The Associated Press
Posted: 02/06/2009 08:36:06 PM PST
ORANGE, Calif.—The veteran sheriff's deputy on duty when an inmate was stomped to death by other prisoners at an Orange County jail has left the Sheriff's Department.
After 10 months on paid leave, Deputy Kevin Taylor's last day was Wednesday. The department's disciplinary records are private so it was not clear if he resigned or was fired.
Taylor is the eighth sheriff's employee to leave the department amid a grand jury investigation into the 2006 death.
A grand jury investigation found that John Derek Chamberlain, 41, was beaten to death while Taylor watched television nearby. Taylor was not charged.
Suspects in the killing told investigators that Taylor and another deputy ordered them to attack Chamberlain because the deputies labeled him a child molester. Chamberlain was awaiting trial on possessing child pornography.
———
Information from: The Orange County Register, http://www.ocregister.com
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_11649284?nclick_check=1
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Grand Jury Indicts Ten Defendants in Widespread Home Foreclosure Rescue Scam
Grand Jury Indicts Ten Defendants in Widespread Home Foreclosure Rescue Scam
Ten people have been indicted by the Grand Jury on a huge real estate fraud scheme that stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from victims. The scam was discovered last summer after the suspects victimized some 400 homeowners
The defendants preyed on mostly non-English speaking, Hispanic homeowners who were in foreclosure, claiming to offer assistance through a land grant. The defendants used the business names of Federal Land Grant Company; Land Grant Services; and KBS Resources.
Arraigned in Superior Court today on charges of conspiracy, grand theft, and deceitful practices as foreclosure consultants were William Hutchings, Xiaoke Li, both of San Diego; Edgar Martinez, Diego Gil, Shawna Landis, of Sorrento Valley, Octavio Escatel, Joel E. Garcia, Stephen P. Mauer, Rose M. Napoli, and Alex Olmos, 39. If convicted, the defendants face from three to 25 or more years in prison.
Two methods were used for inducing owners of residences in foreclosure to participate in a so-called land grant program. One method required homeowners to pay a one-time fee of up to $10,000 to put their property in a land grant. The second method was a lease back scheme. In both scenarios, the homeowner was typically evicted from their property at the completion of foreclosure proceedings and retained no legally recognized title to their property.
http://www.laprensa-sandiego.org/current/Scam.020609.htm
Ten people have been indicted by the Grand Jury on a huge real estate fraud scheme that stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from victims. The scam was discovered last summer after the suspects victimized some 400 homeowners
The defendants preyed on mostly non-English speaking, Hispanic homeowners who were in foreclosure, claiming to offer assistance through a land grant. The defendants used the business names of Federal Land Grant Company; Land Grant Services; and KBS Resources.
Arraigned in Superior Court today on charges of conspiracy, grand theft, and deceitful practices as foreclosure consultants were William Hutchings, Xiaoke Li, both of San Diego; Edgar Martinez, Diego Gil, Shawna Landis, of Sorrento Valley, Octavio Escatel, Joel E. Garcia, Stephen P. Mauer, Rose M. Napoli, and Alex Olmos, 39. If convicted, the defendants face from three to 25 or more years in prison.
Two methods were used for inducing owners of residences in foreclosure to participate in a so-called land grant program. One method required homeowners to pay a one-time fee of up to $10,000 to put their property in a land grant. The second method was a lease back scheme. In both scenarios, the homeowner was typically evicted from their property at the completion of foreclosure proceedings and retained no legally recognized title to their property.
http://www.laprensa-sandiego.org/current/Scam.020609.htm
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Grand Jury Report: County Jail populations declining
By Jennifer Squires
Posted: 02/04/2009 01:30:54 AM PST
SANTA CRUZ -- While jail and prison populations balloon statewide and across the nation, county jail facilities have reduced overcrowding in the past few years, according to the county's annual grand jury report.
The report, which takes a look at jail facilities each year, applauded efforts by the Sheriff's Office and its partners in the criminal justice system for making adjustments in how inmates are screened, housed and supervised to reduce overcrowding at county incarceration centers.
The average monthly population at County Jail on Water Street in Santa Cruz fell 15 percent between 2004 and 2007, according to the report. Current statistics indicate that number continues to decline.
Sheriff-Coroner Steve Robbins, whose agency administers the local jail system, said the population reduction at County Jail -- regularly the most-crowded of the five inmate holding areas in the county -- has been a deliberate effort for the past half-decade so the county could avoid federally decreed population caps.
"The great thing is we're making strides to stay ahead of the curve," Robbins said.
The report lists figures from the first six months of 2007, when the average monthly population there was 358 inmates, a significant decline from 2004 when the average population was 408 and a far cry from the 450-plus inmates that were housed in the facility a decade ago.
According to County Jail statistics Tuesday, the population was 299 inmates, below the state-rated capacity of 311.
To keep a handle on jail population, the Sheriff's Office established a Jail Overcrowding Committee that meets quarterly to discuss concerns. The committee -- comprised of representatives from law enforcement, the judiciary, the District Attorney's Office, the Probation Department, the Public Defenders Office, the county Board of Supervisors and other agencies -- developed a set of strategies to reduce overcrowding.
Among those was implementation of a new classification system that screens inmates to determine whom might be better-suited for a work release or GPS monitoring program.
"Obviously, we want to keep the more violent people incarcerated," Robbins said.
