Taxpayer says LA County hid reason for $2M payout to its CEO

A taxpayer is challenging a $2 million payout to Los Angeles County's top executive, alleging the board of supervisors approved the payment in secret and in violation of California's open meetings laws after voters made her position elective.

The lawsuit claims that the "bridge compensation" payout to county Chief Executive Officer Fesia Davenport was approved in secret and covered up under a false pretense of being a legal settlement of her claims that the text of the ballot measure damaged her reputation.

The lawsuit quoted a December 2024 request to the county in which she allegedly said her concerns, which were brought into closed session under the confidential "potential litigation" category, were based not on a legal grievance but on "retirement planning."

"I also want to go on record stating that even though this request has been brought into closed session under the 'potential litigation' category, I have no intentions of litigating this matter," Davenport is quoted as saying in the request.

The complaint states, "This breakdown of governance was facilitated by a structural conflict of interest. The board relied on the legal advice of County Counsel Dawyn Harrison to approve this transaction. However, public records confirm that Ms. Harrison owes her appointment and salary to the claimant, Ms. Davenport. Consequently, the 'independent counsel' charged with protecting the public treasury was financially beholden to the official raiding it."

Alexander K. Robinson of Robinson Zermay LLP in Los Angeles filed the complaint Feb. 20 on behalf of plaintiff Ana Cristina Lee Escudero.

"The goal of the lawsuit is to ensure that the laws of California are being upheld, especially as it relates to the rights of the taxpayers to have their money transparently and judiciously spent for public purposes, not for private purposes, and to hold politicians responsible when they don't do that," Robinson said in a phone call on Monday.

"This appears to be a situation where those two prior objectives had not taken place, where rights of taxpayers weren't being protected and the politicians were not judiciously carrying out their duties to the taxpayer," he continued.

Responding Monday to inquiries sent to the county, outside counsel Mira Hashmall of Miller Barondess LLP in Los Angeles said, "This litigation and its assertion that this settlement was a gift of public funds is baseless, and the conflict-of-interest allegations are patently false.

"All settlements of this magnitude must be approved by the Board of Supervisors. County Counsel does not have that authority," she continued. 

 "There was no 'secret payment' as alleged in the lawsuit.  The Brown Act authorizes the Board to consider any claim that could pose the risk of litigation in closed session.  The County fully complied with its obligations under the Brown Act," Hashmall said.

The payment in question came after county supervisors introduced Measure G, which sought in part to transfer the chief executive position from an appointed post to an elected position. The supervisors voted to place the measure on the November ballot in 2024, and voters subsequently passed it.

According to the complaint, the measure's announcement prompted a string of contract modification requests from Davenport, who claimed that a targeted 2028 date for the switch would cut her tenure short by two years. Escudero v. County of Los Angeles et al., 26STCP00764 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed Feb. 20, 2026).

In the first of these requests, attached as an exhibit to the complaint, Davenport said the measure "impugns my reputation."

"There is an implicit correlation between the desired future state (i.e. a 'strong, elected executive') and the disfavored current state (i.e. presumably a weak appointed executive)," Davenport wrote.

The board approved the payout in July 2025, finalizing and issuing it in August, according to the lawsuit.

The complaint argues that the matter was improperly categorized as potential litigation in order to avoid disclosing the payment to the public, violating Brown Act requirements for open meetings.

Davenport has been on medical leave for undisclosed reasons since October 2025, with her office saying she is expected to return in early 2026. Joe Nicchitta, chief deputy CEO and chief operating officer, is serving as acting CEO in her absence, according to media reports.