Making a commitment that locks San Bernardino County and its taxpayers into an essentially unbreakable arrangement for the next twentieth of a century and beyond the guaranteed tenures of any of its current members, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors earlier this month extended County Chief Executive Officer Luther Snoke’s employment contract by more than five years, until 2031.
Snoke, who moved up from the position of county chief operating officer in 2023 to become chief executive officer following the forced departure of Leonard Hernandez as the county top staff member, has cemented a positive relationship with his political masters on the board of supervisors in a little over two years.
Third District Supervisor Dawn Rowe has been chairwoman of the board of supervisors since January 2023. She had been from the outset of her time as board chairwoman highly dependent upon Hernandez for guidance with regard to not just the day-to-day operations of the county but policy initiatives and the hallmarks of governance during her chairmanship that were to hopefully be her legacy as a major county politician. The San Bernardino County Charter confers upon the board of supervisors chairperson substantial authority by which the chairperson and the top county staff member, formerly referred to by the title county administrator and now known as the chief executive officer, are almost but not quire coregents of the county, though the full extent of that power is infrequently used.
As it would turn out, fate would bind Rowe and Hernandez together in a way that could not have been predicted ahead of time.
Already dependent on Hernandez, a major test of Rowe’s mettle and performance as a governmental leader came about less than two months into her term as chairwoman, with the
2023 San Bernardino Mountains Snow Disaster. which lasted 16 days from February 22 of that year until March 10. The communities of Crestline, Blue Jay, Lake Arrowhead, Cedar Glen, Sugarloaf, Big Bear, Big Bear Lake were buried in snow and the roads leading into the mountains closed down. Some 20,000 people were snowed in, buildings collapsed, people were isolated, with individuals and families cut off from food, medicine and fuel. There were power outages and at least 13 people died. For more than a week, governmental agencies, including the county sheriff’s department and the county fire department and local public safety agencies were unable to reach those in need. Given Rowe’s and Hernandez’s respective roles in leading the county, the brunt of blame or criticism was vectored their way. Their prospect of emerging from beneath that contretemps was partially based on each having the back of the other.
The following month, April 2023, the county would find itself tested once again when a team of Russian and Belarusian hackers successfully perpetrated a cyberattack that commandeered virtually all of the sheriff’s department’s data files and compromised the department’s ability to freely access the data bases shared by other state and national law enforcement agencies. Together, because it appeared their was no way one of the major agencies within their jurisdiction could be returned to complete functionality in any other way, Rowe and Hernandez signed off on what they and other county officials hoped would prove to be a “total and final” extortion payment to the Red Mafiya.
Rowe may or may not have known about a scandal involving Hernandez that was brewing below the surface and which a fair cross section of county employees knew about but were too intimidated by Hernandez, who had a ruthless side that had been enabled by Rowe and her predecessor as board chairperson, to speak openly about. Hernandez, shortly after assuming the role as the county’s chief executive officer, had promoted Pam Williams to the position of chief administrative officer, shortly after or shortly before involving himself in a personal relationship with her. This led to significant turmoil within the halls of county government, raising concerns about his influence and the integrity of his administration.
By the summer of 2023, there was a sufficient head of steam among the senior political and managerial echelons at the county to form the resolve to do something. Given Rowe’s dependence on Hernandez and her status as board chairman, removing Hernandez was a matter of tremendous sensitivity and required maneuvering that was both stealthy and delicate. While Hernandez was on vacation, maneuvering was undertake about which Rowe had no inkling, and when Hernandez physically returned to San Bernardino County resume as chief executive officer, he was met with a circumstance in which Snoke had usurped his position and had moved into his place. There followed an awkward two weeks while the leadership of the county hung in the balance, Hernandez was on the brink of going outside of official channels and unloading a whole host of information relating to untoward acts engaged in by the county generally and the board of supervisors over the years specifically. For nearly two weeks, the final outcome was not fully known. Ultimately, however, then-County Counsel Tom Bunton was able to negotiate a $650,000 payout/severance package with Hernandez to buy Hernandez’s silence and he went off quietly.
There were, nonetheless, hard feelings on Rowe’s part with regard to how she had been kept in the dark and the manipulations that had gone on behind her back which prevented her from preventing, Hernandez, whom she deemed key to her success as chairwoman, from being deposed as chief executive officer.
