By Melody Gutierrez
mgutierrez@sacbee.com
Last Modified: Wednesday, May. 9, 2012 - 7:42 am
Outside legal counsel for Twin Rivers Unified billed the north area school district nearly $1 million in the past four months, prompting renewed calls by its teachers union for an audit.
"We've been keeping a running tab and it's well over $8 million since July 1, 2008," when the district was created, said John Ennis, the Twin Rivers teachers union president. "This is just ridiculous."
By comparison, the larger Sacramento City Unified spent $956,000 on legal fees in eight months between July 1, 2011, and March 31, 2012.
Timothy M. Cary & Associates billed the district $289,635 for April; $277,155 for March; $233,219 in February, and $120,535 in January. On Tuesday evening, the board argued over whether to ratify payments already made to the firm in March and April. The board deadlocked 3-3 on whether to pull the approval from the agenda. Without a majority, the payments were not pulled off the agenda and thus will be paid.
Timothy Cary did not respond to a call for comment.
Twin Rivers Unified spokeswoman Trinette Marquis declined to comment for this story. Instead, she issued a statement on behalf of the district that said monthly billings from Cary's firm "represent invoices for work done on multiple cases covering multiple months and are not for work done only in that month."
Twin Rivers Unified would not provide a copy of Cary's contract for this story. It asked The Bee to submit a Public Records Act request for the document.
Marquis' statement also said the legal billings include work Cary's firm contracted out to other firms or specialized legal services. For example, Cary's firm hired former FBI agent James Maddock to conduct an internal review of the Twin Rivers police force.
"It looks like it all goes to him (Cary), but it's not," said trustee Michelle Rivas. "The legal fees are winding down. I don't think people fully appreciate how difficult it is to merge school districts."
The past seven months have been especially difficult for Twin Rivers Unified as the district faced public scrutiny about its police department and broader questions about who ultimately is responsible for actions under investigations.
The Sacramento Police Department is conducting an outside review at the request of the school district, while the Sacramento County District Attorney's Office, the FBI and the state attorney general's office are looking into allegations of corruption, theft of district resources and mishandling of property.
The Sacramento County grand jury is also investigating for a second year in a row.
Meanwhile, in the midst of the investigations, all but one of the district's seven school board seats are being contested in the June 5 election. This is the first board race since the inaugural group of trustees of the new district took office in 2008.
Tuesday's board meeting will be the last board meeting leading up to the election after trustees voted to cancel the May 22 meeting. Board president Roger Westrup cited an extensive list of end of the year activities for canceling the meeting. The board voted 4-2 to cancel the May meeting, with Alecia Eugene Chasten and Cortez Quinn voting against.
The board previously voted to cancel the April 24 board meeting.
Ennis said it's irresponsible for trustees to consider canceling two of the past three school board meetings when there is so much turmoil in the district.
The union leader said clearly there is plenty of work to do, given that the board packet for Tuesday's meeting was more than 600 pages. "They listed reasons for canceling the meeting, but why don't they be honest?" Ennis said. "There is a board campaign and they are worried about the grand jury report."
Ennis addressed the board about the district's legal bills, something he's done regularly over the past year.
Trustee Cortez Quinn, who is endorsed by the teachers union, said he is also concerned about Cary's billings.
"We pay Mr. Cary a lot of money, and I don't know if his services are worth what we've paid him," said Quinn, who is the lone current school board member not running with a slate of mostly incumbents.
Cary's firm was responsible for an unusual and vague resolution pulled from last month's consent agenda that would have endorsed legal actions taken – or not taken – by top leaders in the Twin Rivers Unified School District, as well as by Cary's firm.
The resolution left many questioning its intent as well as how the district's outside legal firm so easily placed the item on the consent agenda without any board members reviewing it first.
Resolution 316 set to "affirm and ratify actions taken, or deliberately not taken, by the superintendent, cabinet, staff, and/or general counsel regarding issues affecting Twin Rivers Unified School District."
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/05/09/4476273/twin-rivers-unifieds-legal-tab.html#storylink=cpy
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
(San Joaquin County) Harassment report surfaces against mayor
By Zachary K. Johnson - Recordnet.com -
LATHROP - The Lathrop City Council voted to call in a civil grand jury to follow up on an investigation into allegations that the mayor harassed a city employee.
