August
13, 2014
Daily
Democrat
By
Sarah Dowling
Yolo County Supervisors are
seeking answers months after a Grand Jury investigation found longtime Sheriff
Ed Prieto demonstrates poor leadership.
The board is asking a newly
impaneled grand jury to further review allegations that Prieto practiced
favoritism, nepotism, and gave preferential treatment to his employees. Prieto
responded to the report last week, denying these claims.
"We ask this newly
impaneled grand jury to review the assertions made in the report, ensure that
those assertions are supported by evidence, and (if so) to ask that the grand
jury recommend appropriate actions consistent with the findings and related
evidence," says the board's letter, signed by Chairman Don Saylor.
The letter, penned Tuesday, was
sent after Yolo Supervisors received new Sheriff's Office complaints, which
will be forwarded to the panel for investigation, though these allegations were
not specified.
Meanwhile, an independent
working group, led by former Woodland Mayor Skip Davies, is charged with
completing an evaluation of the issues identified in the grand jury report,
making recommendations where appropriate. It is not known if Davies or the
panel has been making any progress in his evaluation.
Last week, Prieto responded to
the report, denying his use of favoritism and preferential treatment of his
employees. The report, published on the heels of Prieto's re-election, found
the sheriff has exhibited nepotism, management by intimidation and his office
suffers from poor morale.
However, the jury did not find
that Prieto's acts were willful or with corrupt intention, and do not merit his
removal from office, according to the report.
The Grand Jury initiated the
investigation this past year after receiving a complaint about the Sheriff
using favoritism as well as other possibly questionable acts.
As a result of its
investigation, the jury learned that on multiple occasions "employees were
threatened, intimidated and had experienced adverse employment actions as a
result of challenging the Sheriff's agenda."
In his response to the report,
Prieto noted the conclusions reached by the grand jury were based upon
interviews of approximately 16 members of the Sheriff's Office out of 265
employees.
Prieto also found the "wild,
wild west" title of the report to be unprofessional, creating an
"atmosphere of a joke" while diminishing the document's importance.
Prieto disagreed with these
findings, quoting county policies, which justified his actions. He
"partially agreed" with only three of the 14 findings, noting many of
them did not apply to the Sheriff's Office directly, but to other county
departments, which drafted separate responses to the report.
The first finding deals with
employee moral, stating "favoritism, nepotism and preferential treatment
of employees have adversely affected employee morale in the Sheriff's
Department." The jury found that these practices by the sheriff involve
hiring, promotion, assignments and discipline.
Prieto disagreed with these
allegations, stating hiring and promotional processes are handled by county
human resources, although Sheriff's Office staff do conduct interviews after a
candidate list is formed.
The Grand Jury also found he
used or created provisional or extra help positions to employ personal friends
and relatives. Prieto disagreed, noting all department heads work with the
county human resources director to fill these vacancies.
Prieto "partially
agreed" in hiring immediate family members, but stated these hirings
followed county policy and protocol, and "selections were made based
solely upon the knowledge, skills and abilities of the candidates."
Prieto detailed the employment
of two family members. One resigned after human resources found a violation of
the county nepotism policy, but was rehired after the Yolo County Board of
Supervisors revised the policy in 2003.
The second family member was
hired after the policy changed, and worked in four different positions within
the department, maintaining four levels of supervision between herself and
Prieto.
At this time, Prieto issued a
directive that any future employment issues involving his family members will
be handled through the Office of the Undersheriff.
Prieto also responded to Grand
Jury recommendations, which called for collaborations with human resources to
revise employee evaluation standards and implement internal training programs
to reinforce county policy.
"While no specific issues
were raised relative to the current evaluation standards, it should be noted
prior to the Grand Jury's report, the Sheriff's Office evaluation standards
have been used as a model by county HR for the purposes of evaluating employees
within Yolo County," Prieto wrote.
In addition, the jury
recommended that elected public officials, such as Prieto, submit themselves to
the 360-degree evaluation process used by all other department heads in the
county.
In his response, Prieto notes
that many elected officials are not required to participate in this evaluation
process. "The Sheriff as an elected official, is cognizant of his
tremendous responsibility to the citizens of Yolo County who have repeatedly
placed their trust in him as is evident by the fact he has been re-elected four
times." Prieto was reelected without opposition June 3 to his fifth term.
"This is not something the
sheriff takes lightly, and to that end, the sheriff remains responsive and
accountable to those very citizens he has been given the honor to serve and
protect," Prieto concluded.
Contact
Sarah Dowling at 530-406-6234.
No comments:
Post a Comment