Full County Assessor Environmental Health Public Health Services Human Services Agency Sheriff

Conclusions 1

• CL1
  The Office of the Public Defender affords indigent persons the legal right to competent and effective counsel across a broad range of criminal and civil situations. The Office represents its clients with commitment and with passion. Over time, employee issues arose which were either not addressed or perceived as not being addressed. Complaints were filed regarding issues developed prior to and after the current Public Defender assumed office. The actions of some individuals fostered division and disruption. This contributed to intra-departmental distrust and diminished communication. These ingredients brought about a “perfect storm” of discontent, conflict, and disrespectful communication that clearly affected the atmosphere and culture within the Public Defender’s Office and led to preventable and costly lawsuits. Trust is in the process of being restored, however it is evident a rift remains. An independent review of the Department can address the structural organization of the Office and identify best practices in the areas of training, continuing education, and professional 10 development. Doing so will enable the San Joaquin County Public Defender’s Office to take actions necessary to create a cohesive and positive work environment. Given the high expenditure of taxpayers’ dollars on complaints and lawsuits, the cost of an operational review that leads to positive changes will be money well spent. Acknowledgements The Grand Jury would like to acknowledge the dedicated individuals of the Public Defender’s Office who work diligently to provide effective legal defense for the indigent. Disclaimers Grand Jury reports are based on documentary evidence and the testimony of sworn or admonished witnesses, not on conjecture or opinion. However, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing such evidence except upon the specific approval of the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, or another judge appointed by the Presiding Judge (Penal Code Section 911. 924.1 (a) and 929). Similarly, the Grand Jury is precluded by law from disclosing the identity of witnesses except upon an order of the court for narrowly defined purposes (Penal Code Sections 924.2 and 929). This report was issued by the Grand Jury with the exception of one juror who, due to a potential conflict of interest, recused himself from all parts of the investigations, including interviews, deliberations, and the writing and approval of the report. Additionally, one juror was recused late during the preparation of the report. This juror had no impact at all due to the fact that the report was finalized before the juror could impact the findings and recommendations of the report. Response Requirements California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to all findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San Joaquin County Superior Court within 90 days of receipt of the report and within 60 days of receipt in the case of an elected official. The San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors shall respond to all findings and recommendations. Mail or hand deliver a hard copy of the response to: Honorable Xapuri B. Villapudua, Presiding Judge San Joaquin County Superior Court 180 E Weber Ave, Suite 1306J Stockton, California 95202 Also, please email a copy of the response to Ms. Trisa Martinez, Staff Secretary to the Grand Jury, at grandjury@sjcourts.org. 11 Sources California Government Code Title 1, Division 4, Chapter 10, Meyers-Millas-Brown Act of 1968, (Local Public Employee Organizations) Sections 3500 – 3511. California Government Code Title 2, Division 3, Part 2.8, Chapters 1 through 9. Fair Employment and Housing Act of 1959 Civil Service Rules and Regulations, Initial Adoption by Civil Service Commission 5/23/63, Initial Adoption by San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors 1/21/64; Most Recent Amendments Adopted by Civil Service Commission 8/08/18, Most Recent Amendments Adopted by San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors 10/09/18. County of San Joaquin 2019-2020 Proposed Budget Public Defender 2020400000 The Record, September 29, 2017, https://www.recordnet.com/news/20170929/former-investigators-file- complaint-against-sj-county The Record, June 30, 2019, https://www.recordnet.com/news/20190630/sj-public-defenders-office-staffers- accused-of-mocking-lgbt-client-harassing-worker The Record, December 5, 2019, https://www.recordnet.com/news/20191205/sj-public-defenders-office- sued-over-alleged-harassment-anti-lgbt-comments San Joaquin County California, County Administrative Manual, Section 2500 – Human Resources. Issued: August 1, 2005. Reviewed: December 2018. Revised: March 27, 2019. San Joaquin County Employer-Employee Relations Policy. Adopted by the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors January 11, 1977 (Superseding Policy adopted December 24, 1968). San Joaquin County Equal Opportunity Plan October 2018, September 2020, Includes EEO Policy, Harassment-Free Work Environment Policy, Civil Service Rule 20 plus protected class definitions, responsibilities of all levels of employees and related procedures. San Joaquin County Office of the County Counsel letter to Board of Supervisors, April 30, 2020, “Approve Settlement of Legal Action Entitled:” Superior Court of California County of San Joaquin Case # STK-CV-UWT-2017-10192. San Joaquin County Work Rules, Established January 1988, Republished February 2007. Superior Court of California County of San Joaquin Case # STK-CV-UWT-2017-10192. Superior Court of California County of San Joaquin Case #STK-CV-UWM-2018-00-10949. Superior Court of California County of San Joaquin Case # STK-CV-UWT-2019-15620. 12

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.