The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors rejected a proposed hiring freeze on Tuesday night, saying the plan from the county’s chief executive officer was rushed, unclear and confusing.

“There is too much in it that wasn’t explained,” Supervisor Janice Hahn told CEO Fesia Davenport during the board meeting on  March 4. “For me, it is hard to support this without a few more details.”

Seeing she didn’t have the votes, Davenport said a hiring freeze and curtailment of non-essential expenditures throughout all county departments — including travel, training and equipment — will be retooled and brought back to the board at a future date.

Davenport had proposed a broad hiring freeze in order to guard against a budget crisis resulting from anticipated federal funding cuts from the Trump administration and drops in property tax revenues due to the recent wildfires.

Under her plan, if a county department needed to hire personnel or buy equipment, the department head had to get her approval. Davenport would make decisions on a case-by-case basis.

She said the austerity measure was necessary. “The situation could devolve into a fiscal crisis, requiring more severe measures,” Davenport wrote in a March 4 letter to the board.

But pushback from Hahn, Supervisor Lindsey Horvath and Supervisor Hilda Solis brought the measure to a grinding halt toward the end of an all-day board meeting.

One of the issues was making sure county employees remain on the job, assisting people who need permits and help to rebuild homes lost in the Eaton and Palisades fires, and that county departments should be allowed to add employees as needed.

At first, Davenport indicated only “critical health and safety positions” would be exempt from the hiring freeze. But after pushback, she told the board other employee classifications would be exempt, but her answers left some wiggle room.

For example, the Sheriff’s Department would be exempt from the hiring freeze, but only sworn officers, Davenport said, adding that civilian employees could still be on the chopping block.

Each of the 38 county department heads were told to prepare cutbacks ranging from 3% to 8%, Davenport said at the Feb. 11 board meeting. Money saved by not hiring employees in unfilled positions, plus other cuts, would create savings that would be put in a pot used for expenses for fire recovery, large settlements from lawsuits, and plugging revenue gaps.

But when asked how much saving was enough, Davenport said she didn’t have a specific target. The current L.A. County budget totals $49.2 billion. Davenport did not give an estimate of the size of the next fiscal year budget.

Hahn and Horvath criticized Davenport for shortcutting the process and for a lack of transparency.

The hiring freeze proposal came after 38 department heads gave their FY2025-2026 budget projections and lists of unmet needs. None mentioned an austerity budget or Davenport’s request to prepare for cuts, leaving their budget proposals subject to changes.

Horvath said many departments included requests for additional employees to continue their missions. For example, the Department of Children and Family Services wanted 45 more employees, and the Department of Beaches and Harbors asked for five new positions to help reopen closed bathrooms and maintain potable water sources.

Although the rejected motion said a “hard hiring freeze” would be implemented by Davenport if approved, the CEO later said she was not prepared to enact a hiring freeze right away and needed more time to develop the austerity plan.

Hahn objected to Davenport putting the measure on a late supplemental agenda, giving the supervisors about two business days to digest it. Usually, agenda items are discussed in a meeting with staff and the public a few weeks ahead of time, and then placed on the regular agenda the Wednesday night before the Tuesday board meeting.

“This should have gone through the regular process,” Hahn said. “There is too much in it that wasn’t explained.”

Hahn wondered about the scope of departments working on fire recovery, from planning, mental health, animal control and public works. If these departments are all exempt, she asked, who would be subject to a hiring freeze?

Davenport further backed off the “hard hiring freeze,” saying employees working on fire recovery and helping wildfire victims get permits to rebuild would not be affected. But other employees in those departments might be affected.

Horvath wanted a new CEO proposal that cited which departments would be affected and would have their hiring requests rejected, and which positions would be excluded. She also wanted an assessment of how a hiring freeze would affect county services.

Davenport did not say when a new, revamped austerity plan would be ready to return to the board for a vote. But she said the county’s 2026 budget is fraught with revenue and spending issues.

“We have a large amount of uncertainty in the budget,” Davenport said. “When you have uncertainty you control spending.”