BY STEVE E. SWENSON, Californian staff writer
sswenson@bakersfield.com | Thursday, Nov 19 2009 05:57 PM
Last Updated Thursday, Nov 19 2009 05:57 PM
A man and woman were face charges in the gang-related shooting deaths of three men dating back to 2006.
In an unusual step, the District Attorney's staff went to the Kern County Grand Jury to issue an indictment.
That process avoids the need for a preliminary hearing where defense attorneys can ask questions.
Prosecutors have typically used the grand jury process on lengthy cases.
It still took nine days to present the evidence to the grand jury, prosecutor Cynthia Zimmer said.
Kerry Hastings Jr., 23, and Markisha Ann Williams, 24, were indicted on charges of murdering 19-year-old Leonard Banks in September 2006, Bakersfield police reported.
Banks, who Zimmer said was not a gang member, was a football and basketball player at Golden Valley High School.
He and his father, then 56-year-old Leon Banks, were shot at their home where it's believed the suspects wanted to obtain marijuana that was grown there, police said.
The father survived his wounds.
Hastings was also indicted on murder charges in the July, 2007, shooting death of Ernest Joe Kerr Jr., 26, in the 1200 block of Cottonwood Road.
Kerr was also not a gang member, Zimmer said.
Kerr and two other men were walking on Cottonwood Road at about 1:30 a.m. when men who came from an apartment complex in the 1200 block of Cheatham Avenue began shooting at them, sheriff's deputies reported.
Kerr was the only one hit by gunfire, deputies said.
The third killing for which Hastings was indicted was the June 2009, shooting death of 21-year-old Anthony Daniels in the 1300 block of Reese Avenue, police reported.
Daniels was struck by multiple bullets at about 1 a.m., sheriff's deputies reported.
Hastings and Williams were already in jail on other charges when the indictment was issued this week, police said.
http://www.bakersfield.com/news/local/x1220827469/Grand-jury-indicts-pair-for-three-murders
Friday, November 20, 2009
Monday, October 26, 2009
Riverside Grand jury calls Banning leaders
10:00 PM PDT on Friday, October 23, 2009
By ERIN WALDNER
The Press-Enterprise
Banning city officials and community art leaders have confirmed they've been called before the Riverside County civil grand jury.
"Yes, a subcommittee of the grand jury contacted the city of Banning and asked for some information regarding the Redevelopment Agency and they are interviewing some people," Mayor Bob Botts said in a statement. "The city is working with the grand jury and has provided all of the information requested."
The grand jury operates behind closed doors and Botts said he could not discuss the matter further until the inquiry is completed.
Carol Newkirk, executive director of the Banning Cultural Alliance, said she testified before the grand jury earlier this week.
The nonprofit Cultural Alliance receives funding from the Community Redevelopment Agency, a city agency.
Newkirk and Karen Clavelot, president of the lliance, said the organization has provided the grand jury committee with everything it has requested. Newkirk said this includes legal and financial documents.
"We have absolutely no concerns," Clavelot said.
She added, "We can account for all of the money we've gotten from the city."
The grand jury primarily serves as a civil grand jury, performing oversight functions, according to its Web site. It investigated the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District in 2007. Its final report included the grand jury's findings and recommendations to the district for improving operations.
The Banning Cultural Alliance is on the agenda for Tuesday's Community Redevelopment Agency meeting. The agenda says the redevelopment agency, which is the Banning City Council, will hear a presentation from the alliance "regarding their activities and progress with downtown art initiatives, cultural activities and downtown revitalization efforts" for fiscal year 2008-09.
The meeting is at 4:30 p.m. at the Banning Civic Center Council Chambers, 99 E. Ramsey St.
Reach Erin Waldner at 951-763-3473 or ewaldner@PE.com
http://www.pe.com/localnews/rivcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_E_egrandjury24.4712a41.html
By ERIN WALDNER
The Press-Enterprise
Banning city officials and community art leaders have confirmed they've been called before the Riverside County civil grand jury.
"Yes, a subcommittee of the grand jury contacted the city of Banning and asked for some information regarding the Redevelopment Agency and they are interviewing some people," Mayor Bob Botts said in a statement. "The city is working with the grand jury and has provided all of the information requested."
The grand jury operates behind closed doors and Botts said he could not discuss the matter further until the inquiry is completed.
Carol Newkirk, executive director of the Banning Cultural Alliance, said she testified before the grand jury earlier this week.
The nonprofit Cultural Alliance receives funding from the Community Redevelopment Agency, a city agency.
Newkirk and Karen Clavelot, president of the lliance, said the organization has provided the grand jury committee with everything it has requested. Newkirk said this includes legal and financial documents.
"We have absolutely no concerns," Clavelot said.
She added, "We can account for all of the money we've gotten from the city."
The grand jury primarily serves as a civil grand jury, performing oversight functions, according to its Web site. It investigated the Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District in 2007. Its final report included the grand jury's findings and recommendations to the district for improving operations.
The Banning Cultural Alliance is on the agenda for Tuesday's Community Redevelopment Agency meeting. The agenda says the redevelopment agency, which is the Banning City Council, will hear a presentation from the alliance "regarding their activities and progress with downtown art initiatives, cultural activities and downtown revitalization efforts" for fiscal year 2008-09.
The meeting is at 4:30 p.m. at the Banning Civic Center Council Chambers, 99 E. Ramsey St.
Reach Erin Waldner at 951-763-3473 or ewaldner@PE.com
http://www.pe.com/localnews/rivcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_E_egrandjury24.4712a41.html
Santa Clara Editorial: Pham case shows need for more police disclosure
Mercury News Editorial
Posted: 10/19/2009 08:31:30 PM PDT
Updated: 10/19/2009 08:57:03 PM PDT
There's no need to speculate about the difference that more openness would make in building trust between the San Jose police and the community. The sad case of Daniel Pham is a classic example playing out in real time. It's no coincidence that the audience for tonight's city council debate on increasing public access to police records will be dotted with Pham T-shirts and signs.
Pham was the knife-wielding, mentally ill man who was shot by officers May 10 after 911 calls brought them to a Berryessa home. Last week a Santa Clara County grand jury declined to indict the officers, but that was cold comfort to a Vietnamese American community primed to think the worst: Memories of the controversial police killing six years earlier of Bich Cau Thi Tran, a diminutive woman wielding a large vegetable peeler, are still fresh.
There were many differences between these cases. We suspect that if the police had swiftly released more information in the Pham case — and if District Attorney Dolores Carr had followed her predecessor's practice of making grand jury proceedings public in cases of high public interest — this controversy would be behind us.
The city council tonight will discuss a recommendation by the Sunshine Reform Task Force, which includes a Mercury News representative, to release many police reports and 911 tapes and increase reporting of police statistics. The recommendation includes broad exemptions for sensitive cases, such as rape and domestic violence reports, and calls for redacting information in all reports that could endanger witnesses or inhibit investigations. It should be adopted.
Mayor Chuck Reed and the rules and open government committee have proposed limited rules to ensure that police meet current state guidelines on releasing information. But some open government advocates believe Reed's plan could be used to limit information rather than encourage openness.
Reed has said 911 tapes should be released in some instances, which would be better than the current zero release policy, and he said the Pham tapes should be public after the grand jury met. He needs to follow through.