The focus on reducing overcrowding is two-fold, Robbins said. Overcrowding strains jail staff and resources, making it more difficult to manage the facility and administer programs, such as counseling, medical care and educational opportunities. Also, in the long term, habitual overcrowding issues can led to government-imposed population caps -- meaning some inmates would have to be released if the jail population hit a set figure.
Robbins said county jail facilities have managed to avoid that fate, though other counties in California have not.
"For those communities, it's a public safety concern for them," Robbins said.
Jail population
Go online to find out how many people are incarcerated in county jail facilities at any time:
Visit www.scsheriff.com and click on 'Corrections.' Then select 'Jail Population Report."
http://www.mercurynews.com/centralcoast/ci_11622838?nclick_check=1
Posted: 02/04/2009 01:30:54 AM PST
SANTA CRUZ -- While jail and prison populations balloon statewide and across the nation, county jail facilities have reduced overcrowding in the past few years, according to the county's annual grand jury report.
The report, which takes a look at jail facilities each year, applauded efforts by the Sheriff's Office and its partners in the criminal justice system for making adjustments in how inmates are screened, housed and supervised to reduce overcrowding at county incarceration centers.
The average monthly population at County Jail on Water Street in Santa Cruz fell 15 percent between 2004 and 2007, according to the report. Current statistics indicate that number continues to decline.
Sheriff-Coroner Steve Robbins, whose agency administers the local jail system, said the population reduction at County Jail -- regularly the most-crowded of the five inmate holding areas in the county -- has been a deliberate effort for the past half-decade so the county could avoid federally decreed population caps.
"The great thing is we're making strides to stay ahead of the curve," Robbins said.
The report lists figures from the first six months of 2007, when the average monthly population there was 358 inmates, a significant decline from 2004 when the average population was 408 and a far cry from the 450-plus inmates that were housed in the facility a decade ago.
According to County Jail statistics Tuesday, the population was 299 inmates, below the state-rated capacity of 311.
To keep a handle on jail population, the Sheriff's Office established a Jail Overcrowding Committee that meets quarterly to discuss concerns. The committee -- comprised of representatives from law enforcement, the judiciary, the District Attorney's Office, the Probation Department, the Public Defenders Office, the county Board of Supervisors and other agencies -- developed a set of strategies to reduce overcrowding.
Among those was implementation of a new classification system that screens inmates to determine whom might be better-suited for a work release or GPS monitoring program.
"Obviously, we want to keep the more violent people incarcerated," Robbins said.
The focus on reducing overcrowding is two-fold, Robbins said. Overcrowding strains jail staff and resources, making it more difficult to manage the facility and administer programs, such as counseling, medical care and educational opportunities. Also, in the long term, habitual overcrowding issues can led to government-imposed population caps -- meaning some inmates would have to be released if the jail population hit a set figure.
Robbins said county jail facilities have managed to avoid that fate, though other counties in California have not.
"For those communities, it's a public safety concern for them," Robbins said.
Jail population
Go online to find out how many people are incarcerated in county jail facilities at any time:
Visit www.scsheriff.com and click on 'Corrections.' Then select 'Jail Population Report."
http://www.mercurynews.com/centralcoast/ci_11622838?nclick_check=1
Monday, February 2, 2009
Grand jury praises SLO D.A.’s actions in 2002 fatal Grover Beach case involving Freitas
Gerald Shea and his office changed procedures in response to delay in prosecution of 2002 case
Bob Cuddy - bcuddy@thetribunenews.com
The county civil grand jury has applauded District Attorney Gerald Shea’s office for instituting changes after Kenneth Freitas struck and killed Sarah Scruggs in Grover Beach in 2002.
As part of its activities, the citizen panel reviews how well recommendations of previous years’ grand juries have been handled. In this case, it was looking into suggestions the 2003-04 grand jury made in the wake of the tragic traffic death.
Freitas was convicted of misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter for fatally striking 17-year-old Scruggs at the intersection of West Grand Avenue and Fifth Street.
But the trial and conviction took close to a year to get under way. Some charged that was because employees of the county District Attorney’s Office were professionally close to Frank Freitas, the county treasurer-tax collector and Kenneth Freitas’ father.
The grand jury conducted its inquiry after more than 700 people, including Scruggs’ family, demanded an investigation of the District Attorney’s Office handling of the case.
It was not until the investigation began that the District Attorney’s Office filed charges against Freitas.
At the time, Freitas had 24 prior traffic citations — 13 for speeding — and two reckless driving convictions.
Following the incident, Shea’s office instituted a system of requiring monthly status reviews of all pending cases.
It shares this information — called the Pending Cases Report — with the county’s victim witness division.
Shea’s office also has developed new ways to keep track of vehicular manslaughter cases and other cases involving a fatality, grand jurors wrote in their report.
They also praised Shea’s office for issuing a memo that would help deputy district attorneys identify potential conflicts of interest early in a case.
“The communication between the district attorney, the victim witness division, and victims’ families has been improved,” the grand jury wrote.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/607979.html
Bob Cuddy - bcuddy@thetribunenews.com
The county civil grand jury has applauded District Attorney Gerald Shea’s office for instituting changes after Kenneth Freitas struck and killed Sarah Scruggs in Grover Beach in 2002.
As part of its activities, the citizen panel reviews how well recommendations of previous years’ grand juries have been handled. In this case, it was looking into suggestions the 2003-04 grand jury made in the wake of the tragic traffic death.
Freitas was convicted of misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter for fatally striking 17-year-old Scruggs at the intersection of West Grand Avenue and Fifth Street.