Snoke, who was at least passively if not actively involved in what had occurred, found his status as the at first interim and acting CEO complicated, as he had to coordinate closely with Rowe and ameliorate her resentment at the way in which Hernandez had been dry-gulched.
Snoke, possessed of inherent bureaucratic instincts and acquired governmental managerial infighting skills, was able to smooth over, or at least paper over, the potential rift he had with Rowe. Of note, despite some built-up momentum toward making purges of those within the county ranks who had advanced to high positions of authority under Hernandez perceived by some as being the undeserving beneficiaries of his now-discredited administration, Snoke resisted making any radical changes, keeping most of those in vaunted positions on the county’s organizational chart in place. He both actively and passively sought to tamp down upon the fomenting instability that accompanied Hernandez’s departure.
While some degree of discomfiture and low volume grumbling resulted among some mid-level county employees and line workers who had been or at least felt they were victimized by Hernandez’s “chosen minions,” county operations carried on with fewer hiccups and disruptions than might have otherwise been the case.
Snoke, as well, highly conscious of how Hernandez had utilized semi-sycophancy to ingratiate himself with Rowe, made an effort to reinvent himself as a substitute for his predecessor in making certain she was given every assistance practical to make her come across as diligent and competent in her role chairing the board of supervisors and leading the county.
Since September 2023, Snoke has sought, in the words of a well-placed individual within the county establishment to “take the rough edges off” the county’s operations. This entails, the Sentinel was told, making sure official county action that is taken is acceptable to, in descending order, the board of supervisors, other elected county officials, the “support network” those county officials have accumulated including campaign donors and county contractors who serve as vendors of goods and services to the county, public employee unions, public interest groups who have been politically active and county residents generally. He abhors criticism made of the county or any adverse publicity pertaining to the county, believing it to be damaging to employee morale. He has discouraged cooperation with any organs of public information dissemination which he perceives of being hostile or unfair to the county. This approach, he believes, has succeeded in improving the general perception of county government, those who man it and in particular the elected officials who head it. It appears that Rowe concurs.
On multiple occasions over the past year, the board of supervisors have conducted reviews of Snoke’s performance as the county chief executive officer. No report of the outcome of those reviews was provided publicly, in keeping with the general policy among governmental entities to consider issues pertaining to governmental personnel to be confidential. The decision to extend Snoke’s contract for a period of nearly five years and five months, effective November 1, 2025 through March 28, 2031, spoke louder than shouted words. Under the terms of the contract extension, Snoke is to receive total annual compensation of $659,017, consisting of a salary of $451,194 and benefits of $207,823.
As is naturally and typically the case, the relationship between the board of supervisors and its top governmental executive is at its best at the time of the employment contract being approved. Historically, however, there has, unsurprisingly, been a degree of regret and contretemps when the bonhomie ends and a majority or all of the board determines that it wants to part with the individual it has entrusted to overseeing county operations.
Since 1948, when the position of county administrative officer, the forerunner of county chief administrative officer was created, only 11 individuals have held the post, serving an average of 5 years and 5 months and one week. Tony Zenz was county administrative officers (CAO) for more than ten years, from 1948 to 1958. He was followed by Robert Covington, who served a record 17 years as CAO, from 1959 to 1976. Earl Goodwin succeeded Covington, remaining for a relatively short four years, from 1976 to 1980. Robert Rigney stayed as county administrative officer from 1980 until 1986 and would very likely have served far longer but for the health challenges that resulted in his leaving and his death the following year. Harry Mays succeeded Rigney, outlasting his predecessor’s six year tenure by two years, staying as the county’s top dog from 1986 until 1994. Mays and his successor, James Hlawek, who remained from 1994 to 1998, are credited, or blamed, for the succession of brief tenures of the CAOs who followed, an outgrowth of the disarray that ensued from Mays’ and Hlawek’s 1998 indictments and subsequent convictions on graft, bribery and political corruption charges. Hlawek’s successor, Carol Shearer, lasted a single year, from 1998 to 1999; William Randolph succeeded her, lasting from 1999 to 2001; John Michaelson filled the gap between 2001 and 2003 and Wally Hill succeeded him, remaining in place one year, from 2003 to 2004. Hill was succeeded by Mark Uffer, whose exodus in 2009 was followed by the ascendancy of Greg Devereaux. Devereaux, who served from 2010 to 2017 was replaced for a very brief interim by Dena Smith. She was supplanted by Garry McBride, who remained for just under three years, from 2017 until 2020, whereupon he was jettisoned in favor of Hernandez.