Had the tapes been released, it might be clear what police knew going into the situation, including Pham's mental state and the level of danger they could expect. The police report might lay out other circumstances that would help people understand what happened.
And while San Jose doesn't control Carr's decision on grand juries, an open proceeding would have shown whether evidence was presented fully.
In the Pham case, more openness very likely would have meant less anger. But even when releasing reports shows problems with police conduct, it benefits the department. When public drunkenness reports released by the city showed there was little justification for many of those arrests, the number plunged. The result over time will be greater public trust.
Revealing more, and doing more work in public, is always hard at first. But over time, it pays off. That's why the city council should approve the Sunshine Reform Task Force proposal tonight.
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_13597946?nclick_check=1
Posted: 10/19/2009 08:31:30 PM PDT
Updated: 10/19/2009 08:57:03 PM PDT
There's no need to speculate about the difference that more openness would make in building trust between the San Jose police and the community. The sad case of Daniel Pham is a classic example playing out in real time. It's no coincidence that the audience for tonight's city council debate on increasing public access to police records will be dotted with Pham T-shirts and signs.
Pham was the knife-wielding, mentally ill man who was shot by officers May 10 after 911 calls brought them to a Berryessa home. Last week a Santa Clara County grand jury declined to indict the officers, but that was cold comfort to a Vietnamese American community primed to think the worst: Memories of the controversial police killing six years earlier of Bich Cau Thi Tran, a diminutive woman wielding a large vegetable peeler, are still fresh.
There were many differences between these cases. We suspect that if the police had swiftly released more information in the Pham case — and if District Attorney Dolores Carr had followed her predecessor's practice of making grand jury proceedings public in cases of high public interest — this controversy would be behind us.
The city council tonight will discuss a recommendation by the Sunshine Reform Task Force, which includes a Mercury News representative, to release many police reports and 911 tapes and increase reporting of police statistics. The recommendation includes broad exemptions for sensitive cases, such as rape and domestic violence reports, and calls for redacting information in all reports that could endanger witnesses or inhibit investigations. It should be adopted.
Mayor Chuck Reed and the rules and open government committee have proposed limited rules to ensure that police meet current state guidelines on releasing information. But some open government advocates believe Reed's plan could be used to limit information rather than encourage openness.
Reed has said 911 tapes should be released in some instances, which would be better than the current zero release policy, and he said the Pham tapes should be public after the grand jury met. He needs to follow through.
Had the tapes been released, it might be clear what police knew going into the situation, including Pham's mental state and the level of danger they could expect. The police report might lay out other circumstances that would help people understand what happened.
And while San Jose doesn't control Carr's decision on grand juries, an open proceeding would have shown whether evidence was presented fully.
In the Pham case, more openness very likely would have meant less anger. But even when releasing reports shows problems with police conduct, it benefits the department. When public drunkenness reports released by the city showed there was little justification for many of those arrests, the number plunged. The result over time will be greater public trust.
Revealing more, and doing more work in public, is always hard at first. But over time, it pays off. That's why the city council should approve the Sunshine Reform Task Force proposal tonight.
http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_13597946?nclick_check=1
Lake County superintendent of schools responds to grand jury report findings
Friday, 16 October 2009
LAKEPORT – Lake County's superintendent of schools said he erred in signing a document with incorrect information that allowed a former administrator to apply for a credentialing program for which she was not eligible.
The issues were included in the latest grand jury report, released in July, and addressed in the Lake County Office of Education's formal response to the grand jury, released last month.
In that response to the grand jury, Dave Geck admits mistakes and misunderstandings, but also points to what he said are inaccuracies in the grand jury's report.
District Attorney Jon Hopkins confirmed that the grand jury contacted him about the case, which he investigated. Hopkins said he found no evidence of wrongdoing.
The grand jury asked Geck and his office to explain why he signed the document and provided inaccurate information in last year's response, and why he allowed Allison Hillix, the former director of career technical education, to remain in her job without immediately terminating her when it was discovered she didn't hold the appropriate qualifications.
Hillix, who no longer works for the Lake County Office of Education, would not comment when contacted by Lake County News.
The Lake County Office of Education's responses to the report included an admission that Geck showed “poor judgment” in not checking the accuracy of dates on an application Hillix made for a credentialing program.
The grand jury also recommended that all expenses reimbursed to both Hillix and Geck be audited. The report stated that Hillix was reimbursed $10,000 in expenses in an eight-month period.
Geck said he discussed the report with his board of trustees, who participated in the formal response.
“This reflects on the whole Office of Education,” said Geck.
The agency – which has an annual budget of about $16 million, $2 million of which is for supporting districts in business and human resources – has 120 employees, include 25 full-time staffers in the main office. It also has many part-time staffers.
It's been the focus of two years of grand jury investigative efforts and was mentioned in the last two grand jury reports.
“The initial complaint received by the Grand Jury suggested that a high-ranking administrative position was given to an individual that received administrative credentials under false pretenses,” the grand jury stated in its recent report.
In that report, the grand jury faulted Geck for signing a document attesting to the required teaching experience for Hillix, who was applying for a certification program. In her position she oversaw ROP courses, programs and services in the agency.
The certification would allow Hillix to be at an administrator level, said Geck. Without it, she could still be a manager, which would be at a lower step and pay level.
“I never denied that I messed up and made a mistake” on the certification of experience, Geck said.
Geck said Hillix had filled out the form and then had him sign it. “I didn't do a good job of checking that.”
Geck gets plenty of documents to sign, but said that's no excuse.
“When you make a mistake you have to pay the price,” Geck said.
As a result, Geck said his office now has a new administrative policy in which two administrators must verify such a form before it's signed. “That should not happen again,” said Geck.
The investigation by the grand jury's Public Services Committee also revealed that Geck authorized the $10,000 in expense reimbursements to Hillix.
The grand jury report further stated that Hillix had been reimbursed for alcohol purchases while at a conference, but the district's director of business services reported that no such alcohol purchase were reimbursed based on her review of the documentation, according to the district's response to the report.
Geck said the Lake County Office of Education has added a per diem limit. He said the change wasn't necessarily due to the grand jury's investigation, but rather was part of an effort to reduce expenses.
The grand jury report also faulted Geck for saying he didn't have the form in question, which the office's human resources director, Ed Skeen, later produced.
Geck said the issue was due to a misunderstanding, because he thought they were talking about another document. The formal response to the grand jury also maintains that the issue came down to a misunderstanding.
Last year, Geck's office had sent the grand jury a brochure on the Sacramento State program to clear up the misunderstanding. He said they plan to share the document with the grand jury again this year.
The grand jury also stated that Hillix was allowed to resign two months after the credential was invalidated, but Geck said that's incorrect. He said the grand jury had Hillix's personnel files and the resignation dates, along with the district's personnel policies, which his office sent them.
On Aug. 28, 2008, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing notified Geck's office via e-mail that the state university was requesting the credential be denied, according to the response to the grand jury's finding.
At the same time, Hillix discovered her credential was no longer listed on Sacramento State's credentialing Web site. Geck said she investigated appealing it at the start of September. The grand jury's findings held that Hillix should have been immediately terminated.
Skeen then sent the grand jury a notice on Sept. 10, 2008, saying that the credential was invalidated, Geck said.
Hillix wasn't able to file an appeal due to a statute of limitations issues. “Once she wasn't able to appeal she resigned,” said Geck.