But the trial and conviction took close to a year to get under way. Some charged that was because employees of the county District Attorney’s Office were professionally close to Frank Freitas, the county treasurer-tax collector and Kenneth Freitas’ father.
The grand jury conducted its inquiry after more than 700 people, including Scruggs’ family, demanded an investigation of the District Attorney’s Office handling of the case.
It was not until the investigation began that the District Attorney’s Office filed charges against Freitas.
At the time, Freitas had 24 prior traffic citations — 13 for speeding — and two reckless driving convictions.
Following the incident, Shea’s office instituted a system of requiring monthly status reviews of all pending cases.
It shares this information — called the Pending Cases Report — with the county’s victim witness division.
Shea’s office also has developed new ways to keep track of vehicular manslaughter cases and other cases involving a fatality, grand jurors wrote in their report.
They also praised Shea’s office for issuing a memo that would help deputy district attorneys identify potential conflicts of interest early in a case.
“The communication between the district attorney, the victim witness division, and victims’ families has been improved,” the grand jury wrote.
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/607979.html
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
O.C. grand jury criticizes staffing at Orangewood Children's Home
The panel recommends allowing the neighboring juvenile hall to use part of the underutilized, overstaffed Orangewood facility for abused and neglected children in Orange.
By Tami Abdollah
10:58 PM PST, January 27, 2009
While an Orange County facility that cares for abused and neglected children provides spacious cottage-like facilities and roughly four staffers per child, conditions at county juvenile hall are far more bleak, with a shortage of beds and waiting lists for basic programs, according to a grand jury report released Tuesday.
"It's almost like you are comparing an area of barracks to Beverly Hills," said grand jury foreman Jim Perez.
The grand jury report recommends that the county's Social Services Agency give up at least half of its property at Orangewood Children's Home in Orange in order to improve conditions at the Probation Department's facilities next door.
It also suggests the county consider reducing staff at the children's home because its numbers have steadily decreased. Orangewood served up to 300 children in the 1990s but now serves roughly 75 children because of declining need.
County officials said they would review the grand jury report and respond to the Board of Supervisors within 90 days.
"I will say we've worked very hard to reduce the number of children at the Orangewood facility," said Ingrid Harita, director of the county's Social Services Agency. "The abused and neglected children of Orange County really need and deserve a safe and nurturing environment, and we provide that at Orangewood."
More than 300 employees and 250 volunteers serve the 75 children at Orangewood at a cost of $739 per child each day; that compares with 479 staffers for 559 children in the Probation Department at a cost of $228 per child each day, according to the report.
The report concluded that half of Orangewood could be used by the Probation Department without affecting the quality of care for children at Orangewood.
Grand jurors estimated that the savings to taxpayers could be in the millions. The Orangewood facility costs about $23 million a year to run, according to the report.
"We hope that some common sense will prevail and the Orange County citizens will look at the needs of all children, not just some children," Perez said.
This is the third grand jury report that has addressed the Orangewood facility. The first, in 1999-2000, also found that the Orangewood facility was overstaffed. The second, in 2006-07, again challenged the "overstaffing and underutilization" of the facility. County authorities said high staffing levels were necessary because children at Orangewood are "more emotionally and developmentally damaged" and require an "increased level of care."
Orange County grand jurors contend that many children at juvenile hall, though classified as lawbreakers, fit the same profiles and require the same high level of care as those sent to the Orangewood facility.
Recently 210 positions at the Social Services Agency were eliminated; the Probation Department was also hit with the loss of more than 90 beds at one of its juvenile facilities, and it will also be closing one of its youth and family resource centers at the end of this week.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-me-orangewood28-2009jan28,1,2320279.story
By Tami Abdollah
10:58 PM PST, January 27, 2009
While an Orange County facility that cares for abused and neglected children provides spacious cottage-like facilities and roughly four staffers per child, conditions at county juvenile hall are far more bleak, with a shortage of beds and waiting lists for basic programs, according to a grand jury report released Tuesday.
"It's almost like you are comparing an area of barracks to Beverly Hills," said grand jury foreman Jim Perez.
The grand jury report recommends that the county's Social Services Agency give up at least half of its property at Orangewood Children's Home in Orange in order to improve conditions at the Probation Department's facilities next door.
It also suggests the county consider reducing staff at the children's home because its numbers have steadily decreased. Orangewood served up to 300 children in the 1990s but now serves roughly 75 children because of declining need.
County officials said they would review the grand jury report and respond to the Board of Supervisors within 90 days.
"I will say we've worked very hard to reduce the number of children at the Orangewood facility," said Ingrid Harita, director of the county's Social Services Agency. "The abused and neglected children of Orange County really need and deserve a safe and nurturing environment, and we provide that at Orangewood."
More than 300 employees and 250 volunteers serve the 75 children at Orangewood at a cost of $739 per child each day; that compares with 479 staffers for 559 children in the Probation Department at a cost of $228 per child each day, according to the report.
The report concluded that half of Orangewood could be used by the Probation Department without affecting the quality of care for children at Orangewood.
Grand jurors estimated that the savings to taxpayers could be in the millions. The Orangewood facility costs about $23 million a year to run, according to the report.
"We hope that some common sense will prevail and the Orange County citizens will look at the needs of all children, not just some children," Perez said.
This is the third grand jury report that has addressed the Orangewood facility. The first, in 1999-2000, also found that the Orangewood facility was overstaffed. The second, in 2006-07, again challenged the "overstaffing and underutilization" of the facility. County authorities said high staffing levels were necessary because children at Orangewood are "more emotionally and developmentally damaged" and require an "increased level of care."
