s proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget was closed and the budget adoption was scheduled for a future meeting.
The board’s next meeting on the budget was noted in the record as scheduled for June 24 (time noted in the record as 1:30 p.m.).