It was 36 days between the time Geck's office received notice that the credential was being invalidated to Hillix's resignation, not two months as the grand jury said, according to the Lake County Office of Education's response to the findings.
Based on the Lake County Office of Education's attorney's opinion, “our delay in terminating the employee was based on providing the employee with sufficient time to pursue an appeal, and to not compromise any 'due process' rights that the employee might have,” the response stated.
A document provided by Skeen showed that the career technical education director position, which was paid $82,325 annually, became vacant upon Hillix's resignation on Oct. 6, 2008, after she was in the position for 217 days.
Geck said she continued nonadministrative employment “on a very limited, temporary, timesheet basis to complete some projects for the ROP office,” and is no longer employed in any capacity within the office.
During the investigation, the grand jury drew on its rarely used subpoena power to call in Geck and several others. He said he doesn't know how many subpoenas were issued, but became aware that some people in his office were called to testify more than once. In all, the grand jury report noted it drew from 42 hours of testimony in its final report.
Geck's testimony, which was the basis of this year's grand jury report, actually was given in the first half of 2008 under subpoena, he said.
Based on the grand jury's report 2007-08 report, the District Attorney's Office subpoenaed district documents and said they would follow up. Geck said if the document signing had been fraudulent, he would have heard from the District Attorney's Office.
Hopkins said his office, along with county counsel and the presiding judge, act as advisors to the grand jury.
The grand jury, Hopkins said, “did come to us and ask us to investigate potential criminal charges.”
He continued, “We did a lot of extra investigation beyond what they had done in regard to that and determined there was no basis for filing criminal charges.”
Geck said he doesn't believe further grand jury investigations are in the offing. “As far as we know this is a final report.”
He said he felt the structure of the investigation created an adversarial process, and said he would have preferred it if people who had issues with the agency came to him directly.
“I'm just looking for a way to make this a positive process,” said Geck.
He added, “Our goal is to get better and improve at all times.”
Geck said he doesn't want the mistake he made to denigrate the entire Lake County Office of Education, and he's concerned about the community's perception. “We have great people doing great programs.”
He continued, “I did make a mistake but I don't want to make that an excuse.”
The Lake County Office of Education also is implementing grand jury recommendations, including explaining the issues with the credential program and undertaking an audit of the expenses reimbursed to both Geck and Hillix, according to its response document.
In September 2008 the Lake County Office of Education initiated an audit on their own, Geck said. That audit was included in the agency's regular annual audit.
That audit, by Robertson & Associates, was expected to be done by this past Sept. 4. However, Geck said that the auditing firm is backlogged and the document hasn't yet been delivered, although he's expecting it soon.
Geck asserted that, overall, this latest grand jury report was “positive by omission,” since many issues mentioned in last year's report didn't arise in this latest report.
Brock Falkenberg now holds Hillix's old job.
“I think things are going well,” said Geck.
All of the ROP programs got a 15 percent cut in 2008-09 and are looking at another 5 percent cut for 2009-10. Geck said he hopes the programs aren't further reduced.
http://lakeconews.com/content/view/10825/764/
LAKEPORT – Lake County's superintendent of schools said he erred in signing a document with incorrect information that allowed a former administrator to apply for a credentialing program for which she was not eligible.
The issues were included in the latest grand jury report, released in July, and addressed in the Lake County Office of Education's formal response to the grand jury, released last month.
In that response to the grand jury, Dave Geck admits mistakes and misunderstandings, but also points to what he said are inaccuracies in the grand jury's report.
District Attorney Jon Hopkins confirmed that the grand jury contacted him about the case, which he investigated. Hopkins said he found no evidence of wrongdoing.
The grand jury asked Geck and his office to explain why he signed the document and provided inaccurate information in last year's response, and why he allowed Allison Hillix, the former director of career technical education, to remain in her job without immediately terminating her when it was discovered she didn't hold the appropriate qualifications.
Hillix, who no longer works for the Lake County Office of Education, would not comment when contacted by Lake County News.
The Lake County Office of Education's responses to the report included an admission that Geck showed “poor judgment” in not checking the accuracy of dates on an application Hillix made for a credentialing program.
The grand jury also recommended that all expenses reimbursed to both Hillix and Geck be audited. The report stated that Hillix was reimbursed $10,000 in expenses in an eight-month period.
Geck said he discussed the report with his board of trustees, who participated in the formal response.
“This reflects on the whole Office of Education,” said Geck.
The agency – which has an annual budget of about $16 million, $2 million of which is for supporting districts in business and human resources – has 120 employees, include 25 full-time staffers in the main office. It also has many part-time staffers.
It's been the focus of two years of grand jury investigative efforts and was mentioned in the last two grand jury reports.
“The initial complaint received by the Grand Jury suggested that a high-ranking administrative position was given to an individual that received administrative credentials under false pretenses,” the grand jury stated in its recent report.
In that report, the grand jury faulted Geck for signing a document attesting to the required teaching experience for Hillix, who was applying for a certification program. In her position she oversaw ROP courses, programs and services in the agency.
The certification would allow Hillix to be at an administrator level, said Geck. Without it, she could still be a manager, which would be at a lower step and pay level.
“I never denied that I messed up and made a mistake” on the certification of experience, Geck said.
Geck said Hillix had filled out the form and then had him sign it. “I didn't do a good job of checking that.”
Geck gets plenty of documents to sign, but said that's no excuse.
“When you make a mistake you have to pay the price,” Geck said.
As a result, Geck said his office now has a new administrative policy in which two administrators must verify such a form before it's signed. “That should not happen again,” said Geck.
The investigation by the grand jury's Public Services Committee also revealed that Geck authorized the $10,000 in expense reimbursements to Hillix.
The grand jury report further stated that Hillix had been reimbursed for alcohol purchases while at a conference, but the district's director of business services reported that no such alcohol purchase were reimbursed based on her review of the documentation, according to the district's response to the report.
Geck said the Lake County Office of Education has added a per diem limit. He said the change wasn't necessarily due to the grand jury's investigation, but rather was part of an effort to reduce expenses.
The grand jury report also faulted Geck for saying he didn't have the form in question, which the office's human resources director, Ed Skeen, later produced.
Geck said the issue was due to a misunderstanding, because he thought they were talking about another document. The formal response to the grand jury also maintains that the issue came down to a misunderstanding.
Last year, Geck's office had sent the grand jury a brochure on the Sacramento State program to clear up the misunderstanding. He said they plan to share the document with the grand jury again this year.
The grand jury also stated that Hillix was allowed to resign two months after the credential was invalidated, but Geck said that's incorrect. He said the grand jury had Hillix's personnel files and the resignation dates, along with the district's personnel policies, which his office sent them.
On Aug. 28, 2008, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing notified Geck's office via e-mail that the state university was requesting the credential be denied, according to the response to the grand jury's finding.
At the same time, Hillix discovered her credential was no longer listed on Sacramento State's credentialing Web site. Geck said she investigated appealing it at the start of September. The grand jury's findings held that Hillix should have been immediately terminated.
Skeen then sent the grand jury a notice on Sept. 10, 2008, saying that the credential was invalidated, Geck said.
Hillix wasn't able to file an appeal due to a statute of limitations issues. “Once she wasn't able to appeal she resigned,” said Geck.