Orange County grand jurors contend that many children at juvenile hall, though classified as lawbreakers, fit the same profiles and require the same high level of care as those sent to the Orangewood facility.
Recently 210 positions at the Social Services Agency were eliminated; the Probation Department was also hit with the loss of more than 90 beds at one of its juvenile facilities, and it will also be closing one of its youth and family resource centers at the end of this week.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-me-orangewood28-2009jan28,1,2320279.story
County revises grand jury reimbursement
By a vote of 3-2, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved an amendment to the ordinance pertaining to reimbursements for grand jury members.
"The purpose for the revision to the current ordinance is to set forth and strengthen guidelines related to overnight stay and reimbursement for business meetings relative to reimbursements for meals," stated a portion of the attached agenda summary.
The compensation each grand juror receives was adjusted from $25 for each full day attendance and $10 for each half day to $25 for each full panel meeting and $10 for each committee or investigative meeting, not to exceed $25.
"Grand Jurors will be entitled to reimbursement for lunch at rates set for county employees only after a Grand Juror has attended a minimum of two hours of full panel or committee meetings, investigative sessions or other legitimate activities such as orientation sessions and training sessions," stated a portion of the revised ordinance.
"Grand Jurors conducting official business in the county seat and who reside more than 30 miles from the county seat may elect to stay overnight rather than drive back and forth to their residences and will be reimbursed for lodging and dinner costs incurred for no more than two nights per week exclusive of the State Grand Jury Training."
CEO Tom Mitchell said his office had been in contact with the grand jury in reference to their reimbursements.
"The grand jury, despite the best efforts,is projected to go over budget for this year," he said. "I think there is a philosophical difference between our office and the grand jury about how much should be available for their resources. We're limited in how much money we can provide to the grand jury. We gave the grand jury what we felt was the same treatment as other county departments."
Finley Williams, the grand jury's foreman, said travel budget overruns were inevitable.
"It is virtually impossible to calculate travel costs until we have jury selection in June," he said. "In my conversations with the CEO and staff I noted that the grand jury had overrun its travel budget for two years in a row. Some of our cost saving strategies have worked well. Others have not. Additional travel funds are needed to complete this year's work. This year we have five jurors who come from the coast. This was doomed to failure before it started."
Board Chairman and 3rd District Supervisor John Pinches said he was upset that he was previously criticized for his travel expenses by the grand jury.
"I refunded the county about $3,500," he said. "That whole process was frustrating to me."
Fourth District Supervisor Kendall Smith said she "applauded" the grand jury for seeking jurors from all parts of the county, but that budget constraints should result in more frugal spending.
"The bottom line financial issue is another matter," she said. "There's a disconnect between conveying your concerns about the funds and having funds materialize in the manner you're requesting. We've been asking department heads to do more with less for years. In respecting that we have a large county with costs of getting those jurors to the county, that's a huge challenge. Unfortunately, what needs to be looked at is the frequency of meetings or the topics. You have to balance your workload to meet the constraints of the budget...It's discretionary to have meals."
Williams said the comparison with county department heads was unfair.
"We're not employees," he said. "We're volunteers. They address these issues using their life's experiences. Most of what we investigate comes from the citizens of this county. To limit the grand jury's operations by use of the budget is something the Legislature has said will not happen. What I'm here to do today is to tell you we're going to exceed our budget."
Smith said other committees and boards around the county worked with absolutely no compensation.
"It's a difficult volunteer job so there needs to be some coverage for expense," she said. "I think we all agree with that. There are many committees who don't receive any compensation. There's a lot of that and that's what keeps Mendocino County going is that volunteer spirit."
Williams said the amount of time and work required of the grand jury members was substantial.
"It's also a state-mandated watchdog and that's a difference from some of the others," he said. "This is not a monthly meeting or bimonthly meeting. This is something where people are giving up a substantial portion of their lives."
Second District Supervisor John McCowen said more could be done to tighten the grand jury's belt.
"I disagree with your statement that you've done everything to cut costs," he said. "Rather than having to meet 50 weeks out of the year you could adjust that and have some meetings where you don't meet as frequently. I speak as a former grand juror, about 20 years ago. I think that you could have effective savings, and I do appreciate the efforts that were made to cut costs, but I think you could go further."
Williams said that pulling of the grand jury's purse strings would result in a control of what it could investigate.
"The end result of putting fiscal restraints on the grand jury translates into control of topics the grand jury covers," he said. "I want the grand jury to be able to investigate anything it deems appropriate."
Fifth District Supervisor David Colfax said the restrictions grand jurors faced dissuaded many otherwise competent candidates from applying.
"I am concerned at the directive given by the judge and given by those who come onto the grand jury saying you give up two years of your life," he said. "There aren't very many people in Mendocino County who have that luxury. There are people who would be willing to give 10 hours a week or maybe five hours per week, but when you have people taking on 20 hours a week work, you are talking about a very constricted population. My feeling here is that one of the things that's important to be doing in terms of management is what issues should be brought forward."
During public comment, Wendy Roberts, a grand juror, said it was imperative for the grand jury to continue its work.
"It is the single best job I've ever had," she said. "It's research. It's really getting to know the county, not getting bogged down in insular, little micro issues. It's very valuable stuff. I do want you to understand that you're making a long-term investment."
Mitchell said he took offense to Williams' comments and worried that this action might set a negative precedent for others.