With a 4-0 vote, the council passed a resolution to direct the city attorney to send a complaint to the grand jury for further investigation and consideration of possible action, including removing Mayor J. "Chaka" Santos from office.
Santos recused himself from the vote, but he joined the audience and took to the lectern with other speakers during public comment. He said he welcomed the probe from the grand jury to both clear his name and to keep a positive light shining on Lathrop.
"If you decide to do so, let the grand jury decide," he said.
A city-commissioned investigation into harassment allegations found that Santos paid too much personal attention to an unidentified female employee, made inappropriate comments to her and, on one occasion, held onto her hand for too long after pretending to lick some rubber bands she had been holding.
Santos is not accused of touching the woman or trying to put his arm around her, but he gave her periodic "fist bumps," sometimes called her "baby," used "weird voices" and said he would take her to Sacramento with him when he became governor, according to the report.
Santos told the investigator said he was joking about becoming governor and had no knowledge of the rubber-band incident, according to the report. The investigator, attorney Margaret Kotzebue, questions the credibility of Santos, noting in her report that "he is simply not credible as a witness due to his nonresponsive answers to my questions, inconsistent statements and failure to recall essential events."
The resolution that passed Monday raised the possibility of removing Santos from office. This is not an authority the civil grand jury has, but it could make a recommendation to the District Attorney's Office, Lathrop City Attorney Salvador Navarete said.
It seemed fishy that the allegations came out during an election year, said Dan Doyle, one of the speakers at the lectern at the Monday meeting. "This all sounds like a witch hunt to me."
Santos was elected to a two-year term as mayor in 2010. After the report was released, Santos told The Record it was "politically motivated." He said that Lathrop City Councilman Sonny Dhaliwal wanted to become mayor and noted it was an election year.
"Dhaliwal isn't being accused. Don't try and create a distraction from the issue," former City Councilman Steve Dresser said.
The four sitting council members made brief statements before casting their votes. "We are doing our job to protect our employees and to protect taxpayers," Dhaliwal said. He also confirmed he was running for mayor.
After the vote, Santos took his seat back and reclaimed the gavel to continue the rest of the meeting.
During a lull, he congratulated Dhaliwal on his candidacy and extended his hand.
"Let's shake hands," Santos said. "We're going to have fun."
LATHROP - The Lathrop City Council voted to call in a civil grand jury to follow up on an investigation into allegations that the mayor harassed a city employee.
With a 4-0 vote, the council passed a resolution to direct the city attorney to send a complaint to the grand jury for further investigation and consideration of possible action, including removing Mayor J. "Chaka" Santos from office.
Santos recused himself from the vote, but he joined the audience and took to the lectern with other speakers during public comment. He said he welcomed the probe from the grand jury to both clear his name and to keep a positive light shining on Lathrop.
"If you decide to do so, let the grand jury decide," he said.
A city-commissioned investigation into harassment allegations found that Santos paid too much personal attention to an unidentified female employee, made inappropriate comments to her and, on one occasion, held onto her hand for too long after pretending to lick some rubber bands she had been holding.
Santos is not accused of touching the woman or trying to put his arm around her, but he gave her periodic "fist bumps," sometimes called her "baby," used "weird voices" and said he would take her to Sacramento with him when he became governor, according to the report.
Santos told the investigator said he was joking about becoming governor and had no knowledge of the rubber-band incident, according to the report. The investigator, attorney Margaret Kotzebue, questions the credibility of Santos, noting in her report that "he is simply not credible as a witness due to his nonresponsive answers to my questions, inconsistent statements and failure to recall essential events."
The resolution that passed Monday raised the possibility of removing Santos from office. This is not an authority the civil grand jury has, but it could make a recommendation to the District Attorney's Office, Lathrop City Attorney Salvador Navarete said.
It seemed fishy that the allegations came out during an election year, said Dan Doyle, one of the speakers at the lectern at the Monday meeting. "This all sounds like a witch hunt to me."
Santos was elected to a two-year term as mayor in 2010. After the report was released, Santos told The Record it was "politically motivated." He said that Lathrop City Councilman Sonny Dhaliwal wanted to become mayor and noted it was an election year.
"Dhaliwal isn't being accused. Don't try and create a distraction from the issue," former City Councilman Steve Dresser said.
