SEATTLE — Sound Transit CEO Julie Timm will receive her full salary for 2024 after departing on Jan. 12 and has agreed to provide “on-call services” as a consultant next year, the Seattle Times reports, but the transit agency has not released the full agreement covering her departure.
The Sound Transit board’s motion setting the terms of Timm’s departure says the CEO is leaving by mutual agreement but also refers to severance pay, and the board’s vice chair, Dave Somers, told the newspaper that “there were differences between the board and Julie in how to structure the agency.” But he said the family issues were the primary consideration: “She was not terminated. She chose to leave.”
The board approved the settlement on a unanimous voice vote at a Dec. 15 meeting, and an agency representative said the Timm’s “transition services agreement” would be released in four to five weeks to fulfill a public-documents request by the newspaper.
Timm announced her departure after just 16 months on Dec. 12, citing family reasons [see “Sound Transit CEO Timm to resign,” Trains News wire, Dec. 13, 2023]. The board is expected to choose an acting CEO soon and will create a transition team while the agency searches for a permanent replacement.
Assuming the ST BOD operates as fiduciaries protecting the taxpayers’ money, they should have entered into an agreement with her to pay for consulting services as needed. Now they will be paying for two CEOs.
Good questions above, Mr. Rice. Yes, it is odd to say the least, that the ST CEO, Ms. Timm, ‘Resigns’ for “Family Reasons” and then still gets a year’s severance pay? It sounds like she and the ST Board didn’t see “eye-to-eye” on policy and managerial issues and perhaps the ‘severance’ was a way to grease-the-skids and get rid of her. Vice-Chair Sommer’s statement above doesn’t sound quite like it is the full story.
Of course the Sound Transit problems and issues related to cost-overruns and delays in LRT openings will continue and the Puget Sound taxpayers are left holding the bag.
So typical of large, opaque, unaccountable government agencies ….
No disrespect to the now former CEO and her family issues, she should do what she needs to do, but to get a 1 year severance?
I would be interested in what came first, her offer to resign, or the offer for the severance in return. In what world in the private sector do people quit for personal reasons and they get a year at full pay?
I know how this works in the C-Suite. Many “voluntary” resignations are negotiated in advance and aren’t tendered until all of the departed requirements were met.
Does the agreement have a rehire clause, meaning if she get a new gig before her year is up, does she forgo the remaining settlement pay? (or do they lump sum)
As I noted in a prior post, the press had reported her board was divided about her leadership and were arguing over policy and structure. Tons of CEO’s have resigned for “family reasons” when they stopped or couldn’t get the board to work their way.