"Watchdog is one of those buzzwords that implies we're doing something wrong," he said. "To qualify the term as watchdog is a negative termŠIf they're granted additional funds that means that one more county worker might be laid off. You cannot ignore the fact that there is not enough funds. I feel for our employeesŠWe appreciate the support of the grand jury, but perhaps we need to have a different model for how we do business."
After discussion had finished, the reimbursement amendment passed 3-2, with Pinches and Colfax dissenting.
http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/ci_11570734
"The purpose for the revision to the current ordinance is to set forth and strengthen guidelines related to overnight stay and reimbursement for business meetings relative to reimbursements for meals," stated a portion of the attached agenda summary.
The compensation each grand juror receives was adjusted from $25 for each full day attendance and $10 for each half day to $25 for each full panel meeting and $10 for each committee or investigative meeting, not to exceed $25.
"Grand Jurors will be entitled to reimbursement for lunch at rates set for county employees only after a Grand Juror has attended a minimum of two hours of full panel or committee meetings, investigative sessions or other legitimate activities such as orientation sessions and training sessions," stated a portion of the revised ordinance.
"Grand Jurors conducting official business in the county seat and who reside more than 30 miles from the county seat may elect to stay overnight rather than drive back and forth to their residences and will be reimbursed for lodging and dinner costs incurred for no more than two nights per week exclusive of the State Grand Jury Training."
CEO Tom Mitchell said his office had been in contact with the grand jury in reference to their reimbursements.
"The grand jury, despite the best efforts,is projected to go over budget for this year," he said. "I think there is a philosophical difference between our office and the grand jury about how much should be available for their resources. We're limited in how much money we can provide to the grand jury. We gave the grand jury what we felt was the same treatment as other county departments."
Finley Williams, the grand jury's foreman, said travel budget overruns were inevitable.
"It is virtually impossible to calculate travel costs until we have jury selection in June," he said. "In my conversations with the CEO and staff I noted that the grand jury had overrun its travel budget for two years in a row. Some of our cost saving strategies have worked well. Others have not. Additional travel funds are needed to complete this year's work. This year we have five jurors who come from the coast. This was doomed to failure before it started."
Board Chairman and 3rd District Supervisor John Pinches said he was upset that he was previously criticized for his travel expenses by the grand jury.
"I refunded the county about $3,500," he said. "That whole process was frustrating to me."
Fourth District Supervisor Kendall Smith said she "applauded" the grand jury for seeking jurors from all parts of the county, but that budget constraints should result in more frugal spending.
"The bottom line financial issue is another matter," she said. "There's a disconnect between conveying your concerns about the funds and having funds materialize in the manner you're requesting. We've been asking department heads to do more with less for years. In respecting that we have a large county with costs of getting those jurors to the county, that's a huge challenge. Unfortunately, what needs to be looked at is the frequency of meetings or the topics. You have to balance your workload to meet the constraints of the budget...It's discretionary to have meals."
Williams said the comparison with county department heads was unfair.
"We're not employees," he said. "We're volunteers. They address these issues using their life's experiences. Most of what we investigate comes from the citizens of this county. To limit the grand jury's operations by use of the budget is something the Legislature has said will not happen. What I'm here to do today is to tell you we're going to exceed our budget."
Smith said other committees and boards around the county worked with absolutely no compensation.
"It's a difficult volunteer job so there needs to be some coverage for expense," she said. "I think we all agree with that. There are many committees who don't receive any compensation. There's a lot of that and that's what keeps Mendocino County going is that volunteer spirit."
Williams said the amount of time and work required of the grand jury members was substantial.
"It's also a state-mandated watchdog and that's a difference from some of the others," he said. "This is not a monthly meeting or bimonthly meeting. This is something where people are giving up a substantial portion of their lives."
Second District Supervisor John McCowen said more could be done to tighten the grand jury's belt.
"I disagree with your statement that you've done everything to cut costs," he said. "Rather than having to meet 50 weeks out of the year you could adjust that and have some meetings where you don't meet as frequently. I speak as a former grand juror, about 20 years ago. I think that you could have effective savings, and I do appreciate the efforts that were made to cut costs, but I think you could go further."
Williams said that pulling of the grand jury's purse strings would result in a control of what it could investigate.
"The end result of putting fiscal restraints on the grand jury translates into control of topics the grand jury covers," he said. "I want the grand jury to be able to investigate anything it deems appropriate."
Fifth District Supervisor David Colfax said the restrictions grand jurors faced dissuaded many otherwise competent candidates from applying.
"I am concerned at the directive given by the judge and given by those who come onto the grand jury saying you give up two years of your life," he said. "There aren't very many people in Mendocino County who have that luxury. There are people who would be willing to give 10 hours a week or maybe five hours per week, but when you have people taking on 20 hours a week work, you are talking about a very constricted population. My feeling here is that one of the things that's important to be doing in terms of management is what issues should be brought forward."
During public comment, Wendy Roberts, a grand juror, said it was imperative for the grand jury to continue its work.
"It is the single best job I've ever had," she said. "It's research. It's really getting to know the county, not getting bogged down in insular, little micro issues. It's very valuable stuff. I do want you to understand that you're making a long-term investment."
Mitchell said he took offense to Williams' comments and worried that this action might set a negative precedent for others.
"Watchdog is one of those buzzwords that implies we're doing something wrong," he said. "To qualify the term as watchdog is a negative termŠIf they're granted additional funds that means that one more county worker might be laid off. You cannot ignore the fact that there is not enough funds. I feel for our employeesŠWe appreciate the support of the grand jury, but perhaps we need to have a different model for how we do business."