It was 36 days between the time Geck's office received notice that the credential was being invalidated to Hillix's resignation, not two months as the grand jury said, according to the Lake County Office of Education's response to the findings.
Based on the Lake County Office of Education's attorney's opinion, “our delay in terminating the employee was based on providing the employee with sufficient time to pursue an appeal, and to not compromise any 'due process' rights that the employee might have,” the response stated.
A document provided by Skeen showed that the career technical education director position, which was paid $82,325 annually, became vacant upon Hillix's resignation on Oct. 6, 2008, after she was in the position for 217 days.
Geck said she continued nonadministrative employment “on a very limited, temporary, timesheet basis to complete some projects for the ROP office,” and is no longer employed in any capacity within the office.
During the investigation, the grand jury drew on its rarely used subpoena power to call in Geck and several others. He said he doesn't know how many subpoenas were issued, but became aware that some people in his office were called to testify more than once. In all, the grand jury report noted it drew from 42 hours of testimony in its final report.
Geck's testimony, which was the basis of this year's grand jury report, actually was given in the first half of 2008 under subpoena, he said.
Based on the grand jury's report 2007-08 report, the District Attorney's Office subpoenaed district documents and said they would follow up. Geck said if the document signing had been fraudulent, he would have heard from the District Attorney's Office.
Hopkins said his office, along with county counsel and the presiding judge, act as advisors to the grand jury.
The grand jury, Hopkins said, “did come to us and ask us to investigate potential criminal charges.”
He continued, “We did a lot of extra investigation beyond what they had done in regard to that and determined there was no basis for filing criminal charges.”
Geck said he doesn't believe further grand jury investigations are in the offing. “As far as we know this is a final report.”
He said he felt the structure of the investigation created an adversarial process, and said he would have preferred it if people who had issues with the agency came to him directly.
“I'm just looking for a way to make this a positive process,” said Geck.
He added, “Our goal is to get better and improve at all times.”
Geck said he doesn't want the mistake he made to denigrate the entire Lake County Office of Education, and he's concerned about the community's perception. “We have great people doing great programs.”
He continued, “I did make a mistake but I don't want to make that an excuse.”
The Lake County Office of Education also is implementing grand jury recommendations, including explaining the issues with the credential program and undertaking an audit of the expenses reimbursed to both Geck and Hillix, according to its response document.
In September 2008 the Lake County Office of Education initiated an audit on their own, Geck said. That audit was included in the agency's regular annual audit.
That audit, by Robertson & Associates, was expected to be done by this past Sept. 4. However, Geck said that the auditing firm is backlogged and the document hasn't yet been delivered, although he's expecting it soon.
Geck asserted that, overall, this latest grand jury report was “positive by omission,” since many issues mentioned in last year's report didn't arise in this latest report.
Brock Falkenberg now holds Hillix's old job.
“I think things are going well,” said Geck.
All of the ROP programs got a 15 percent cut in 2008-09 and are looking at another 5 percent cut for 2009-10. Geck said he hopes the programs aren't further reduced.
http://lakeconews.com/content/view/10825/764/
Friday, October 23, 2009
Nevada County Grand jury room named after longtime juror
Ray Hoffman was Mr. Grand Jury of Nevada County before he died at 80 in September; fellow jury members and county officials have made sure his years of hard work are remembered.
At the request of the current grand jury, the Board of Supervisors voted this week to name the room where the watchdogs meet at the Rood Center the Ray Hoffman Memorial Grand Jury Room.
“It's a wonderful honor,” said his widow, Nancy Hoffman, on Thursday. “He loved the grand jury, every minute of it.”
Mrs. Hoffman said her husband had a stroke that made it hard for him to walk and talk in the last year of his life. But he would still attend grand jury meetings, even if he had to take the Telecare medical care bus to get there.
“He was involved right up to his death,” Mrs. Hoffman said. “He was involved for 12 years and was foreman for three terms.”
Hoffman also was a member of the California Grand Jurors Association, teaching others about the process and writing a manual for county jurors. He retired to Penn Valley 14 years ago from the Bay Area, where he worked for Hunts Foods.
“It's well-deserved. He spent so much of his time on the jury. It was kind of his room anyway,” said Diane Masini, a fellow juror for three terms.
“He did tireless work on behalf of the county and was a fine individual,” Truckee-area Supervisor Ted Owens said this week.
“The gentleman had a passion for his job,” said Board Chairman Hank Weston, who serves Hoffman's area.
To contact Senior Staff Writer Dave Moller, e-mail dmoller@theunion.com or call 477-4237. ho serves Hoffman's area.
http://www.theunion.com/article/20091016/NEWS/910159978&parentprofile=search
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Colusa Grand jury criticizes county spending
Tuesday, Sep 29 2009, 6:20 pm
By Susan Meeker/Tri-County Newspapers
If you have a question — just ask.
That was the informal response of the Colusa County Board of Supervisors to Colusa County grand jury about its criticism that the county paid $75,000 for a salary survey that was incomplete and not finished by the contracted date.
Board Chairman Gary Evans said the public flap over the salary survey could have been avoided if the grand jury had done its due diligence during its investigation and contacted county officials involved in the project.
"The grand jury didn't talk to any one of us," Evans said. "They went off half-cocked."
The grand jury, in its final report, said a citizen's complaint prompted the investigation into the existence of the salary survey that was to be provided by Nash and Company, a Palos Verdes consulting firm.
The grand jury secured a copy of the $75,000 contract dated Sept. 7, 2007, with work to be completed by April 30, 2008.
After its investigation, the grand jury reported that the contracted work was not completed and accepted by the county, as specified by the contract.
The grand jury also reported that the county paid the company in full before the work was completed and urged the county to improve its oversight of contracted services.
Brian Ring, personnel director, in his formal response to the grand jury, said the county should have initiated a formal extension of the deadline for the final survey, when county officials realized the initial date could not be met, but that the county "is pleased" with the report and the work produced by Nash and Company.
"The department feels the contractor delivered what was contracted for," Ring stated.
Ring said the contract with Nash and Company was to review and rewrite all 241 Colusa County job descriptions, bringing them up to date, and including Fair Labor Standards Act and American with Disabilities Act requirements.
The final report, which was received by the supervisors on March 3, incorporated career ladders, reduced the number of job classifications and developed a useable salary schedule in order to pay employees a competitive wage.
Ring said the county will consider implementing the salary options only when funding allows.
Contact Susan Meeker at 458-2121 or smeeker@tcnpress.com.
http://www.colusa-sun-herald.com/news/spending-3564-county-criticizes.html
By Susan Meeker/Tri-County Newspapers
If you have a question — just ask.
That was the informal response of the Colusa County Board of Supervisors to Colusa County grand jury about its criticism that the county paid $75,000 for a salary survey that was incomplete and not finished by the contracted date.
Board Chairman Gary Evans said the public flap over the salary survey could have been avoided if the grand jury had done its due diligence during its investigation and contacted county officials involved in the project.
"The grand jury didn't talk to any one of us," Evans said. "They went off half-cocked."
The grand jury, in its final report, said a citizen's complaint prompted the investigation into the existence of the salary survey that was to be provided by Nash and Company, a Palos Verdes consulting firm.
The grand jury secured a copy of the $75,000 contract dated Sept. 7, 2007, with work to be completed by April 30, 2008.
After its investigation, the grand jury reported that the contracted work was not completed and accepted by the county, as specified by the contract.
