• Online Edition
  • About
  • Support The Sheet
  • Contact

The Sheet

  • News
    • Mountain Town News
    • Sports and Outdoors
  • Arts and Life
  • Opinion/Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Dining

Led zep-again

  • by Mike Bodine
  • in News
  • — 15 Jan, 2016

Leddy lands job in Sonoma two days after resigning in Mono.

Jim Leddy, former Mono County Administrative Officer, gave notice on April 14, 2015, the same day a complaint from a victim of his alleged sexual harassment was filed with the State’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing. Leddy has since gone on to another six-figure job in Sonoma County, where he worked prior to Mono County, just two days after he left the Eastside. The job opening in Sonoma ran just five days. Leddy applied for the job April 16 and it closed April 17.

Leddy was hired as the Special Projects Director for the Community Development Commission (CDC) in Sonoma, a position that was created just prior to his return and wasn’t approved by the Sonoma County Supervisors until April 21. The workload for the CDC was overwhelming and in need of a coordinator, according to Sonoma.

The quick hire following allegations of sexual harrassment has raised the ire of Sonoma officials. Sonoma Supervisor Shirlee Zane was quoted in Sonoma newspaper The Press Democrat, “There is no doubt that there is concern [and] that we have to ask questions about the hiring process.” Zane did not return repeated calls from The Sheet.

Sonoma Supervisor David Rabbitt said he could not come to an opinion about something that happened on the other side of the state and that was, mostly, hearsay.

Christina Cramer, Sonoma County’s Human Resources Director, told The Sheet that when the timeline of events in Mono and Sonoma are overlaid, there appear to be improprieties—but she said that is purely coincidental.

“When we saw the timing, we thought ‘Oh boy, this is going to be called into question,’” she said. She added that at the time of the interview process, she and the HR department were not aware of the allegations. Cramer had no comment on whether the allegations would have had an impact on Leddy’s recruitment.

Leddy was one of 16 applicants for the Special Project Coordinator position and was deemed the most qualified for the position by the CDC, Cramer explained. The five-day recruitment is standard operating procedure for Sonoma.

The Press Democrat article states that Leddy received references from three Mono County Supervisors and former Mono County Counsel, Marshall Rudolph. Cramer said that there were two references from “high on the ladder” in Mono, and one was not Rudolph, but she did not specify the other two.

“It’s entirely possible that he did a great job notwithstanding. It’s not a lie for people to say good things about him,” Rudolph told the Press Democrat.

Mono County Supervisor Larry Johnston said he did not give Leddy a reference. Supervisor Tim Fesko admitted he couldn’t recall if he gave Leddy a recommendation, but he was never contacted by Sonoma. Supervisor Stacy Corless said that she was not one of the references and wouldn’t give him one if he asked. Supervisor Tim Alpers did not return calls from The Sheet.

Supervisor Fred Stump said in an email that he was not sure if Leddy had used him as a reference but Leddy had asked him in the past if he could use him as a reference. “I never rescinded that permission, an oversight on my part,” Stump said.

According to California law, a former employer that’s used as a reference can disclose job performance; reasons for termination or separation; knowledge, qualifications, skills, or abilities based upon credible evidence and eligibility for rehire. But a positive recommendation does not equal the condoning of a former employee’s activities, alleged or not.

Leddy made $160,000 a year as Mono County CAO. He’s now pulling down $130,842 a year in Sonoma.

Cramer said Leddy left Sonoma in 2013 on good standing.

Stump added a commentary on the entire fiasco, and while not substantiating or refuting the harassment allegations, he spelled out what those claims mean. “Lastly, generally speaking, there are behaviors that while not illegal still are not acceptable.”

Share

— Mike Bodine

You may also like...

  • Previous story Winter Race Series begins
  • Next story Almost fully charged
  • Special Publications

  • Recent Posts

    • GET A PIECE OF THE ROCK
    • OBITUARY: BRIAN SIEBERT 1973-2026
    • SEAL OF APPROVAL
    • GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME … $1.1M
    • IT’S A HARD KNOCK LIFE FOR BEARS
  • Special Publications

  • News
    • Mountain Town News
    • Sports and Outdoors
  • Arts and Life
  • Opinion/Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Dining

© 2026 THE SHEET. DEVELOPED BY PENDERWORTH.