The four sitting council members made brief statements before casting their votes. "We are doing our job to protect our employees and to protect taxpayers," Dhaliwal said. He also confirmed he was running for mayor.
After the vote, Santos took his seat back and reclaimed the gavel to continue the rest of the meeting.
During a lull, he congratulated Dhaliwal on his candidacy and extended his hand.
"Let's shake hands," Santos said. "We're going to have fun."
Monday, May 7, 2012
Fire Board Meeting - Keep CAL FIRE
Letter posted by Marshall Ketchum
Sun, May 6
KEEP CAL FIRE
Prior to CAL FIRE's arrival, fire departments on the Coastside were an expensive mess, resulting in over $1.2M in lawsuit settlements and legal fees, as well as high turnover and poor morale.
A 2006 Grand Jury recommended contracting with an outside agency such as CAL FIRE as one of the few viable options for fixing the departments.
Coastside taxpayers are currently enjoying savings estimated at over $1M per year with CAL FIRE, compared to trying to staff and run a department themselves.
Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell have committed to spend over $100k in consulting and legal fees in an attempt to remove CAL FIRE and bring back the 'local control' that failed us so badly in the past.
Many feel Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell recently abused the Brown Act, holding closed meetings under the guise of labor negotiations.
Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell refuse to listen to constituants or the recent Grand Jury report that said "The Grand Jury could not find any substantive issues that justified terminating the CAL FIRE contract."
http://www.sanmateocourt.org/documents/grand_jury/2011/coastside_fire_protection.pdf
On April 25, even after the Grand Jury report, Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell voted against extending CAL FIRE's contract past June 30, 2012, even though they had no other options.
Please plan to attend the Fire Board Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday May 9. The board will be discussing the recent Grand Jury findings that said "The Grand Jury could not find any substantive issues that justified terminating the CAL FIRE contract." You will have the opportunity to tell the Fire Board what you think, and will meet plenty of like-minded individuals concerned with the direction the majority of the Board trying to take us.
Sun, May 6
KEEP CAL FIRE
Prior to CAL FIRE's arrival, fire departments on the Coastside were an expensive mess, resulting in over $1.2M in lawsuit settlements and legal fees, as well as high turnover and poor morale.
A 2006 Grand Jury recommended contracting with an outside agency such as CAL FIRE as one of the few viable options for fixing the departments.
Coastside taxpayers are currently enjoying savings estimated at over $1M per year with CAL FIRE, compared to trying to staff and run a department themselves.
Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell have committed to spend over $100k in consulting and legal fees in an attempt to remove CAL FIRE and bring back the 'local control' that failed us so badly in the past.
Many feel Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell recently abused the Brown Act, holding closed meetings under the guise of labor negotiations.
Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell refuse to listen to constituants or the recent Grand Jury report that said "The Grand Jury could not find any substantive issues that justified terminating the CAL FIRE contract."
http://www.sanmateocourt.org/documents/grand_jury/2011/coastside_fire_protection.pdf
On April 25, even after the Grand Jury report, Mike Alifano, Doug Mackintosh, and Gary Riddell voted against extending CAL FIRE's contract past June 30, 2012, even though they had no other options.
Please plan to attend the Fire Board Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday May 9. The board will be discussing the recent Grand Jury findings that said "The Grand Jury could not find any substantive issues that justified terminating the CAL FIRE contract." You will have the opportunity to tell the Fire Board what you think, and will meet plenty of like-minded individuals concerned with the direction the majority of the Board trying to take us.
(San Diego) Grand jury suggests school foundation audits
Written by Aaron Burgin
11:32 a.m., May 7, 2012
San Diego schools need to keep better tabs on the parent-based foundations that raise money for them, the San Diego County Grand Jury says in a new report.
Fundraising foundations have proliferated during the economic downturn as a way for parents and benefactors to raise money for their ailing schools.
The grand jury recommends that the San Diego Unified School District review and audit schools at least once per school year for compliance.
The four-page report from the grand jury, a panel of citizens that monitors local governments, is based on one school foundation in the district that did not have its nonprofit paperwork in order. The report does not identify the school.
Schools activist Sally Smith told The Watchdog that she filed the complaint that led to the grand jury report, and it was about Creative Performing Media Arts Middle School’s foundation.
At the time she filed the complaint, Smith said the foundation called itself a nonprofit on its website even though it had yet to receive federal 501(c)(3) nonprofit status.
