Brian Wilkinson
After investigating numerous complaints from a private citizen aimed at Madera County District Attorney Michael Keitz, the county grand jury has concluded there is insufficient cause for the removal of Keitz from office.
The complaints that led to the investigation: that Keitz hired a deputy district attorney because he was a friend; his office lost case files and failed to meet filing dates; and results of an investigation of Keitz by an outside attorney on retainer with the county were never released.
According to the grand jury report, the hiring of the deputy DA was competitive and in conformance with county personnel policies.
The deputy DA is still employed by the county and due to confidentiality policies, the name of the employee was not released.
The grand jury investigation, which was conducted with guidance and counsel from the state's office of the attorney general, showed that only six of 7,000 cases entered into the computer tracking system during 2010 could not be refiled due to a missed deadline.
"Nevertheless, tracking and control of case files within the office of the DA may well be haphazard," the report said.
The report further stated that the investment in specialized software for the task is questionable, as the system is not performing as expected and the ability of the DA or his deputies to identify cases to ensure timely filings is limited.
The report said an outside attorney conducted a review of Keitz at the request of former Human Resources Director Lonn Boyer, but since Boyer is no longer available, the reasons for his request for an inquiry cannot be determined.
The unnamed investigating attorney billed the county for more than $3,000 in May 2009, only four months after Keitz assumed his duties.
"This brief report is a matter of mystery two years after its completion," reported the jury. Many persons acknowledge the existence, completion and delivery of the report to then county counsel Dave Prentice, who, in informal conversations, acknowledged the report but denied having read it in its entirety.
Furthermore, the report said, county counsel indicated that members of the Madera County Board of Supervisors have neither read nor been briefed on the report.
The grand jury was unsuccessful in obtaining the report from Prentice, who cited client-attorney privilege.
The grand jury concluded that the complainant made some allegations "based on rumor ... without documentation or proof." According to the report, the original complaint included details of sensitive personnel actions, which raised questions of breech of victim and employee privacy especially as the authority of clerical staff to have access to and release such sensitive materials is questionable.
Other conclusions of the jury:
The DA's leadership style and methods may contribute to morale issues within the office, especially in times of staffing shortages and heightened workload.
Accusations in the complaint regarding discriminatory personnel actions are the subject of litigation and not within the purview of the grand jury.
The release of documents relating to active cases involving minors is troubling and effective guidelines as to who has the authority to release such information must be strengthened.
The report prepared by outside counsel for the county might address issues of concern to employees within the DA's office and the general public. The suggestion that an investigation ordered by the county has not been read in its entirety nor made available to the Board of Supervisors is not creditable.
The grand jury made the following recommendations:
The Board of Supervisors should release the investigative report now in possession of county counsel and Keitz must be shown the report and be permitted a rebuttal before release to the general public.
Control and release authority for confidential documents, especially those dealing with minors, should be reviewed and strengthened.
The Board of Supervisors should consider granting increased budgetary discretion to the DA.
The DA should review his leadership style and seek assistance in rebuilding staff morale and improving his communication to his staff.
In a prepared statement, Keitz said he is pleased the grand jury has exonerated his office of the allegations of fraudulent behavior.
"Continuous improvement is one of the values I set forth for my operation and their (grand jury) recommendations will undoubtedly result in a better office for the people of Madera County," Keitz said in his statement.
"Despite deficiencies in both staffing levels and technology, the dedicated and hardworking staff in my office are committed to the safety of the people of Madera County. Throughout my tenure in office, I have taken corrective action in areas where I felt the best interests of the people were not being served. Although these actions were not popular with some, I refuse to back away from my obligation to do what is right in seeking justice for the people of Madera County, nor will I bow to political maneuvers, threats or coercion," said Keitz.
http://www.sierrastar.com/2011/06/09/55550/grand-jury-says-no-cause-to-remove.html
No comments:
Post a Comment