Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grand Jury topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves responses to civil grand jury reports after supervisors raise credibility concerns
Summary
The board approved draft responses to three civil grand jury reports, including detention centers and county airports. Supervisor Parlin criticized aspects of the grand jury process and raised security concerns about a county-issued laptop that left county premises; staff noted the grand jury controls its website content.
Get email alerts on the Grand Jury topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Board of Supervisors on July 21 reviewed and approved draft responses to three civil grand jury reports covering the El Dorado County Detention Center, county airports, and the civil grand jury website.
Grant Weber of the Chief Administrative Office presented the drafts, explaining the board's standard practice to respond only where recommendations concern the board or its staff, and noting the sheriff provided separate responses on findings that concern that elected office.
Supervisor Parlin used the discussion to sharply question the civil grand jury's credibility and processes. Parlin said some reports include opinion and hearsay, and she described a 2023 incident in which a grand jury member allegedly left county premises with a county-issued laptop after refusing to return it, generating a police report and raising questions about secured data and what was downloaded. "There's a huge trust problem right now," Parlin said, urging the grand jury to publish clarity about its process and data security.
Staff replied that the grand jury is responsible for the content it posts to its website and that Information Technology posts content on the grand jury's behalf; IT does not independently author grand jury materials. Weber said staff worked with departments to prepare the board's draft responses and recommended either adoption as final or directing changes and returning for final approval.
After discussion the board moved and approved the draft responses as the next procedural step. County counsel reported earlier that the board completed several closed-session items and authorized initiation of litigation on item 7; no reportable action was required on other closed items.
The board approved the drafts and directed staff to proceed with the filing process required by the court and applicable statutes.