Principal Scott Thomason said that when the grand jury approached the school and foundation last year, officials believed it was registered as a nonprofit. They discovered, however, that a previous board never completed the process.
Once they discovered this, Thomason said, the group took down any reference on its website to being a nonprofit and hired an attorney to assist with the registration process.
“The grand jury actually did us a favor by pointing out paperwork is not in order,” Thomason said. “We immediately began getting things in line so that we are totally aboveboard.”
The district declined to issue a response for this story, saying it will wait until its official response is released, around Aug. 1.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/07/grand-jury-suggests-school-foundation-audits/
11:32 a.m., May 7, 2012
San Diego schools need to keep better tabs on the parent-based foundations that raise money for them, the San Diego County Grand Jury says in a new report.
Fundraising foundations have proliferated during the economic downturn as a way for parents and benefactors to raise money for their ailing schools.
The grand jury recommends that the San Diego Unified School District review and audit schools at least once per school year for compliance.
The four-page report from the grand jury, a panel of citizens that monitors local governments, is based on one school foundation in the district that did not have its nonprofit paperwork in order. The report does not identify the school.
Schools activist Sally Smith told The Watchdog that she filed the complaint that led to the grand jury report, and it was about Creative Performing Media Arts Middle School’s foundation.
At the time she filed the complaint, Smith said the foundation called itself a nonprofit on its website even though it had yet to receive federal 501(c)(3) nonprofit status.
Principal Scott Thomason said that when the grand jury approached the school and foundation last year, officials believed it was registered as a nonprofit. They discovered, however, that a previous board never completed the process.
Once they discovered this, Thomason said, the group took down any reference on its website to being a nonprofit and hired an attorney to assist with the registration process.
“The grand jury actually did us a favor by pointing out paperwork is not in order,” Thomason said. “We immediately began getting things in line so that we are totally aboveboard.”
The district declined to issue a response for this story, saying it will wait until its official response is released, around Aug. 1.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/07/grand-jury-suggests-school-foundation-audits/
Sunday, May 6, 2012
(Contra Costa County) Report: Antioch animal shelter controls costs better than county but lacks in services
By Paul Burgarino - Contra Costa Times -
Antioch has not kept up with the county when it comes to programs and services provided at local animal shelters and must find ways to add volunteers and provide lower spay and neuter fees, according to a recently released grand jury report.
Although Antioch appears to be doing better at controlling costs than its county counterpart, the Contra Costa grand jury last month said the city's shelter has substantially less space and services for each animal, and fewer people providing for their care.
The percentages of animals adopted, transferred out and euthanized in both shelters are similar, according to the report.
Antioch officials say the grand jury was correct in acknowledging the shelter's shortcomings but misses the mark as far as its criticisms.
"I would argue that we've done a great job with the resources that we have, and the report reinforces it. We are meeting the needs of the city," Antioch police Chief Allan Cantando said. "Our percentages are in the ballpark of the county at a third of the cost. We have relatively similar results for much cheaper."
Antioch voters decided in 1978 to create a separate animal shelter, with the intention of providing better services. Its shelter opened in 1991 and has not been upgraded, though the city's population has increased by 60 percent to almost 104,000.
Antioch's animal services ran on a budget of near $744,000 in the 2010-11 fiscal year, compared with the county's $11.6 million program.
The annual cost per animal was $250.30 in Antioch and $750.41 for the county.
Glenn Howell, the county's animal service director, said the report's calculations in showing the cost per animal is flawed because some cases are more expensive than others. He added that the county shelter strives for a high level of service and medical care.
According to the report, spay and neuter fees at the Antioch shelter are two to four times higher than the county rates, suggesting the city should seek quotes for low-cost services from other local vets. Antioch officials say they have done this, but veterinarians as business owners have balked at the prospects of losing money.
The county has tried to keep fees as low as possible to encourage owners to get the procedure and reduce pet overpopulation, Howell said.
According to the report, the Antioch shelter does not have enough volunteers to adequately care for the number of animals it processes. It has an animal-to-volunteer ratio of 23.6 to 1, while the county's ratio is 3.13 to 1.
The East Contra Costa city laid off its volunteer coordinator in 2010, leaving fewer resources to recruit, train and supervise volunteers, the report said. Antioch needs more volunteers so animals can get time out of kennels for socialization and playtime, which is part of their humane treatment, the report said.