Prior to his hiring, Devereaux had been the city manager of Ontario for 12 years, and the city manager of Fontana for four immediately prior to that. He had been the president of the California Redevelopment Association. He had initially transitioned into San Bernardino County in 1991, when he was hired by then-Fontana City Manager Russ Carlsen to serve as Fontana’s redevelopment and housing manager. Previously, he had been the director of housing and community development with the City of Garden Grove. His employment in government had begun in 1982, when he was hired to oversee the cultural services department with the City of Long Beach, whereafter he was promoted to the position of that city’s director of parks and recreation. Prior to moving to California, he obtained a law degree from West Virginia University.
Whereas virtually everyone of his predecessors in the county top job was selected from among a pool of applicants for the post and faced or otherwise had to overcome some degree of competition to land the job, Devereaux was recruited into the position and had to be convinced to accept the responsibility, honor and status of being the county’s highest ranking staff member. One incentive offered to him was the added authority and prestige of the assignment he at last accepted. The title he was given was not “county administrative officer” but rather “county chief executive officer.” Moreover, he was granted a greater degree of autonomy and spending authority than had previously been the case. And he was also provided with a so-called “super bonus,” which consisted of a clause put into his contract which required that, unlike those who had previously held the position of county administrative officer, he could not be terminated by a simple 3-to-2 majority vote of the board of supervisors but only upon a vote of 4-to-1 or 5-to-0. Lastly, he was given a five-year guaranteed contract, with a five-year extension option, such that if he were terminated prior to his five-year anniversary with the county, he was to be paid the entire amount due him under the contract until the five years elapsed. When the contract was extended and renewed in 2015, he was offered the assurance that if he was terminated as county CEO, the county would continue to employ him for the duration of that five-year contract extension as a management consultant.
As scandal overtook Hlawek and the county in 1998, the members of the board of supervisors as it was then composed came to regret the commitment the board had made in contractually obligating the county to keep him in place as CAO. Uffer’s contract had not yet ended when the board in 2009 collectively decided it no longer wanted his services and undertook to bring Devereaux in as his successor. Subsequently, Uffer legally contested his involuntary termination and sued the county, whereupon he obtained a $650,000 settlement.
The county board of supervisors as it was then composed remained enthusiastic about Devereaux and his performance throughout the entire duration of his original five-year contract, so enthusiastic, in fact, that it triggered the five-year extension option in late 2014 to keep him as the county chief executive officer to 2020. In the November 2014 election, however, Curt Hagman was elected to the Fourth District supervisor’s post, replacing Gary Ovitt, the one-time Ontario Mayor who had employed Devereaux as Ontario city manager and who was instrumental in convincing his board colleagues in 2009 and 2010 to lure Devereaux to serve as the county’s chief executive officer. Hagman was a different breed of political animal, a strong personality whose approach was hampered by having an equally strong personality, such as Devereaux’s, in his functional orbit. Before the end of 2015, Hagman was casting about for a way to remove Devereaux as county CEO. That was a tall order, as the super bonus that Devereaux had wisely insisted upon was yet in effect, such that Hagman would need to secure not just two votes on the board in addition to his own to sack Devereaux but three others. The votes to remove Devereaux, whose talent for running a large organization with scores, indeed hundreds of simultaneously moving parts was undeniable, simply did not exist. Ultimately, however, Hagman was able to bring his domineering personality to bear and get his way by conveying to Devereaux that he would be able to leave as county CEO but remain in place until 2020 or beyond as a management consultant with the county and simultaneously function as a management consultant with as many other local governmental entities as could use his services, thereby making two, three or even four times as much money as he was making as county chief executive officer. Devereaux reinvented himself as an independent governmental management advisor and departed as county CEO.
