Retirement Board Votes to Terminate Hackwood

The Orange County Retirement Board on Thursday fired former administrator Mary-Jean Hackwood, who was demoted a month ago after being accused of forcing employees to wrap her Christmas presents, wash her car and water her house plants.

The 6-3 vote to terminate Hackwood from her $97,760-a-year job came after a closed session of the board that lasted nearly three hours.

Hackwood, who previously has denied the allegations through her attorney, did not attend the meeting. She could not be reached for comment Thursday. Her attorney, Cameron Smith, did not return a call for comment.

“We believe . . . she was terminated with cause,” said board member Mary Abbott, who consistently sought Hackwood’s removal. “This action terminates her as of today.”

The controversy surrounding Hackwood’s actions developed after several employees secretly met with some board members and complained that Hackwood frequently abused her position as head of the $3-billion retirement system for county employees.

Late last year, the board hired William E. Wright of the Tustin investigative firm of Murphy & Maconachy Inc. to investigate the allegations. After interviewing 16 employees, Wright forwarded a lengthy report to the board.

The report detailed more than two dozen instances of Hackwood allegedly forcing employees to perform personal chores for her, as well as improperly inflating her expenses, inaccurately reporting sick leave and vacation time, and forcing employees to work overtime without pay.

Hackwood was accused of making employees take in her trash cans at her home when she was out of town; pick up and deliver her personal tax returns; and type, copy and mail 150 copies of her Christmas message to family and friends, according to a letter sent to Mary-Jean Hackwood

her attorney in December.

The investigative report, which has not been made public, was sent to the district attorney.

“Our inquiry is continuing,” said Deputy Dist. Atty. Guy Ormes. “We have asked the board for a copy of its investigation and we will review it.”

In the past, Hackwood’s attorney has maintained that his client was falsely accused. He acknowledged there was a serious morale problem among staffers at the retirement system, but denied that Hackwood abused her authority or knowingly acted improperly.

Former board Chairman Keith Concannon, one of three who opposed firing Hackwood, strongly objected to the action when the board meeting was reopened to the public, saying he expected it to result in “costly litigation.”

Concannon criticized county officials for blocking the board’s original plan to demote Hackwood and move her into a separate office. Removing Hackwood, he said, “is not [within] the county’s jurisdiction.”

“They’ve said many times that they want to have more control,” said Concannon. “I think what they are looking at is that [the system] has $3 billion and they are bankrupt.”

Another Hackwood supporter, board member Bruce A. Moore, said Hackwood’s termination might not be valid because of a clause in an employment contract negotiated with her last year that requires a 7-2 vote of the board to fire her.

“I’m very concerned about the legal issues involved with this decision,” Moore said. “You have to follow the law [and] sometimes the law cuts both ways.”

Nearly all of the system’s 40 employees, as well as officials of the Orange County Employees Assn., pressed for Hackwood’s termination and questioned the board’s resolve when it decided in January only to demote Hackwood to a portfolio manager and to make her work alone in a separate office.

“We could have used her experience and knowledge,” said Moore.

More than 80 workers and union officials, some carrying placards, packed the board meeting room last month to protest the board’s decision to retain yet demote Hackwood.

But on Thursday, union officials applauded the board’s action.

“We feel [this] was the only fair action to take,” said Tobye Lovelace, a spokeswoman for the OCEA. “We think the employee support helped the board make up its mind.”

Reaction in the retirement system’s offices Thursday was subdued.

“I’m sorry it took so long for the board to get there, but I think it has finally taken the right position,” said Sheri Altmark, a paralegal and investigator with the system.

“From the employees, I think there is a sigh of relief.”