The Civil Grand Jury investigates complaints made by county residents, but not all complaints are investigated.
Santa Clara
County's Civil Grand Jury for decades has attempted to improve government and
investigate corruption, but whether it's meeting those goals isn't so clear.
The Civil Grand
Jury investigates complaints made by county residents, but not all complaints
are investigated—in fact, few are. Any resident can submit a complaint in
person or on the county's website.
Once
investigations are complete, 19 jurors present their findings to government
agencies and come up with recommendations for improving issues. But those
agencies aren't required to act on the recommendations. In fact, they can do
nothing at all.
Between 2019-2020,
the grand jury received 52 complaints and produced five investigative reports
on topics such as conservatorships and gender gaps in local fire departments.
Jurors also produced a continuity report, documenting the responses of the
2018-2019 reports and the progress on several reports from previous terms.
According to the
report released in December, 11 recommendations from 2018-19 jury reports have
been implemented and 23 are in the process of being carried out. Twenty three
recommendations from the reports released that year will not be implemented,
according to the report.
A summary of civil grand jury reports released
in 2018-19 with responses and implemented changes listed, as well as
recommendations that will not be implemented or need further analysis. Courtesy
of Santa Clara County.
The most recent
report focused on the lack of women firefighters in the county, citing hostile
work environments and a conscious lack of recruitment. The report found that
only 4% of local firefighters are women—far below the 17% target recommended by
Women in Fire, an advocacy group.
Local cities
pushed back on the jury's findings, and the jury has no legal authority to
force change.
"Fire
Stations 1, 2, and 5 have multiple dormitory rooms that can be assigned by
gender," reads a letter from Mountain View officials, adding that other
stations could not be retrofitted and therefore the recommendations would not
happen.
So far, San Jose,
Mountain View, Palo Alto and the county's central fire protection district are
the only entities with listed responses to the reports. Each accepted some
recommendations and disagreed or denied others.
Matt Tuttle,
president of San Jose Fire Fighters Local 230 union, said systemic change will
take time—and funding.
Five women are
enrolled in this year's fire academy.
"That is the
most we have seen in several years and the five new recruits are both paramedics
and EMTs," Tuttle said.
The biggest
challenge, he said, which will take the longest, is having a dedicated,
well-funded recruitment budget.
Whether a report
results in change is a mixed bag. In a 2017-2018 report on the business
activities of the Alum Rock Union School District, the report called for the
resignation of three of its board members.
The grand jury
called out those trustees for allegedly pushing through a deal with
construction company Del Terra and creating a conflict of interest by assigning
the firm to both program manager and construction manager roles.
Jurors also
alleged that the board violated the Brown Act, the state's open meeting law.
After the report
was released, nothing happened. Three years later, the trustees named in the
report either didn't run for office when up for re-election or were beaten by
challengers.
"The public
reacted but it took time," said a former grand jury member, who spoke to
San José Spotlight on condition of anonymity.
Another 2020 grand
jury report alleged that the San Jose Unified School District obscured lobbying
activities carried out on its behalf and violated government ethics laws. The district
opposed the majority of the jury's findings and refused to implement most
suggested changes.
In a written
response, district officials asked whether "the empaneled Grand Jury that
prepared the report was behaving in the public's interest or was it searching
for nonexistent evidence to support a pre-determined conclusion from a group of
'not-in-my-backyard' individuals who knew Grand Jury members."
Lack of diversity
Every year, the
presiding judge from the superior court swears in 19 jurors and explains their
duties.
Applicants must be
18 years old, citizens of the United States and cannot concurrently be serving
as a trial juror. Applications for the next Civil Grand Jury will open this
summer.
Last year, more
than 100 applications were received for the 19 spots on the jury, with eight
"hold over" applicants from 2019.
But despite
Silicon Valley's rich diversity, the people lining up to serve on the jury are
mostly older, white men.
Santa Clara County
officials told San José Spotlight that racial data for the current jury is not
available. Only data about applicants for this year's pool are documented and
released, they said. Those numbers show applicants are nearly 70% white, 10%
Asian, about 2% Black, and 5.5% Hispanic/Latino. The majority—60%—were also
men.
According to the
United States Census Bureau, only 30% of Santa Clara County residents are white
alone. A quarter of the county's residents are Hispanic or Latino, 39% are of
Asian descent and about 3% are Black.
Image courtesy of
Santa Clara County Superior Court.
The most common
age group to apply were residents ages 65 to 74 with 42 applications, followed
by ages 55 to 64 with 33 applications.
The former jury
member said it's "peculiar" that Santa Clara County claims it doesn't
have race and gender information for its current members.
"It would
seem to me that the court would have the info for any juror who chose to give
out their racial background," the former member said.
In about two years
on the Civil Grand Jury, the former member said there were only two African
American jurors and one Latino juror.
The reason for the
lack of racial diversity, the member believes, is economical.
Jurors are
required to serve about 25 hours a week, according to the county's website, and
only get paid $20 a day. That's why they aren't reaching communities of color
and traditionally economically disadvantaged communities to get more
representation on the jury, the member said.
"If you're
asking someone to clear their calendar for two to three days a week and you're
paying them $20 as a per diem, you really have to ask why is one of the
wealthiest counties in the state paying an abysmal amount," the member
said.
Civil Grand Jury
Deputy Manager Britney Huelbig said the court tries to recruit grand juries
that reflect a "representative cross-section of the community they
serve."
"Those
methods include obtaining recommendations for grand jurors who encompass a
cross-section of the county's population base," Huelbig said, "solicited
from a broad representation of community-based organizations, civic leaders and
superior court judges, referees and commissioners, and having the court
consider carry-over grand jury selections."
No particular
background is necessary to be a grand juror, Huelbig said, and diversity of
members "is one of the grand jury's greatest strengths."
But the former
jury member said the low pay and time commitment tends to favor older, retired
people.
"It's not
something random or arbitrary," said William Armaline, director of the
Human Rights Collaborative at San Jose State University. "It's supposed to
be a jury of one's peers, that's the theoretical principle."
Equitable
recruitment is especially difficult during the pandemic, Armaline said.
"Working
class people are trying to find time to eat, maybe deal with their family and
kids for more than five minutes at a time, pay their bills," Armaline
said. He added that officials in the justice system are aware of it, but this
is a "genuinely difficult problem."
Patch.com Campbell,
CA
San Jose Spotlight, News Partner
By Madelyn Reese
May 13, 2021
No comments:
Post a Comment