Hagman had been so heavily focused on getting rid of Devereaux that he, and the rest of the board of supervisors, had ignored entirely the issue of who they would manage the county once he was gone. Somewhat embarrassingly, they elevated Dena Smith, who had previously been the clerk of the board of supervisors and had taken on an interim assignment temporarily overseeing the county’s land use services division, to the chief executive officer’s post. While Smith, by osmosis in her clerical role with the county over many years, had an understanding of the motions Devereaux and the county’s chief administrative officers before him went through and she had a superficial appreciation for the function of the county’s chief executive, she was not herself a true governmental executive manager. The board, particularly Hagman, following Devereaux’s departure had an interest in making a convincing case that the county remained in sound managerial hands, however, and maintained the fiction that Smith was every bit Devereaux’s managerial equal and that she was in for and up to the long haul. In doing that, the board made the misstep, most likely for appearances’ sake, of not changing the title conferred upon Smith back to county administrative officer. Moreover, in promoting Smith to county chief executive officer, instead of reverting the position’s level of authority to what it had been under Covington, Rigney, Mays and the others, the post retained the extended executorial reach that Devereaux demanded when he accepted the job. The reality was that those who then succeeded him – Smith, McBride, Hernandez and now Snoke – did not and do not have the consummate managerial skill extending to planning, organizing, directing and controlling as well as the depth of his across-the-board governmental and bureaucratic experience. All four, however, inherited the expanded authority the position was granted when Devereaux was put into the position.
Within six months of Smith taking on the county chief executive officer assignment her unsuitability for the job was apparent to everyone on the county’s organizational chart and a growing segment of the public. She left that fall, but the board of supervisors had not yet located a realistic replacement for Devereaux. With Smith’s departure, it did the best that could be done in-house, moving McBride, who had distinguished himself as the county’s chief financial officer, into the chief executive office suite.
Though McBride was a masterful numbers cruncher and completely at home in the world of finance and wielding budgets while sitting alone at a desk before a computer monitor perfecting spreadsheets, he had no stomach for being confrontational or making a pointed and personal display of authority. Insofar as planning went, he was up to snuff, but when it came to organizing, directing and controlling, he proved to be the anti-Devereaux, and in order to carry out the actual function of the county’s chief executive, the board turned to Hernandez, who had been the county librarian before he was promoted to county chief operating officer in one of Devereaux’s final significant acts as CEO. Despite having begun his public agency career as a mild-mannered warehouser of books, Hernandez possessed an assertive instinct – what some called a mean streak and some others said was a sadistic side – together with ambition. The board, Hagman in particular, was soon bypassing McBride to have Hernandez carry out its orders, including those ratified with a formally agendized vote by its members or ones made unilaterally by individual board members without being officially adopted as policy. In 2020, Hernandez was assigned to carry out either terminating or securing the resignation of his boss – McBride. With McBride out of the way, Hernandez was made county CEO. Over the next three years, the board essential surrendered to Hernandez, with the exception of occasional direction by Hagman, control of the county, providing him with the opportunity to firmly establish that his ambition far exceeded his actual skill and competence, resulting ultimately in his placement on surprise leave in August 2023, which was followed by his resignation when it became clear that there were four votes on the board to terminate him.
Over the years, the board of supervisors has essentially spurned suggestions that the county charter be adjusted to require that the employment contract of the county CEO be restricted to a duration of four years or a period no longer than the current terms of the supervisors then in office.
Despite the repeated experience of past boards of supervisors and the current one which were so enthusiastic about engaging the services of Hlawek, Uffer, Devereaux, Smith, McBride and Hernandez only to reappraise that commitment at a later date, the current board, consisting of Rowe, Hagman, Paul Cook, Joe Baca Jr and Jesse Armendarez, earlier this month felt sufficiently confident in Snoke to not only bind the county and themselves to him until March 2031, but saddle those future members of the board of supervisors who may succeed them with Snoke as well. Next year, 2026, the Second and Fourth District seats on the board, held by Hagman and Armendarez respectively, are up for election. In 2028, Cook, Rowe and Baca, who currently represent the county’s First, Third and Fifth Districts in that order, will need to stand for reelection to remain in office. Potentially, at least, by the time Snoke’s contract elapses, all of the current members of the board of supervisors might no longer be on that panel.