Cantando said the shelter is working to build its volunteer corps back up, though limited funding makes it tough. He argues that Antioch should be entitled to the property tax its citizens pay to the county that winds up funding the county shelter, which would go a long way in helping address its staffing shortage.
About 40 percent of the county animal shelter's budget is funded by county general fund money, Howell said.
The Antioch shelter holds animals an average of 19 days, compared with the county's seven days, which the report suggests is due to its limited staff.
Antioch shelter supervisor Monika Helgemo, however, said the shelter holds the animals longer to give them a better chance of being adopted. The shelter has also tried to be more active through social media and adoption events to help animals find homes, she said.
The report says that both Antioch and the county create an advisory council of stakeholders to oversee costs related to animal care and to look for cheaper services.
Antioch has not kept up with the county when it comes to programs and services provided at local animal shelters and must find ways to add volunteers and provide lower spay and neuter fees, according to a recently released grand jury report.
Although Antioch appears to be doing better at controlling costs than its county counterpart, the Contra Costa grand jury last month said the city's shelter has substantially less space and services for each animal, and fewer people providing for their care.
The percentages of animals adopted, transferred out and euthanized in both shelters are similar, according to the report.
Antioch officials say the grand jury was correct in acknowledging the shelter's shortcomings but misses the mark as far as its criticisms.
"I would argue that we've done a great job with the resources that we have, and the report reinforces it. We are meeting the needs of the city," Antioch police Chief Allan Cantando said. "Our percentages are in the ballpark of the county at a third of the cost. We have relatively similar results for much cheaper."
Antioch voters decided in 1978 to create a separate animal shelter, with the intention of providing better services. Its shelter opened in 1991 and has not been upgraded, though the city's population has increased by 60 percent to almost 104,000.
Antioch's animal services ran on a budget of near $744,000 in the 2010-11 fiscal year, compared with the county's $11.6 million program.
The annual cost per animal was $250.30 in Antioch and $750.41 for the county.
Glenn Howell, the county's animal service director, said the report's calculations in showing the cost per animal is flawed because some cases are more expensive than others. He added that the county shelter strives for a high level of service and medical care.
According to the report, spay and neuter fees at the Antioch shelter are two to four times higher than the county rates, suggesting the city should seek quotes for low-cost services from other local vets. Antioch officials say they have done this, but veterinarians as business owners have balked at the prospects of losing money.
The county has tried to keep fees as low as possible to encourage owners to get the procedure and reduce pet overpopulation, Howell said.
According to the report, the Antioch shelter does not have enough volunteers to adequately care for the number of animals it processes. It has an animal-to-volunteer ratio of 23.6 to 1, while the county's ratio is 3.13 to 1.
The East Contra Costa city laid off its volunteer coordinator in 2010, leaving fewer resources to recruit, train and supervise volunteers, the report said. Antioch needs more volunteers so animals can get time out of kennels for socialization and playtime, which is part of their humane treatment, the report said.
Cantando said the shelter is working to build its volunteer corps back up, though limited funding makes it tough. He argues that Antioch should be entitled to the property tax its citizens pay to the county that winds up funding the county shelter, which would go a long way in helping address its staffing shortage.
About 40 percent of the county animal shelter's budget is funded by county general fund money, Howell said.
The Antioch shelter holds animals an average of 19 days, compared with the county's seven days, which the report suggests is due to its limited staff.
Antioch shelter supervisor Monika Helgemo, however, said the shelter holds the animals longer to give them a better chance of being adopted. The shelter has also tried to be more active through social media and adoption events to help animals find homes, she said.
The report says that both Antioch and the county create an advisory council of stakeholders to oversee costs related to animal care and to look for cheaper services.
Friday, May 4, 2012
Solano County grand jury: Coroner's Office files lack security
BY KIMBERLY K. FU/ KFU@THEREPORTER.COM
Posted: 05/04/2012 01:05:03 AM PDT
Security measures are lacking at the Solano County Coroner's Office, but it's nothing that a new system can't fix, according to a 2011-12 county grand jury report released Thursday.
A September visit to the Fairfield site apparently revealed no exterior alarm system and insufficient interior security.
According to the report, evidence, case reports and more may be compromised as a result.
Those case reports are kept in a locked office accessible only to two employees via a door key lock, grand jurors said, adding that the documents are stored in plastic storage containers.