The grand jury also reported that the county paid the company in full before the work was completed and urged the county to improve its oversight of contracted services.
Brian Ring, personnel director, in his formal response to the grand jury, said the county should have initiated a formal extension of the deadline for the final survey, when county officials realized the initial date could not be met, but that the county "is pleased" with the report and the work produced by Nash and Company.
"The department feels the contractor delivered what was contracted for," Ring stated.
Ring said the contract with Nash and Company was to review and rewrite all 241 Colusa County job descriptions, bringing them up to date, and including Fair Labor Standards Act and American with Disabilities Act requirements.
The final report, which was received by the supervisors on March 3, incorporated career ladders, reduced the number of job classifications and developed a useable salary schedule in order to pay employees a competitive wage.
Ring said the county will consider implementing the salary options only when funding allows.
Contact Susan Meeker at 458-2121 or smeeker@tcnpress.com.
http://www.colusa-sun-herald.com/news/spending-3564-county-criticizes.html
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Los Gatos-Saratoga Union school district disagrees with most of grand jury report findings
By Brian Babcock
Saratoga News
Posted: 09/14/2009 10:14:21 PM PDT
Updated: 09/14/2009 10:14:22 PM PDT
Local school districts have begun responding to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury's reports on the spending of education dollars and inventory practices, and there seems to be little the school districts agree with.
In a letter sent to the grand jury about the spending of education dollars, the Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District responded to six findings and recommendations the grand jury made. The high school district only "partially" agreed with one of them.
The report, "Who Really Benefits From Education Dollars? Hint: It's not the students," analyzed the pay packages, perks and legal fees paid by the 34 school districts in the county.
The grand jury stated in the report that district board members approve overly generous benefits to themselves. To remedy the issue the grand jury recommended the county boards eliminate health benefits and pension contributions and minimize travel and conference costs.
"Removing health benefits will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable," the district's letter states. "This benefit is of great help in attracting and maintaining well-qualified, hard-working and dedicated governing board members."
Superintendent Cary Matsuoka said district staff, including teachers, rarely attend conferences out of California. The high school district tries to ensure responsible spending by not attending costly out-of-state conferences and meetings, he said.
"We attend conferences in state and we limit the amount of conferences that directly relate to our line of work," Matsuoka said.
The district's governing board president, Rosemary Rossi, echoed the superintendent's statement.
"The district continuously evaluates the value and benefit of attendance at conferences for staff, administrators and board members," Rossi wrote in an e-mail. "As for the board and superintendent, we limit our conference trips to those that are directly related to the work of leadership and governance which are our primary roles."
Whether it is teachers, superintendents or board members, having competitive compensation, such as health benefits and pension contributions, can help attract the best talent to the district, Matsuoka said.
"Compensation is very important in recruiting," he said. "We have a talented and outstanding staff and compensation is a part of that. It's not all of it, but it is a big part of it."
The high school district's letter also stated that it would not follow the grand jury's recommendation that it renegotiate the superintendent's benefits.
Matsuoka received a $185,869 salary, $13,470 worth of health insurance and a $7,200 car allowance in fiscal year 2008-09, according to the grand jury report. The grand jury stated it costs the district $65.46 per child to pay his salary, which is ninth highest of the 34 county districts included in the report.
The only recommendation that the high school district "partially" agreed with was that it should use Santa Clara County legal counsel when appropriate instead of using private law firms.
"The district is sometimes involved in complex legal issues that require legal expertise in sub-sections of the education code, requiring considerable specialized legal capacity, time and energy," the district wrote.
The Los Gatos Union School District and the Saratoga Union School District have not replied to the grand jury's report as yet. They are required to reply to the report by Sept. 25.
The Los Gatos Union School District has replied to the grand jury's report on inventory practices.
The report, "Santa Clara County School Inventory Practices: $300M+ Taxpayer Investment — But Who's Counting?" concluded that most school districts lack knowledge of policies and procedures related to inventory requirements, which can lead to theft, fraud and abuse.
Los Gatos Union School District superintendent Richard Whitmore said the district does agree with some of the grand jury's recommendations and will implement them.
Although the district agreed with the board that there is a potential for abuse when it comes to inventory, it disagreed that credit card statements need to be provided to the full board of trustees.
"Our board president is approving all my expenses now. We don't think it warrants a separate action item," Whitmore said.
"Generally we're in good shape on the inventory issues," he added.
The newspaper did not receive the Saratoga Union School District's response letter by deadline.
http://www.mercurynews.com/valley/ci_13338541?nclick_check=1
Saratoga News
Posted: 09/14/2009 10:14:21 PM PDT
Updated: 09/14/2009 10:14:22 PM PDT
Local school districts have begun responding to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury's reports on the spending of education dollars and inventory practices, and there seems to be little the school districts agree with.
In a letter sent to the grand jury about the spending of education dollars, the Los Gatos-Saratoga Union High School District responded to six findings and recommendations the grand jury made. The high school district only "partially" agreed with one of them.
The report, "Who Really Benefits From Education Dollars? Hint: It's not the students," analyzed the pay packages, perks and legal fees paid by the 34 school districts in the county.
The grand jury stated in the report that district board members approve overly generous benefits to themselves. To remedy the issue the grand jury recommended the county boards eliminate health benefits and pension contributions and minimize travel and conference costs.
"Removing health benefits will not be implemented because it is not warranted or reasonable," the district's letter states. "This benefit is of great help in attracting and maintaining well-qualified, hard-working and dedicated governing board members."
Superintendent Cary Matsuoka said district staff, including teachers, rarely attend conferences out of California. The high school district tries to ensure responsible spending by not attending costly out-of-state conferences and meetings, he said.
"We attend conferences in state and we limit the amount of conferences that directly relate to our line of work," Matsuoka said.
The district's governing board president, Rosemary Rossi, echoed the superintendent's statement.
"The district continuously evaluates the value and benefit of attendance at conferences for staff, administrators and board members," Rossi wrote in an e-mail. "As for the board and superintendent, we limit our conference trips to those that are directly related to the work of leadership and governance which are our primary roles."
Whether it is teachers, superintendents or board members, having competitive compensation, such as health benefits and pension contributions, can help attract the best talent to the district, Matsuoka said.
"Compensation is very important in recruiting," he said. "We have a talented and outstanding staff and compensation is a part of that. It's not all of it, but it is a big part of it."
The high school district's letter also stated that it would not follow the grand jury's recommendation that it renegotiate the superintendent's benefits.
Matsuoka received a $185,869 salary, $13,470 worth of health insurance and a $7,200 car allowance in fiscal year 2008-09, according to the grand jury report. The grand jury stated it costs the district $65.46 per child to pay his salary, which is ninth highest of the 34 county districts included in the report.
The only recommendation that the high school district "partially" agreed with was that it should use Santa Clara County legal counsel when appropriate instead of using private law firms.
"The district is sometimes involved in complex legal issues that require legal expertise in sub-sections of the education code, requiring considerable specialized legal capacity, time and energy," the district wrote.
The Los Gatos Union School District and the Saratoga Union School District have not replied to the grand jury's report as yet. They are required to reply to the report by Sept. 25.
The Los Gatos Union School District has replied to the grand jury's report on inventory practices.