After discussion had finished, the reimbursement amendment passed 3-2, with Pinches and Colfax dissenting.
http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/ci_11570734
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Grand jury reports on sheriff's property room
The Bakersfield Californian | Tuesday, Jan 27 2009 10:43 AM
The Kern County grand jury released a report Tuesday saying it’s impressed with the Sheriff’s Department’s property room but has recommendations for improvement.
The recommendations included that officials provide protective face masks and latex gloves to everyone who enters certain evidence rooms; purchase drying equipment for blood-soaked evidence; implement an effective pest control program in the homicide evidence room; and look into buying a cutting machine to destroy weapons.
The full report and others released by the grand jury are available at www.co.kern.ca.us/grandjury.
http://www.bakersfield.com/102/story/674797.html
The Kern County grand jury released a report Tuesday saying it’s impressed with the Sheriff’s Department’s property room but has recommendations for improvement.
The recommendations included that officials provide protective face masks and latex gloves to everyone who enters certain evidence rooms; purchase drying equipment for blood-soaked evidence; implement an effective pest control program in the homicide evidence room; and look into buying a cutting machine to destroy weapons.
The full report and others released by the grand jury are available at www.co.kern.ca.us/grandjury.
http://www.bakersfield.com/102/story/674797.html
Monday, January 26, 2009
Grand jury accuses Coalinga council of conflicts, misconduct
By Chris Collins / The Fresno Bee
The Coalinga City Council wastes money, circumvents open-meeting laws and has conflicts of interests, the Fresno County grand jury concludes in a stinging report issued Friday.
The seven-page report says that in one instance, council members promised city police officers added benefits if they agreed to turn against their police chief. In another case, a council member who also is a sheriff's sergeant insisted on hiring deputies with the Sheriff's Office as security guards -- even though extra security was unnecessary, the report said.
"The investigation revealed that these issues have been an ongoing problem for many years," the report said. "... Testimony and documentation indicated that some of the City Council members were unaware of their municipal code, personnel rules, and the limits of their authority."
The report doesn't accuse the council members of committing any crimes.
Two of the council members referred to in the report -- Mike Oxborrow and Tony Garcia -- denied any wrongdoing Friday. Former Mayor Trish Hill, who is accused of helping a developer who had a business relationship with her boss, declined to comment.
"The report is full of some falsehoods," Oxborrow said. "To give the impression we're all messed up and dysfunctional right now is just flat wrong."
The report notes that the city has had a troubled history, with 17 city managers and nine police chiefs in the past 18 years.
Many of the issues seem to revolve around a long-running dispute involving three council members -- Oxborrow, Garcia and Hill -- the former city manager, Stephen Julian, and the former police chief, Jerry Galvin.
Sometime around July 2007, for reasons that aren't clear, the council asked Julian to fire Galvin. Julian refused, and the council placed him on administrative leave. They also passed an ordinance giving themselves the power to fire Galvin directly.
But a group of Coalinga residents intervened. They persuaded two-thirds of the city's voters to pass a measure that returned hiring and firing power to the city manager. Nevertheless, Galvin announced in April that he would retire.
Later that month, the council fired Julian, even though he had a contract to work to the end of 2009. He later sued and settled for $225,000.
The grand jury report said that in March 2007, Oxborrow, Hill and Garcia met with the Coalinga Police Officers Association. The council members rotated in and out of the meeting in "a deliberate attempt to avoid the quorum requirements of the Brown Act," the report said, referring to the state open-meetings law that prohibits a majority of council members from meeting together outside of a council meeting.
The report said the council members in that meeting tried to get the officers to agree that Galvin should be fired and offered them additional job benefits "in exchange for their support." Nevertheless, the officers held a vote expressing confidence in Galvin.
Oxborrow and Garcia denied Friday discussing any plans to fire Galvin at the meeting or offering anything in exchange for the officers' support of such a plan.
A separate incident occurred in May 2007 during an annual city festival, the grand jury report said. Galvin wanted to use Coalinga police officers and reserve deputies from the Sheriff's Office to provide security at a minimal cost. But Garcia, who also is a sheriff's sergeant, "insisted" that the city contract with the Sheriff's Office to hire full-time sheriff's deputies -- at $50 an hour -- the report said. In the end, the city spent an extra $4,000 to $5,000.
Garcia said he was only concerned with making sure there were enough trained officers at the event. He said he recused himself when the council voted 4-0 to hire the deputies.
There was another incident with the appearance of a conflict of interest, the grand jury reported. At some point in 2007, Hill and the city's planner met with developers who wanted to build on a large swath of land that potentially would more than double Coalinga's size. Part of the land was owned by a ranch owner who employs Hill as a secretary, city officials said.
Julian, the former city manager, said the developer had been told for years that a large part of the property was outside the area designated for the city's expansion. Nevertheless, the Planning Commission and City Council approved the development in late 2007.
Hill joined the City Council in voting to change the city's general plan so the development could move forward, which prompted the need for a new environmental study, the grand jury report said.
Normally the developer would pay for such a study, but the city footed the $100,000 bill, the report said.
Oxborrow said the city handled the costs because the council was afraid the developer would sue if it had to pay for a study that it didn't initially know would be needed.
Bill Skinner, the city's current city manager, said the city plans to make a formal response to the grand jury report.
In addition, the city will soon adopt a code of ethics and will begin a series of workshops to train City Council members on open-meeting laws, the city's code, how to handle personnel issues and how to avoid conflicts of interest. he said.
"Things have been moving in the positive direction," Skinner said.
