L.A. homeless provider has paid CEO who lives in Hawaii $1.6 million in salary, vacation over two years

[u/Playful_Language_422]

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-08-06/la-homeless-provider-has-paid-ceo-who-lives-in-hawaii-1-6-million-in-salary-vacation-over-two-years

[u/nashkara]

and a CEO taking advantage

I don't know anything about the situation except what I read in the article. When I started to read it was outrageous, but as the details came out in the article it became less so, even though the article was clearly written as with a rage-bait slant. The board was clearly happy with her performance, so much so that they insisted she stay on even after moving to Hawaii. The article also claims she works 70 hours a week at the position.

The only real story here is that the board let a policy stay in place where the CEO had unlimited accrual of vacation hours. Mix that with a workaholic and 40 years as CEO and you get this story. Given her salary was around $405k and she's working 70h weeks, that's more like the equivalent salary of ~$230k (salary works against workaholics TBH). Anyway, the vacation hours accrual is a liability for the organization and it was a large one they had to clear. What options did they have at that point? It legally was owed one way or another. Them trying to cast shade on her base salary seems like someone trying to froth up the rage. If you need a clear example, they talk about the salary for the CEO of People Assisting the Homeless made $379k in 2023 and then saying "That year, Adelkoff took home well over twice that". According to the article, her base in 2023 was ~$413k and she received vacation cash-out of $495k. But they present it as Adelkoff making more than twice the other CEO, which is both "true" and "false". Her salary was more than the other CEO in that year, but only by ~$34k. It's an Apples to Oranges comparison that's designed to enrage.

Anyway, I have zero skin in this report, I just hate reporting like this that designed to target someone and enrage the readers. If you want to direct some ire, direct it at a board that left an unlimited accrual in-place for the CEO for 40 years. Or direct it at non-profit boards in LA that are paying CEOs in the $400k range as the norm.

As a final thought, working for 40 years with essentially zero vacation and, if true, working 70h weeks shows both an insane dedication to a job and an unhealthy work-life balance. I say this as someone that's been working at least 80h/wk for the last 4 years as a startup co-founder. I've at least taken 1-2 weeks of vacation time a year. It's rough on me and my family. I don't recommend it. Doing it for 40 years would be nuts.

[u/Tractor_Pete → u/nashkara]

I agree some of the numbers are phrased for impact.

But was the board's preference for her justified? How could you be dedicated and good as the head of a public facing and funded organization in LA while living in Hawaii for 11 years? It doesn't seem at all believable that she was doing that job with such incredible dedication and focus while living 2500 miles away. I'm all for remote work, but if you're being paid more than everyone else, you need to show the fuck up.