[Sutter County] Jury reports abuses of power at department

A Sutter County grand jury investigation released Thursday reported it uncovered evidence of abuses of power, management by intimidation and favoritism at a county department.

The final report on the investigation into the Welfare and Social Services Division painted a picture of a workplace where management practices have deteriorated employee morale to the point of potentially impacting services to the public.

"Favoritism and preferential treatment of employees have adversely affected employee morale of the (division)," the report stated. "These practices by management staff involved work schedules, promotion, assignments and discipline. Evidence has shown promotional practices within the division are not solely based on merit.

"Division managers give special assignments and promotions to those who seemingly curry personal favor," the report continued. "In addition, evidence has also shown disciplinary actions are not applied fairly and consistently to all employees."

The findings were among the more critical of the grand jury's investigations into eight county departments. The report also includes an investigation of the Sutter County District Atto ney's office, which was requested by former Supervisor James Gallagher after the office was forced to return almost $50,000 of misused grant funds to the state.

Sutter County Human Services Director Tom Sherry said his department was working on a formal response to the report and declined to offer further comment.

County Administrator Jim Arkens said he wasn't overly concerned with the report because he wasn't given many specifics to his questions when he was interviewed by the grand jury during its investigative process.

"They didn't have any substance at the time; it was a lot of rumors," Arkens said. "The department head, Lori Harrah, is excellent, and I believe she runs a good department."

The report documents several examples of trouble in the Welfare and Social Service Division.

The grand jury found management would revoke alternative work schedules for no apparent legitimate reason. Alternative work schedules were acknowledged by management to be an employee benefit and allow employees to work four 10-hour days to have a three-day weekend, for instance.

"Employees believe the revocations were in response to displeasing management for illegitimate and petty reasons, such as raising concerns, complaints and discussion of other management decisions," the report stated.

The jury also discovered a public assistance specialist supervisor was frequently seen sleeping on duty. The supervisor was also known to sleep on duty prior to being promoted to the current position.

"When employees have raised concerns about this situation, these employees feel they face retaliation, rather than the problem being addressed," the report stated. "The retaliation consisted of revocations of alternate work schedules, undesired work assignments and the failure to receive promotions."

Furthermore, the grand jury found that not only was the sleeping supervisor not disciplined, but was being groomed by management for a better assignment.

The grand jury also heard testimony from employees they were reluctant to report concerns to their union for fear of reprisal, and that management threatens staff with demotions for not adhering to a set agenda.

4 recommendations

The Sutter County grand jury found that the Sutter County District Attorney's Office has a history of scandal, misappropriation of funds and misuse of power that has resulted in costly court settlements, poor working environments and the return of grant money.

The grand jury elected to investigate the office at the request of former Supervisor James Gallagher.

Most recently, the county had to return almost $50,000 of misused funds from the Victim/Witness Assistance Program. The return of those funds also resulted in future allocations being denied by the state, adding up to a total loss for the county of nearly $80,000.

The report also included past improprieties, all related to former District Attorney Carl Adams.

Adams misused almost $50,000 in California Emergency Management Agency Anti-Drug Abuse Enforcement funds to prosecute former Auditor-Controller Robert Stark, according to the report.

The report also mentions an out-of-court settlement cost of $155,000 to resolve a lawsuit alleging that Adams "condoned a sexually charged work environment."

Notably absent from the report was an examination of the events that led to a state investigation of the office, which was prompted by former Deputy District Attorney Jana McClung's decision to not disqualify the county office from evaluating the domestic violence case involving a Sutter County sheriff's deputy.

There were rumors an employee of the office was in a relationship with the deputy, raising concerns about the propriety of managing the case locally, rather than referring the case to the state office.

Despite public records requests by the Appeal-Democrat, details of the case and what the Attorney General's Office has found concerning local prosecutors' handling of the case have not been made public.

The report praised current District Attorney Amanda Hopper, saying she "has dedicated her efforts to create an atmosphere that promotes transparency, ethical behavior and the renewal of confidence in the Sutter County District Attorney's office."

The grand jury made four recommendations:

1. The district attorney's office requested the Auditor-Controller conduct an internal audit. The grand jury recommended the necessary resources should be allocated to allow the audit.

This recommendation, however, is unlikely to occur this year.

At Tuesday's county budget hearings, Auditor-Controller Nate Black requested the Board of Supervisors provide the funds to establish an internal audit division in the county.

While the Board agreed with the proposal in principle, the request was denied due to a lack of county funds, Black said.

Black said he and Hopper were disappointed in the decision.

"I'm really holding out hope that they'll change their tune and fund that this year or next year," Black said. "I can't get to the district attorney audit until I get that funding. We have too many other responsibilities."

2. The district attorney's office should be provided the resources to employ a full-time accountant, in light of the amount of funding the office receives from grants with specific purposes.

3. The grand jury noted the workload at the district attorney's office has increased tremendously due to the passage of Proposition 47, which downgraded certain non-violent offenses from felonies to misdemeanors. The district attorney has dedicated one deputy district attorney to handle these cases. As a result, that person's workload has been shifted to the remaining attorneys. The grand jury recommends an additional attorney be hired to handle the workload.

4. The grand jury recommended the Victim/Witness Assistance Program should be overseen by a different agency due to potential conflicts of interest with the district attorney's office.

"The district attorney is sworn to prosecute to the full extent of the law, and this may not be in the best interest of the victim or witness," the report stated.

June 29, 2015

Appeal Democrat

By Andrew Creasey