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/1150904.html
The Coalinga City Council wastes money, circumvents open-meeting laws and has conflicts of interests, the Fresno County grand jury concludes in a stinging report issued Friday.
The seven-page report says that in one instance, council members promised city police officers added benefits if they agreed to turn against their police chief. In another case, a council member who also is a sheriff's sergeant insisted on hiring deputies with the Sheriff's Office as security guards -- even though extra security was unnecessary, the report said.
"The investigation revealed that these issues have been an ongoing problem for many years," the report said. "... Testimony and documentation indicated that some of the City Council members were unaware of their municipal code, personnel rules, and the limits of their authority."
The report doesn't accuse the council members of committing any crimes.
Two of the council members referred to in the report -- Mike Oxborrow and Tony Garcia -- denied any wrongdoing Friday. Former Mayor Trish Hill, who is accused of helping a developer who had a business relationship with her boss, declined to comment.
"The report is full of some falsehoods," Oxborrow said. "To give the impression we're all messed up and dysfunctional right now is just flat wrong."
The report notes that the city has had a troubled history, with 17 city managers and nine police chiefs in the past 18 years.
Many of the issues seem to revolve around a long-running dispute involving three council members -- Oxborrow, Garcia and Hill -- the former city manager, Stephen Julian, and the former police chief, Jerry Galvin.
Sometime around July 2007, for reasons that aren't clear, the council asked Julian to fire Galvin. Julian refused, and the council placed him on administrative leave. They also passed an ordinance giving themselves the power to fire Galvin directly.
But a group of Coalinga residents intervened. They persuaded two-thirds of the city's voters to pass a measure that returned hiring and firing power to the city manager. Nevertheless, Galvin announced in April that he would retire.
Later that month, the council fired Julian, even though he had a contract to work to the end of 2009. He later sued and settled for $225,000.
The grand jury report said that in March 2007, Oxborrow, Hill and Garcia met with the Coalinga Police Officers Association. The council members rotated in and out of the meeting in "a deliberate attempt to avoid the quorum requirements of the Brown Act," the report said, referring to the state open-meetings law that prohibits a majority of council members from meeting together outside of a council meeting.
The report said the council members in that meeting tried to get the officers to agree that Galvin should be fired and offered them additional job benefits "in exchange for their support." Nevertheless, the officers held a vote expressing confidence in Galvin.
Oxborrow and Garcia denied Friday discussing any plans to fire Galvin at the meeting or offering anything in exchange for the officers' support of such a plan.
A separate incident occurred in May 2007 during an annual city festival, the grand jury report said. Galvin wanted to use Coalinga police officers and reserve deputies from the Sheriff's Office to provide security at a minimal cost. But Garcia, who also is a sheriff's sergeant, "insisted" that the city contract with the Sheriff's Office to hire full-time sheriff's deputies -- at $50 an hour -- the report said. In the end, the city spent an extra $4,000 to $5,000.
Garcia said he was only concerned with making sure there were enough trained officers at the event. He said he recused himself when the council voted 4-0 to hire the deputies.
There was another incident with the appearance of a conflict of interest, the grand jury reported. At some point in 2007, Hill and the city's planner met with developers who wanted to build on a large swath of land that potentially would more than double Coalinga's size. Part of the land was owned by a ranch owner who employs Hill as a secretary, city officials said.
Julian, the former city manager, said the developer had been told for years that a large part of the property was outside the area designated for the city's expansion. Nevertheless, the Planning Commission and City Council approved the development in late 2007.
Hill joined the City Council in voting to change the city's general plan so the development could move forward, which prompted the need for a new environmental study, the grand jury report said.
Normally the developer would pay for such a study, but the city footed the $100,000 bill, the report said.
Oxborrow said the city handled the costs because the council was afraid the developer would sue if it had to pay for a study that it didn't initially know would be needed.
Bill Skinner, the city's current city manager, said the city plans to make a formal response to the grand jury report.
In addition, the city will soon adopt a code of ethics and will begin a series of workshops to train City Council members on open-meeting laws, the city's code, how to handle personnel issues and how to avoid conflicts of interest. he said.
"Things have been moving in the positive direction," Skinner said.
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/1150904.html
Friday, January 23, 2009
Grand jury report criticizes Coalinga City Council
Fresno County grand jury reported today that the Coalinga City Council intimidated city employees, showed disrespectful and unprofessional behavior during meetings, and cost the city more than $220,000 when it fired its city manager.
The panel also criticizes council members for spending more than $300,000 for legal fees and overstepping its authority.
In one incident, City Council member Tony Garcia, a sergeant employed by the Fresno County Sheriff’s Department, ordered the police chief to hire sheriff’s deputies for the 2007 Horn Toad Derby, an annual city event. In the past, the police chief had used his staff at no extra cost to the city.
Garcia’s demand cost the city $4,000 to $5,000 in extra security, the report said.
The report is available on the Fresno County Superior Court website at fresnosuperiorcourt.org. First click on "Jury" and then "Grand Jury;" the report will be indexed by the number and the year.
http://www.fresnobee.com/updates/story/1149993.html
Thursday, January 22, 2009
School district responds to grand jury report
| |
Two of the eight subjects in the Placer County Grand Jury’s 2007/2008 Final Report Responses released Friday pertain to Lincoln.
The two Lincoln subjects are on the financing, facilities and management by the Western Placer Unified School District and on the annual inspection of the Lincoln Police Department.
This week, the News Messenger looks at the school district’s responses. Next week, the News Messenger will look at the police department’s responses.