"The report filing system was organized; however, the grand jury was concerned with the storage containers in use," the report states. "Fire or water could damage or destroy these extremely sensitive, irreplaceable and historical documents."
To remedy the situation, grand jurors recommend installing a "state-of-the-art alarm system so that the Sheriff's Office dispatch center is alerted of any intrusion." Also suggested is replacing the manual locks on the office door with a card key system, "which would add additional security and accountability for access into sensitive areas."
As for the storage woes, officials want the plastic containers dumped in favor of a fire-and-flood-resistant system.
In other matters, the report requested annual updates of the Coroner Procedural Manual, which was last updated in March 2004. The eight-year-old manual, grand jurors said, does not contain current operating procedures and job specifications.
The report's final recommendation was for the sheriff to "instruct staff on correct procedures for funding consultant services and include clear and precise instructions on funding additional professional consultant services in the Coroner's Procedural Manual."
Follow Staff Writer Kimberly K. Fu at Twitter.com/ReporterKimFu. http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_20547045/solano-county-grand-jury-coroners-office-files-lack
A September visit to the Fairfield site apparently revealed no exterior alarm system and insufficient interior security.
According to the report, evidence, case reports and more may be compromised as a result.
Those case reports are kept in a locked office accessible only to two employees via a door key lock, grand jurors said, adding that the documents are stored in plastic storage containers.
"The report filing system was organized; however, the grand jury was concerned with the storage containers in use," the report states. "Fire or water could damage or destroy these extremely sensitive, irreplaceable and historical documents."
To remedy the situation, grand jurors recommend installing a "state-of-the-art alarm system so that the Sheriff's Office dispatch center is alerted of any intrusion." Also suggested is replacing the manual locks on the office door with a card key system, "which would add additional security and accountability for access into sensitive areas."
As for the storage woes, officials want the plastic containers dumped in favor of a fire-and-flood-resistant system.
In other matters, the report requested annual updates of the Coroner Procedural Manual, which was last updated in March 2004. The eight-year-old manual, grand jurors said, does not contain current operating procedures and job specifications.
The report's final recommendation was for the sheriff to "instruct staff on correct procedures for funding consultant services and include clear and precise instructions on funding additional professional consultant services in the Coroner's Procedural Manual."
Follow Staff Writer Kimberly K. Fu at Twitter.com/ReporterKimFu. http://www.thereporter.com/news/ci_20547045/solano-county-grand-jury-coroners-office-files-lack
(Stanislaus County) Smith: No grand jury appeals
by Nick Rappley - Patterson Irrigator -
Councilwoman Annette Smith announced at the regular council meeting Tuesday, May 1, that she would not pursue any further legal action against Stanislaus County or its civil grand jury.
“Although the county has acknowledged my right to take further legal action against them, I am not going to do so, because in the end, only the lawyers win, and it distracts from all the other important issues we face in these challenging economic times,” Smith said in a prepared statement near the end of the meeting.
U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill ruled April 11 to dismiss a civil rights lawsuit that Smith filed against Stanislaus County in an attempt to revise the findings of a grand jury report that called for Smith’s dismissal. O’Neill’s nine-page ruling left no room for an amendment, which means Smith could only appeal to a higher court or take it to the state court system.
Smith argued that the grand jury was an entity of the county, while O’Neill said the county was not liable, because the grand jury was an arm of the Stanislaus County Superior Court, which is affiliated with a state agency.
Stanislaus County Counsel Jack Doering said last week that the county’s legal representative in the matter, Sacramento-based Porter Scott, sent a letter to Smith, her lawyer and the city of Patterson offering to give up any attempts to recoup attorney fees incurred because of the lawsuit if Smith would drop the suit and promise not to appeal.
At the time, Doering called the suit a waste of taxpayer money.
The grand jury’s report released in late June recommended that Smith resign or be recalled.
It stated she failed to recuse herself from a vote regarding developer John Ramos’ legal fees while she had a financial relationship with him. It also stated that Ramos had written off expenses for Smith in the past.
In addition, it criticized Smith for allegedly confronting a resident in a supermarket parking lot and using abusive language. The report stated further that she pressured city staff members to fire former Community Development Director Rod Simpson.