The report, "Santa Clara County School Inventory Practices: $300M+ Taxpayer Investment — But Who's Counting?" concluded that most school districts lack knowledge of policies and procedures related to inventory requirements, which can lead to theft, fraud and abuse.
Los Gatos Union School District superintendent Richard Whitmore said the district does agree with some of the grand jury's recommendations and will implement them.
Although the district agreed with the board that there is a potential for abuse when it comes to inventory, it disagreed that credit card statements need to be provided to the full board of trustees.
"Our board president is approving all my expenses now. We don't think it warrants a separate action item," Whitmore said.
"Generally we're in good shape on the inventory issues," he added.
The newspaper did not receive the Saratoga Union School District's response letter by deadline.
http://www.mercurynews.com/valley/ci_13338541?nclick_check=1
Monday, September 28, 2009
Solano's volunteer grand jury gives back
By Rachel Raskin-Zrihen
Posted: 09/27/2009 12:01:34 AM PDT
Updated: 09/27/2009 12:01:35 AM PDT
Moved by a desire to "be part of the solution," Bunyan Johnson of Vallejo said he thought volunteering to serve on the Solano County Grand Jury would be just the ticket.
And, after a lifetime in law enforcement, the recent widower said it was a good choice.
"I felt I wanted to give something back to the community," said Johnson, grand jury foreperson in 2006/07 and 2008/09. "And I lost my wife not long ago and wanted to keep busy, and the grand jury seemed like a perfect fit."
Johnson said he "wanted to make Solano County and its cities better places to live."
Having testified before grand juries as a police officer, Johnson said he'd never before served on one, and enjoyed the experience.
"There are 19 of us, and it's a diverse group. I got to meet people with different experiences. There were former mayors, doctoral candidates, law enforcement officers, nurses -- I learned something from each of them," Johnson said. "I felt I could do something with all that talent surrounding me to help make our cities better."
The grand jury is an investigative body and part of the judicial branch of government, called for by both the U.S. and California constitutions. The jury's three primary functions are to be a watchdog over local government, investigate citizen complaints about public agencies and officials and to occasionally investigate a criminal matter when requested by the district attorney.
Each year, Solano County Superior Court judges identify potential grand jurors, and they and other elected officials nominate them.
TJ's Designs owner Jimmie Jones, 71, said he was approached in 2004 by then-Vallejo Mayor Tony Intintoli about serving. He served two years, one as foreman, he said.
"I had heard about grand juries, but didn't know any more about them than the common citizen, and it was fascinating," said Jones, a former Times-Herald publisher. "It was very interesting, challenging.
"Normally, juries get complaints from the citizenry and it's an interesting process to go through them if the jury decides to take it on," he said.
Serving on the current jury, Medic Ambulance President Rudy Manfredi said he, too, is "loving" the experience.
"I did it because it allows a regular citizen to get a more in-depth look at government," he said. "We investigate, talk to witnesses and make recommendations. We are 19 people from very different backgrounds. We get along very well, and have some very lively discussions."
Each new grand jury consists of second-term jurors, plus new members, all of whom are given responsibilities by the presiding judge of the Superior Court. Their one-year term begins each July 1.
The county tracks the sitting juror demographics, and tries to have the body's ethnic makeup reflect the county's, but selection isn't based on ethnic criteria, Solano County Court Executive Officer Brian Taylor said.
"We try to recruit from all segments of society, but it depends on who applies and who is randomly selected," Taylor said.
For instance, the 2009/2010 civil grand jury in Solano County is made up of six men and three women. They range in age from 35 to 75 and older. There are 12 whites, six blacks and one Hispanic, according to the county Web site.
Last year, there were 16 men and three women, ranging from 45 to 75-plus. Fifteen were white and four were black.
"We're a fact-finding group. We inspect the jails, the police departments," Johnson said. "Most rewarding for me was some of the places we inspected. You actually get to go in and see what they're doing in the prisons; the programs they have for the inmates, the religious services, the food, the type of medical treatment they get."
Johnson said he believes his grand jury service has led to positive change.
"We send our findings and recommendations, and they have to respond," he said. "In most cases, they do. And based on some of the responses, I assume some changes have been made."
Johnson said he was most impressed by his visits to the California State Prison, Solano and the California Medical Facility, both in Vacaville.
"I was especially impressed with the hospice program, which was outstanding," he said. "What impressed us was the care and attention given to the dying inmates. As a law enforcement officer, I've been to other countries and other states, and inmates don't always seem to get the same level of humane treatment."
The care taken to meet inmates' particular dietary requirements also impressed Johnson, he said.
"Special effort is made to get them their required food," he said. "If you're Jewish, for instance, they make an effort to get you kosher food."
As the sitting grand jury foreperson, James McCully of Vacaville, 63, said he's tried to improve the efficiency of the process.
"Because of my experience in organizational development, I believe these procedural changes will help make our reports more timely," McCully said.
A winemaker by trade, McCully said he's been in public service in one form or other since enlisting in the Marine Corps at 17. Being on the grand jury is just another way to serve, he said.
In Solano County, grand jurors are paid $15 per day for meeting days, and new budget constraints limit them to three meetings this year, according to the Web site.
The grand jury may hire independent auditors and subpoena witnesses and documents, officials said. Jury members may ask advice of legal counsel on civil matters, confer with the district attorney on criminal matters, and discuss problems with Superior Court judges, they said.
Grand jury investigations are contained in early release reports and in an annual final report containing all findings and recommendations and is distributed to public officials, libraries and the general public through the news media.
Grand jury members frequently rely on information from concerned citizens who are aware of problems and are willing to come forward, officials said.
Unlike in Solano County, a separate grand jury is convened to hear criminal cases in Napa County, Court Executive Officer Stephen Bouch said.
Grand jurors are prohibited from discussing what they're working on, he added.
"Criminal grand juries aren't used as much in California as they used to be" Bouch said. "They'll hear evidence presented by the prosecuting attorney to establish probable cause for arresting someone for committing a crime."
In Napa, criminal grand juries are formed on request and hearings are held in secret sessions. If convinced by what they hear, grand jury members can issue an indictment, he said.
But it's rare, Bouch said.
"In the past nine years, one criminal grand jury was called for one case, and that was maybe five years ago," he said.
Contact staff writer Rachel Raskin-Zrihen at (707) 553-6824 or RachelZ@thnewsnet.com.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_13431624?nclick_check=1
Posted: 09/27/2009 12:01:34 AM PDT
Updated: 09/27/2009 12:01:35 AM PDT
Moved by a desire to "be part of the solution," Bunyan Johnson of Vallejo said he thought volunteering to serve on the Solano County Grand Jury would be just the ticket.
And, after a lifetime in law enforcement, the recent widower said it was a good choice.
"I felt I wanted to give something back to the community," said Johnson, grand jury foreperson in 2006/07 and 2008/09. "And I lost my wife not long ago and wanted to keep busy, and the grand jury seemed like a perfect fit."
Johnson said he "wanted to make Solano County and its cities better places to live."
Having testified before grand juries as a police officer, Johnson said he'd never before served on one, and enjoyed the experience.
"There are 19 of us, and it's a diverse group. I got to meet people with different experiences. There were former mayors, doctoral candidates, law enforcement officers, nurses -- I learned something from each of them," Johnson said. "I felt I could do something with all that talent surrounding me to help make our cities better."