To view the complete report and responses, visit online at www.PlacerGrandJury.org.
A Grand Jury report examining the financial woes of Lincoln’s schools brought few complaints from school officials, whose responses, released Friday, largely agreed with the June report.
In a list of 11 responses, Western Placer Unified School District officials agreed or partially agreed with all of the Grand Jury’s findings they were asked to respond to.
“This has been a ‘teachable moment’ for the leaders in Western Placer Unified School District,” Superintendent Scott Leaman and Board of Education President Paul Carras wrote on Aug. 25.
The Grand Jury report criticized the community and the district for setting unrealistic goals and using risky, uncertain funding to get there.
The district’s responses were submitted to the 2007-2008 Grand Jury in August and were made public Friday only after the 2008-2009 Grand Jury had time to review them and organize a packet with responses from law enforcement officials and other departments investigated by the Grand Jury.
Grand Jury Foreman Rick Morgan said in a letter to Superior Court Judge Charles Wachob that some of the responses to the report were “lacking in substance.” He declined to specify which, as the current Grand Jury may be investigating them.
“I think if you read them, you can figure out (which responses didn’t satisfy the Grand Jury),” he said in a phone interview.
In the report, the Grand Jury made 15 specific recommendations to the school district, including suggestions to more clearly define and carefully monitor construction funding, bar partnerships between architects and primary contractors, create a department dedicated to overseeing new construction and ensure that the district is receiving the best value for its money in joint ventures with the city and outside contracts.
Three of the recommendations received only partial agreement from the district. One, a suggestion to create a separate district department for construction, would be a waste of money in times when nothing is being built, Leaman said Monday.
He called the recommendation “definitely something we’re going to look at,” and said it might make sense if the district undertook more large-scale construction projects.
The district also only partially agreed with a suggestion to ensure the nonprofits that work with the district – the Lincoln High School Farm Foundation and the Western Placer Education Foundation – maintain levels of transparency and adhere to laws pertaining to public foundations.
Because the foundations are separate entities from the school district and because many district leaders sit on the boards of the foundations, Leaman said, it would be “an inappropriate intrusion” for the school district to enforce any direct action on the foundations. Leaman said the district will continue to act as a “liaison” to the foundations, offering legal assistance and answers to specific questions.
A suggestion to expand use of the Lincoln High School Farm was also met with conditional support.
Leaman said the farm lacks infrastructure for expansion. A dirt road currently leads to the farm but Leaman said the district has plans to upgrade it before the eventual construction of the district’s third high school: a full campus on the 280-acre farm.
But that high school and the one that would presumably precede it, Twelve Bridges High School, may be a long way off.
In 2006, the planned Twelve Bridges High School – originally scheduled to open in Fall 2009 – was placed on hiatus due to increasing debt.
Cathy Allen, assistant superintendent of Facilities and Maintenance Services, said she isn’t sure when construction on the school will resume because the district would need more funding from state or local bonds. This funding could come in 2009 or 2010, depending on when the school board decides to put bonds before voters.
Allen hopes five new classrooms at Lincoln High School will be added in time for the fall 2009 semester and said completing Twelve Bridges High School could take two and a half to four years, depending on how many grades were accepted at a time.
Currently, Lincoln High School enrollment increases by about 100 students each year, Leaman said, which means it will be filled to capacity by 2013.
Stacey Brown, principal of Twelve Bridges Middle School, said because there is still room for growth at Lincoln High School, concerns about delays in the construction of Twelve Bridges High School have faded.
“In my first year, three years ago, there was more disappointment (among parents),” Brown said. “I hear much less now than I did then.”
He added that parents still ask periodically about plans for Twelve Bridges High School.
Tina Sims, 50, is one of those parents. Her daughter, 12-year-old Loreena, is a Twelve Bridges seventh-grader. Although they haven’t decided which high school she’ll attend, Sims said Twelve Bridges High School was at the top of their list.
“We’re really rooting for Twelve Bridges to be built,” Tina Sims said.
Loreena tugged on her mother’s elbow, interjecting.
“I want to go to Whitney!” she said. “All my friends are going there!”
Currently, there are 80 students at Whitney High School who transferred out of the Western Placer Unified School District to attend the Rocklin school, Leaman said.
Steve Berger, who has a son at Lincoln High School, also had his sights set on Twelve Bridges High School.
“I had hoped Twelve Bridges High School would be built,” he said. His son is a swimmer and wanted to use the planned aquatic center at Twelve Bridges.
In recent years, the district’s plan for expansion has been hindered by the region’s slowing growth. Because the district’s main sources of funding stem from bonds, developer fees and new homebuyers, revenue streams dry up when expansion slows.
As part of its June recommendations, the Grand Jury report urged the district to “guarantee all building projects are tied to defined and specific funding sources.”
In its response, the district pledged to avoid riskier funding, like the popular Certificate of Participation bonds, which don’t require voter approval and are secured by the operating budget and reserves.
The district has also been plagued by concerns about its relationship with its former architect and contractor, NTD-Stichler and Edge Development. In September 2007, district staff members complained about allegedly substandard build quality and inflated bills. A lawsuit related to the school district’s firing of one of the workers, Mike Thornbrough, is currently ongoing in Auburn, according to Thornbrough’s attorney, David Henderson.
In late 2007, the district chose five new architects for future work. In November, LPA completed a plan for expansion at Lincoln High School and Rainforth Grau will work on planning the district’s next elementary school.
http://lincolnnewsmessenger.com/detail/103887.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)