The report also called for former Mayor Becky Campo to pay back money she received as mayor, because she allegedly lived outside city limits, and stated that the city should file a complaint with the California State Bar to chastise former City Attorney George Logan for alleged improprieties, such as failing to be in the room when the council voted to reimburse Ramos for $27,000 in legal fees. The grand jury called for Ramos to return that money to the city, as well.
During her statement Tuesday night, Smith pulled no punches in expressing her disdain for the grand jury and its practices.
“I firmly stand by my position that something has to be done when a group of people with no specialized training, but empowered by the government, can attack and malign your character with unregulated power based on unsubstantiated or erroneous evidence,” she read from her statement.
On a related note, the California Fair Political Practices Commission sent a letter dated April 18 indicating that it had rejected a complaint filed by community activist Jeff Lustgarten in response to Smith’s participation in votes related to her legal fees.
The commission enforces the provisions of the Political Reform Act, a state law that governs ethics of elected officials and their staffs in state and local government.
Smith said at a special council meeting last week that the political squabbling in Patterson was out of hand and needed to stop.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
(San Diego County) Grand jury takes on newsrack blight
U-T San Diego - written by Matt Clark -
The city, the port and the Metropolitan Transit System have failed to crack down on unsightly newsracks, a San Diego County Grand Jury report has concluded.
Authorities have also failed to enforce permitting rules, the report says.
“The city is missing out on thousands of dollars in permit fees, and the appearance of the racks tarnishes San Diego’s image as ‘America’s Finest City,’” said the grand jury, a civil watchdog group.
The report was released last week, and The Watchdog gave officials time to respond to the allegations. But city officials did not return requests for comment sent Thursday and Monday.
The grand jury recommends creating or improving databases for tracking permits, displaying a permit sticker on each news rack and enhancing enforcement of newsrack ordinances.
The grand jury reviewed the permit status and condition of 555 newsracks downtown, in North Park and in La Jolla. The review found 41 percent of the newsracks on city property were not permitted, missing out on $15 each per year. The grand jury estimated this cost the city about $23,000 annually.
According to the report, the city issued permits for at least 144 newsracks that weren’t on its property. Fifty-nine of the racks were in other cities and 85 were on other agencies’ property within the city limits.
Many of the racks have condition problems that are prohibited under the city’s newsrack ordinance, according to the report. Nearly a third of the racks reviewed downtown had graffiti or stickers on them, and others were rusty, had broken windows, had trash inside or were chained to city light poles or signposts.
“A lot of them are used as storage facilities for homeless people,” grand jury Foreman Jim Lewis said. “A lot of stickers have been placed on these things, and even if they had publications in them, you wouldn’t be able to see what they were.”
Neither the Port of San Diego nor the Metropolitan Transit System have an ordinance regulating newsracks. Both agencies are considering adopting one, the report said.
None of the names of the publications reviewed were included in the report. Photos of some newsracks included in the report did not allow for identifying the name of the publication. None of them appeared to be U-T San Diego newsracks.
Lewis said the grand jury stayed away from naming any publications in the report because it wasn’t intended to focus on the publications. He couldn’t provide an opinion on which publications did the best in maintaining the condition of their newsracks.
“That wasn’t part of the focus on our investigation,” Lewis said. “Because we only did a representative sample, it’s hard to focus on any particular publication.”
U-T San Diego Consumer Distribution Manager Pete Savoie said the paper obtains permits for hundreds of racks on city property as required under the ordinance, which the paper worked with the city to draft and adopt.
Savoie said the city occasionally notifies him of condition problems. A U-T San Diego employee cleans up the rack and takes a picture that is sent back to the city, he said.
“It’s not us,” Savoie said. “I have an employee and (another manager) has two employees to go out and check the racks and when they see them, get them cleaned up.”
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
(San Mateo County) Report urges emergency repairs for Pescadero flooding
Half Moon Bay Review - by Mark Noack -
Pescadero residents for years have pleaded for something to be done to solve the town’s annual flooding problem, but a logjam of government agencies has continued to stall any action, according to a new San Mateo County Grand Jury report released Tuesday.
The report examined 25 years of worsening conditions along Butano Creek, which typically overflows during the winter months onto Pescadero Creek Road. In recent years the flooding has meant the town’s main road is unusable for days, cutting off access for tourist traffic and emergency vehicles. The current conditions are “unsafe and unacceptable”, the report concluded.
