CEO: Goodbye or good riddance?
If one were to know absolutely nothing about the tenure of soonto-depart Mendocino County CEO Carmel Angelo, I would tell them to invest the eight minutes it takes to read Mark Scaramella's piece, “The CEO'S Record Of Mismanagement,” and John Sakowicz's letter-to-the-editor setting out a chronology of non-existent oversight of CEO acts of commission and omission.
I'd also ask people to spend the two minutes it takes reading my comments concluding this column, and by then you're sure to be an expert on the topic.
The County Executive Officer is an appointed position that is supposed to be subordinate to the Board of Supervisors since they are the ones responsible for hiring the person to serve in the post. However, in Ms Angelo's 12 years on the job, it appeared to many that she had flipped the script, and she became the tail that is wagging the dog.
Here are highlights from Scaramella's recent column, “The CEO'S Record Of Mismanagement” appearing in the Anderson Valley Advertiser.
“Contrary to CEO Carmel Angelo's claims that criticism of her lushly-compensated performance as Mendocino County CEO for twelve long years had something to do with her gender or management style, our indictment against the outgoing CEO had only to do with managerial shortcomings.
“Our main indictment is her failure to properly report on County operations, both budgets and projects. Without proper reporting — which no one in authority has ever really demanded of her — the checks and balances, the course corrections, the avoidance of problems, the focus on service delivery that normally would obtain in a properly managed operation are impossible, consequently Mendocino County has become bogged down by its own inertia.
“Our other indictments include personnel mismanagement leading to unnecessary staff turnover, departures and liabilities, lying to and undermining the Sheriff thereby jeopardizing public safety, continuing to keep control of the Board agenda when there was no need, and mostly ignoring board directives.
“CEO Angelo has shown an untoward preference for friends like the Schraeders who receive contract after contract without competitive bidding, doling out large sums of public money to them on the consent calendar with no attempt to develop or consider better or more cost-effective alternatives for parts of that huge contract (upwards of 20 million a year). The CEO has made a number of dubious senior Executive Office hires with no open recruitment or input from the Board of Supervisors.
“She has steadfastly refused to stop putting retroactive contracts and pay raises on the consent agenda despite regular requests from the Board to the contrary.
“CEO Angelo was good at maintaining and expanding her empire, keeping the Supervisors and the public at a distance, and was much more effective than her predecessor at convincing the Board that things were being effectively managed when they were not.
“We were not the only ones pointing out these shortcomings. In 2019 the Grand Jury weighed in on many of these same complaints. CEO Angelo simply brushed the Grand Jury's findings aside like she has the Supervisors.
“The Grand Jury also found that: “The CEO Report does not include substantive department updates, e.g. new jail addition, Sheriff overtime, BOS directive status, departmental statistics and major road project status.”
“The CEO simply disagreed, declaring that her CEO report was fine as is.
“And our personal favorite. When we asked a few basic questions about departmental budget variances in one of the CEO report's, CEO Angelo replied that “The very nature of your questions is the reason the County budget team has been hesitant to present a `budget to actual'.”
“Translation: Don't ask any questions, and if you do, we'll clam up.”
In his letter-to-the-editor this week, Ukiah resident John Sakowicz melds the Kathy Wylie “hate speech” controversy with alleged Grand Jury avoidance of numerous acts of commission or omission by Angelo.
“Regarding Jim Shields' article about how Grand Jury foreman Kathy Wylie calls any criticism of outgoing County CEO Carmel Angelo, `hate speech'…i always thought Wylie was in Angelo's pocket.
“Look at the public record. Wylie always steered grand jury investigations away from Angelo. Nary a single critical grand jury report … on the CEO office and the CEO'S years of bullying the Board of Supervisors, the Sheriff, and county department heads.
“Nary a single critical grand jury report on the county's mythical financial reserve. The socalled “reserve” was built on the backs of workers who suffered high vacancy rates in their departments. It was built on deferred maintenance of buildings. It was built on a ballooning unfunded county pension liability.
“Nary a single grand jury report on how Angelo privatized mental health services and made Camille Schraeder and her friends at Redwood Community Services rich with no accountability.
“Nary a single report on how Angelo consolidated power at the CEO Office…bringing auditor and treasurer functions, budget, emergency services, risk management, IT, and general services into the CEO'S Office along with the existing human resources and county counsel.
“Nary a single critical report on how Angelo “disappeared” numerous county employees, including department heads, resulting in numerous expensive wrongful termination lawsuits.”
***
One interesting aspect of the CEO'S tenure is that the general public probably is more aware of the name and activities of a bureaucrat holding an administrative position than they are of the five elected supervisors who are the CEO'S boss and empowered with final decision authority basically in all matters.
More importantly, a majority of citizens believe the CEO is the real decision-maker in county government. And no, the media has not brainwashed people into reaching that conclusion. Too many folks have expressed that opinion to me while relating a personal experience(s) regarding to actions taken at BOS meetings over the years.
Angelo also generates unvarnished high praise from some of the most popular and respected elected officials in this county.
Two that come immediately to mind are former Sheriff Tom Allman and former Supervisor John Pinches, but there are others for sure.
When Alllman announced his retirement a few years ago, he went out of his way to single out CEO Angelo for praise and her stellar job performance.
In a December 2019 story, the UDJ reported, “Allman's time as sheriff spans three boards of supervisors and three county CEOS. Allman gives current county CEO Carmel Angelo an A-plus rating. `Carmel is a workhorse. If not for her our reserve would not be where it is. She does her job and does it real well,' Allman said, adding that he either met with or talked to Angelo every single Monday, a communication that helped him keep his department funded and working. He noted that the Hart family investigation cost his department some $40,000 which he didn't have but which Angelo found for him to continue the work. `I can't name a situation where we haven't done something because of (a lack of) money,' he said.”
Pinches, who served on the BOS for a dozen years, told me that Angelo's hiring was the “best thing to ever happen in Mendocino County” because of her unmatched skills as an administrator and budgeteer.
Pinches, who made his reputation mastering the intricacies of budget deep-diving, explained that most of his colleagues on the Board over the years “didn't understand and didn't seem to care much about the budget process. But with Carmel for the first time I had somebody I could work with and make some headway on improving this county's finances. And keep in mind how the County was close to going over the cliff before she arrived.”
During the 2018 3rd District Supervisors campaign, Pinches was quick to defend the CEO during debates when she came under fire from attendees.
“Carmel Angelo has done more than anybody who was ever been in that position before to put this County on solid ground. She knows the ins and outs of the budget process and does a really good job of managing everything she's responsible for. People who say she doesn't, don't know what they're talking about or just don't like her for other reasons.”
So there you have it. You might call it a tale of two CEOS.
Take your pick.