The grand jury is an investigative body and part of the judicial branch of government, called for by both the U.S. and California constitutions. The jury's three primary functions are to be a watchdog over local government, investigate citizen complaints about public agencies and officials and to occasionally investigate a criminal matter when requested by the district attorney.
Each year, Solano County Superior Court judges identify potential grand jurors, and they and other elected officials nominate them.
TJ's Designs owner Jimmie Jones, 71, said he was approached in 2004 by then-Vallejo Mayor Tony Intintoli about serving. He served two years, one as foreman, he said.
"I had heard about grand juries, but didn't know any more about them than the common citizen, and it was fascinating," said Jones, a former Times-Herald publisher. "It was very interesting, challenging.
"Normally, juries get complaints from the citizenry and it's an interesting process to go through them if the jury decides to take it on," he said.
Serving on the current jury, Medic Ambulance President Rudy Manfredi said he, too, is "loving" the experience.
"I did it because it allows a regular citizen to get a more in-depth look at government," he said. "We investigate, talk to witnesses and make recommendations. We are 19 people from very different backgrounds. We get along very well, and have some very lively discussions."
Each new grand jury consists of second-term jurors, plus new members, all of whom are given responsibilities by the presiding judge of the Superior Court. Their one-year term begins each July 1.
The county tracks the sitting juror demographics, and tries to have the body's ethnic makeup reflect the county's, but selection isn't based on ethnic criteria, Solano County Court Executive Officer Brian Taylor said.
"We try to recruit from all segments of society, but it depends on who applies and who is randomly selected," Taylor said.
For instance, the 2009/2010 civil grand jury in Solano County is made up of six men and three women. They range in age from 35 to 75 and older. There are 12 whites, six blacks and one Hispanic, according to the county Web site.
Last year, there were 16 men and three women, ranging from 45 to 75-plus. Fifteen were white and four were black.
"We're a fact-finding group. We inspect the jails, the police departments," Johnson said. "Most rewarding for me was some of the places we inspected. You actually get to go in and see what they're doing in the prisons; the programs they have for the inmates, the religious services, the food, the type of medical treatment they get."
Johnson said he believes his grand jury service has led to positive change.
"We send our findings and recommendations, and they have to respond," he said. "In most cases, they do. And based on some of the responses, I assume some changes have been made."
Johnson said he was most impressed by his visits to the California State Prison, Solano and the California Medical Facility, both in Vacaville.
"I was especially impressed with the hospice program, which was outstanding," he said. "What impressed us was the care and attention given to the dying inmates. As a law enforcement officer, I've been to other countries and other states, and inmates don't always seem to get the same level of humane treatment."
The care taken to meet inmates' particular dietary requirements also impressed Johnson, he said.
"Special effort is made to get them their required food," he said. "If you're Jewish, for instance, they make an effort to get you kosher food."
As the sitting grand jury foreperson, James McCully of Vacaville, 63, said he's tried to improve the efficiency of the process.
"Because of my experience in organizational development, I believe these procedural changes will help make our reports more timely," McCully said.
A winemaker by trade, McCully said he's been in public service in one form or other since enlisting in the Marine Corps at 17. Being on the grand jury is just another way to serve, he said.
In Solano County, grand jurors are paid $15 per day for meeting days, and new budget constraints limit them to three meetings this year, according to the Web site.
The grand jury may hire independent auditors and subpoena witnesses and documents, officials said. Jury members may ask advice of legal counsel on civil matters, confer with the district attorney on criminal matters, and discuss problems with Superior Court judges, they said.
Grand jury investigations are contained in early release reports and in an annual final report containing all findings and recommendations and is distributed to public officials, libraries and the general public through the news media.
Grand jury members frequently rely on information from concerned citizens who are aware of problems and are willing to come forward, officials said.
Unlike in Solano County, a separate grand jury is convened to hear criminal cases in Napa County, Court Executive Officer Stephen Bouch said.
Grand jurors are prohibited from discussing what they're working on, he added.
"Criminal grand juries aren't used as much in California as they used to be" Bouch said. "They'll hear evidence presented by the prosecuting attorney to establish probable cause for arresting someone for committing a crime."
In Napa, criminal grand juries are formed on request and hearings are held in secret sessions. If convinced by what they hear, grand jury members can issue an indictment, he said.
But it's rare, Bouch said.
"In the past nine years, one criminal grand jury was called for one case, and that was maybe five years ago," he said.
Contact staff writer Rachel Raskin-Zrihen at (707) 553-6824 or RachelZ@thnewsnet.com.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_13431624?nclick_check=1
Sunday, September 27, 2009
After apology, State drops charges against Butte County Grand juror
By Terry Vau Dell
Posted: 09/24/2009 05:37:34 PM PDT
OROVILLE - State prosecutors have dismissed charges against a former Butte County grand juror, after she apologized in court for having disclosed alleged confidential information to the media regarding a police excessive force investigation she conducted more than two years ago.
In her written statement, Georgie Szendrey said "my actions were based on my sincere belief that I was acting in the best interests of the citizens of Butte County and the Constitution of the U.S.
"I regret any inconvenience caused the criminal justice system and any distress to the 2006-07 Grand Jury," the Chico woman added.
Szendrey had been scheduled to stand trial next week on a single misdemeanor charge alleging unlawful disclosure of secret Grand Jury information which could have carried up to six months in jail. Because other former grand jurors could have been called to testify in the case, Szendrey's lawyer, Michael Harvey, said he was concerned that "to establish this crime, the Attorney General would, of necessity, have to disclose and reveal multitudes of Grand Jury secrets to verify the alleged disclosure of a few" by his client.
But deputy attorney general Barton Bowers said the judge had specifically limited such testimony to statements attributed to Szendrey in the local press.
"In light of Mrs. Szendrey's apology, the Attorney General's Office believes it is in the best interest of justice to dismiss the criminal charge against her, but hopes that this will serve as a reminder about the importance of secrecy in grand jury proceedings," Bowers said Wednesday.
Szendrey had been accused of disclosing information to a reporter concerning an excessive force complaint lodged against two Ridge officers, Robert Pickering and Timothy Cooper, with the 2006-07 Grand Jury by the family of an underage drunken driver. In her written findings, which were not included in the Grand Jury's Final Report, Szendrey concluded the officers failed to give clear commands or inform the 19-year-old ridge man he was under arrest before tackling him to the pavement and handcuffing him as a neighbor videotaped the December 2006 incident.
In a joint byline story that ran in the Paradise Post, Enterprise-Record and Oroville Mercury-Register on March 6, 2008, Szendrey was quoted as saying that after her term on the county public watchdog group ended, she decided to turn over her findings along with printed excerpts from the neighbor's videotape to the suspect's lawyer. The grand jury information was later used in court to unseal Pickering's personnel file in two unrelated Paradise resisting arrest cases, both of which ended in jury acquittals.
At a pretrial hearing for Szendrey earlier this month, Butte County Superior Court Judge Gerald Hermansen sided with an attorney for the newspapers that the California Reporter's Shield Law basically barred the prosecution from eliciting testimony from the reporters concerning any information not included in the 2008 article, such as who interviewed Szendrey and when. On Tuesday, Szendrey's attorney said he met with the state prosecutor to work out a "joint resolution," which included the written apology by the former grand juror.
"I apologize to the court and my fellow members of the 2006-07 Grand Jury for any disclosure of Grand Jury statements I may have made in speaking to the reporter for the Chico Enterprise-Record," the statement read.