As a solution, the grand jury recommended immediate action to clear excess silt and vegetation along the creek bed, which should let the river flow more quickly out to sea. Taking this action might not be simple, the report acknowledges, because a hodgepodge of state and federal agencies maintain oversight of the coastal watershed. Moving through the full gauntlet of agencies could take three years or more.
But the grand jury could find no instance when the county had applied for any permits to repair the problem.
To speed things up, the report recommends the county declare the flooding to be an emergency, which would allow repairs to be done immediately. The litany of permits would still be necessary, but could be obtained retroactively.
The grand jury report singled out the California State Parks department for being particularly unhelpful in its investigation. Two State Parks officials had declined to appear before the grand jury. State Parks is currently embroiled in litigation over its management of the Pescadero Marsh, which some allege is the root problem that has caused the flooding to worsen in recent years.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
(Orange County) Grand Jury: Wean Special Districts From Tax Dollars
Voice of OC - by Tracy Wood -
Orange County’s 16 water and sewer districts should be consolidated into no more than six regional districts, and the majority of the county’s 27 special districts should wean themselves from a total of $183 million in taxpayer dollars they receive each year, according to the first report from the 2011-2012 Orange County grand jury.
Instead of taking 11 percent of all property taxes paid in Orange County, most districts should finance themselves through the fees they charge for services, according to the report, titled "Let There Be Light: Dragging Special Districts From the Shadows."
“No logical reason exists for these agencies to continue to use tax dollars to finance themselves,” the report concludes.
The report is the latest in a long line of reports and reviews going back at least 40 years that criticize the system of special districts and call for reforms.
Government agencies are required to respond, generally in 60 to 90 days, depending on the agency.
The report goes on to state that most of the 27 special districts have outlived their original purposes and could be absorbed by the cities they serve or combined with other districts.
Water and sewer districts should be consolidated into no more than six regional districts, and water agencies operated by Anaheim, Fullerton and Santa Ana should consider consolidating with other agencies, the report recommends.
Cash and unrestricted reserves of the 27 special districts total at least $866 million and are “available to the governing boards to spend as they please,” according to the grand jury.
“Local citizens are not openly informed of this wealth when agencies ask for fee increases, special assessments, or bond measures," the report states. “Most of the special districts do not appear to have specific criteria for amassing these reserves, nor do they have published long-range plans for their constructive use.”
According to the report, the Irvine Ranch Water District has the largest unrestricted reserve: $225,431,000.
The report observes that some districts didn’t show how property tax revenue was spent and urged the Orange County Board of Supervisors to require tax bills sent to taxpayers to clearly show what their property taxes are funding.
“The taxpayer deserves to know where the taxes are being allocated,” the report asserts.
“Costa Mesa Sanitary District, South Coast Water District, Trabuco Canyon Water District, and Yorba Linda Water District have nearly $35,000,000 allocated to them by the Auditor-Controller, but do not show this revenue in the budgets,” the report states.
“Some budget notes suggest that tax revenue was not included because of the uncertainty of the State financial condition,” the report notes. But, it adds, "the actual receipt of that tax allocation is not documented.“
The grand jury proposed that special districts be subjected to an independent performance audit at least every three years.
The report states that of the 27 special districts, only three currently receive no property tax support: Mesa Consolidated Water District in Costa Mesa; Serrano Water District, which serves Villa Park and parts of Orange; and the Municipal Water District of Orange County, which wholesales water to 28 agencies that serve most of Orange County.
Special districts largely are unknown to the public but have their own, often elected, boards of directors, serve specific areas and provide a special service, like water delivery to homes and businesses. Directors often collect up to $200 per meeting, and the districts have paid staffs. The system began more than 100 years ago as a way to provide needed services to isolated rural areas.
In Orange County, the two oldest special districts are the Buena Park and the Placentia library districts, created “by the vote of less than 100 voters in 1919,” the report states. They were formed to supply a source for books for people in the isolated communities.
“Today these cities have populations of over 84,000 and 52,000 respectively,” the grand jury noted, saying it was time for the cities to assume the work.
The grand jury recommended that the only districts to get support from county taxpayers should be the Orange County Cemetery District, which maintains county-owned cemeteries, and the Vector Control District, which runs programs to prevent the spread of West Nile Virus and other diseases carried by insects and rodents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)