Szendrey's attorney Wednesday said he has advised her not to comment at this time about the dismissal action. Her husband, Ed Szendrey, a retired chief investigator in the Butte County District Attorney's Office, said he was gratified that his wife's "high sense of justice ... was corroborated by two juries."
***
Terry Vau Dell is a reporter for the Enterprise-Record.
Posted: 09/24/2009 05:37:34 PM PDT
OROVILLE - State prosecutors have dismissed charges against a former Butte County grand juror, after she apologized in court for having disclosed alleged confidential information to the media regarding a police excessive force investigation she conducted more than two years ago.
In her written statement, Georgie Szendrey said "my actions were based on my sincere belief that I was acting in the best interests of the citizens of Butte County and the Constitution of the U.S.
"I regret any inconvenience caused the criminal justice system and any distress to the 2006-07 Grand Jury," the Chico woman added.
Szendrey had been scheduled to stand trial next week on a single misdemeanor charge alleging unlawful disclosure of secret Grand Jury information which could have carried up to six months in jail. Because other former grand jurors could have been called to testify in the case, Szendrey's lawyer, Michael Harvey, said he was concerned that "to establish this crime, the Attorney General would, of necessity, have to disclose and reveal multitudes of Grand Jury secrets to verify the alleged disclosure of a few" by his client.
But deputy attorney general Barton Bowers said the judge had specifically limited such testimony to statements attributed to Szendrey in the local press.
"In light of Mrs. Szendrey's apology, the Attorney General's Office believes it is in the best interest of justice to dismiss the criminal charge against her, but hopes that this will serve as a reminder about the importance of secrecy in grand jury proceedings," Bowers said Wednesday.
Szendrey had been accused of disclosing information to a reporter concerning an excessive force complaint lodged against two Ridge officers, Robert Pickering and Timothy Cooper, with the 2006-07 Grand Jury by the family of an underage drunken driver. In her written findings, which were not included in the Grand Jury's Final Report, Szendrey concluded the officers failed to give clear commands or inform the 19-year-old ridge man he was under arrest before tackling him to the pavement and handcuffing him as a neighbor videotaped the December 2006 incident.
In a joint byline story that ran in the Paradise Post, Enterprise-Record and Oroville Mercury-Register on March 6, 2008, Szendrey was quoted as saying that after her term on the county public watchdog group ended, she decided to turn over her findings along with printed excerpts from the neighbor's videotape to the suspect's lawyer. The grand jury information was later used in court to unseal Pickering's personnel file in two unrelated Paradise resisting arrest cases, both of which ended in jury acquittals.
At a pretrial hearing for Szendrey earlier this month, Butte County Superior Court Judge Gerald Hermansen sided with an attorney for the newspapers that the California Reporter's Shield Law basically barred the prosecution from eliciting testimony from the reporters concerning any information not included in the 2008 article, such as who interviewed Szendrey and when. On Tuesday, Szendrey's attorney said he met with the state prosecutor to work out a "joint resolution," which included the written apology by the former grand juror.
"I apologize to the court and my fellow members of the 2006-07 Grand Jury for any disclosure of Grand Jury statements I may have made in speaking to the reporter for the Chico Enterprise-Record," the statement read.
Szendrey's attorney Wednesday said he has advised her not to comment at this time about the dismissal action. Her husband, Ed Szendrey, a retired chief investigator in the Butte County District Attorney's Office, said he was gratified that his wife's "high sense of justice ... was corroborated by two juries."
***
Terry Vau Dell is a reporter for the Enterprise-Record.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Tehama County Board of Supervisors respond to Grand Jury suggestions
By GEOFF JOHNSON -DN Staff Writer
Posted: 09/23/2009 08:46:39 AM PDT
Updated: 09/23/2009 11:24:42 AM PDT
The Tehama County Board of Supervisors Voted on Tuesday to evaluate the cost of a large, flat-screen scanner to preserve documents and blueprints and to review fire safety practices, but not to refer ordinances and measures requiring impartial analysis to an outside office.
All three were recommendations submitted by the Tehama County 2008-2009 Grand Jury, an entity formed and dissolved each year to make an impartial analysis of county government.
Although the jury investigated everything from the Tehama County Animal Shelter to Juvenile Hall, its advice to the Board of Supervisors and administration concerned the preservation of county documents and the question of who should evaluate the impartiality of ordinances and measures.
The response to the former was mixed. While the county agreed to some of the recommendations of the jury, it rejected the idea of creating the position of an Information Technology Coordinator to oversee the preservation of county documents and refused to tour a local radar base where the sheriff and district attorney are keeping overflow documents.
The county also soundly rejected the grand jury's request to send ordinances and measures to an outside party for impartial analysis.
California law requires County Counsel to perform an impartial analysis of county measures and ordinances, but not to draft the measures. The grand jury argued this creates a conflict of interest, wherein the same party drafting the ordinance is asked to judge its legality.
In its report, the grand jury cited Measure B, which would have allowed grand juries to set new salaries for the supervisors, as an example that could have benefited from outside analysis. The grand jury's reading was that Measure B did not make it clear future grand juries could change supervisor salaries without another measure on the ballot.
The Board of Supervisors disagreed in its response, stating nearly all ordinances and measures require impartial analysis, which would mean nearly all ordinances and measures would have be to drafted by an office other than County Counsel.
---
Staff Writer Geoff Johnson can be reached at 527-2153, extension 114, or at gjohnson@redbluffdailynews.com
http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_13401676
Posted: 09/23/2009 08:46:39 AM PDT
Updated: 09/23/2009 11:24:42 AM PDT
The Tehama County Board of Supervisors Voted on Tuesday to evaluate the cost of a large, flat-screen scanner to preserve documents and blueprints and to review fire safety practices, but not to refer ordinances and measures requiring impartial analysis to an outside office.
All three were recommendations submitted by the Tehama County 2008-2009 Grand Jury, an entity formed and dissolved each year to make an impartial analysis of county government.
Although the jury investigated everything from the Tehama County Animal Shelter to Juvenile Hall, its advice to the Board of Supervisors and administration concerned the preservation of county documents and the question of who should evaluate the impartiality of ordinances and measures.
The response to the former was mixed. While the county agreed to some of the recommendations of the jury, it rejected the idea of creating the position of an Information Technology Coordinator to oversee the preservation of county documents and refused to tour a local radar base where the sheriff and district attorney are keeping overflow documents.
The county also soundly rejected the grand jury's request to send ordinances and measures to an outside party for impartial analysis.
California law requires County Counsel to perform an impartial analysis of county measures and ordinances, but not to draft the measures. The grand jury argued this creates a conflict of interest, wherein the same party drafting the ordinance is asked to judge its legality.
In its report, the grand jury cited Measure B, which would have allowed grand juries to set new salaries for the supervisors, as an example that could have benefited from outside analysis. The grand jury's reading was that Measure B did not make it clear future grand juries could change supervisor salaries without another measure on the ballot.
The Board of Supervisors disagreed in its response, stating nearly all ordinances and measures require impartial analysis, which would mean nearly all ordinances and measures would have be to drafted by an office other than County Counsel.
---
Staff Writer Geoff Johnson can be reached at 527-2153, extension 114, or at gjohnson@redbluffdailynews.com
http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_13401676
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
