Editorial

An “Unbecoming” Star Chamber

By Ray A. March


    "Drawing on my fine command of the language, I said nothing."
                        -- Robert Benchley



If only Supervisor Patricia Cantrall had such humility and humor as Robert Benchley.
   
Instead, she lets the gavel go to her head and flies forth with surely what must be “conduct unbecoming.”
   
But, we leave that judgment to Dave Allan, her fellow supervisor, who offered “conduct unbecoming“ as the reason for knocking Jeff Bullock off the chair of the Modoc County Board of Supervisors without even defining the meaning of such a damaging description.
   
So Dave, tell us, in your opinion are these following utterances from Cantrall considered “conduct unbecoming” a supervisor?
   
“You, sir, have called the CAO everything but a white man.” That racist accusation by Cantrall was aimed at an unidentified man in the audience after she took the chair vacated by Bullock.
   
How about this one?
   
"All I ever said to you was take a deeper inhale of my cigarette smoke and maybe you'll drop dead, and maybe that's not a bad idea." The object of this life-threatening remark was Ron Rutledge, a regular board attendee and thorn who relies on an oxygen tank for breathing.
   
Cantrall let loose with these notable quotes in the space of a Modoc minute. Just think what she might have achieved if she had had more time.
   
Of course, one might argue Cantrall’s quotes were among the very first words that slipped her lips after assuming the chair of the Modoc County Board of Supervisors and are only two examples.
   
Therefore, one could argue, they may not qualify as sufficient evidence to purge her from the chair a'la Bullock for “conduct unbecoming.”
   
Then, no one stood up and gave Bullock or the unbelieving audience at that infamous meeting on Feb. 14 the slightest suggestion of what he was guilty of beyond Allan’s “conduct unbecoming.”
   
We never thought we would come to Bullock’s defense, but in a round about way that’s what we are doing when we say the Board of Supervisors was star chamber all the way on this one.
   

Balancing the County’s Budget Deficits

                            on the Backs of Children
                                                                  
                                                          By Ray A. March

Part 22

Jan. 28, 2002
Smith: Find a Way to Skirt State Law

In spite of red flags at full mast and obvious indications that negative balances in the treasury were not being managed properly, the Children and Families Commission was on a narrow, one-way path to fire Donna Michelson, its executive director.
   
In two days it would do just that.
   
But before the commission could axe Michelson, Phillip Smith had one final and puzzling  request of Michelson.
   
At about the same time Treasurer Cheryl Knoch presented her Three Option Plan to the commission, Smith, the commission’s former chair, sent a hand written memo to Executive Director Donna Michelson with the following instructions:
   
“Please contact other counties for information on how they got around (his emphasis) the requirement that funds from the state go into the Trust Fund created in the county. The creation of that Trust Fund was a requirement of Prop. 10.”
   
There is no known correspondence documenting Michelson’s response at the time to Smith‘s blatant order to find a way to circumvent the state requirement that Prop. 10 funds were to be kept separate from the county treasury.
   
However, in a recent e-mail exchange with the Modoc Independent News Michelson had this to say:
   
“We were organized as an independent entity to handle Prop. 10, therefore, we were required to have an independent banking account,” she wrote.  “If you initially set up your Prop. 10 through the Department of Education or Health, then the accounting department for those entities would handle the money.  We did not do that, and you cannot merely change it midway by a simple vote of the board of directors.  Papers would have to be filed notifying the Board of Supervisors and the State of California.
   
“It was a requirement that Modoc County just ignored.  We checked.  Even those counties that had set up Prop. 10 to be administered through their education or health departments, had a separate trust fund for the monies or a separate banking account.  That's what I reported back to the commission, because that's what I was told by the counties that I inquired of.
   
“In any event, Prop. 10 aka Children and Families Commission aka Children's First 5, aka Children First is somewhat of a chameleon. With this last change of name statewide, they can hide a multitude of sins, namely, misuse of funds. Now they are not limited to children under the age of five, but all children, and we all know that goes on forever, especially if the children happen to have children while they are "children."
   
In late January of 2002 although she was apparently unaware of it, time was running out for Michelson and the “domino effect” was already in motion. At this stage -- although also unknown to Michelson -- only one final last-ditch attempt to thwart the commission’s stubborn intention of keeping Prop. 10 funds in the county treasury was made.
   
Next: Part 23
    And that last-ditch effort was a bold and once again out-of-the-ordinary e-mail memo from CPA Kristin Domenichelli to Michelson in which Domenichelli wasted no words in what she thought of Knoch’s Three Option Plan.

Lafferty Acquitted

Editor's Note: The following press release was issued by attorney Jordan Funk at the conclusion of the trial of Craig Lafferty.

On Monday afternoon, at the conclusion  a four day jury trial, a Modoc County jury deliberated two and a half hours before acquitting Craig Lafferty of voluntary manslaughter in the shooting death of Kevin Konz.

Mr. Konz was shot at about 3:00 a.m. on the night of June 24, after he had climbed onto a deck  23’ in the air at the rear of a residence in Lake City.  Mr. Lafferty, who was represented by former District Attorney Jordan Funk, argued that the shooting was justified because, under the totality of the circumstances known to Mr. Lafferty at the time, he reasonably feared for his safety and the safety of his two young daughters and the children’s mother, who were inside the residence when the shooting occurred.

The mother had previously called 911 after seeing an unrecognizable face in a second story window of her residence at 2:00 a.m.  The second story deck was only accessible from inside the residence. The evidence also showed that Mr. Konz apparently broke the latch on a gate in order to gain entrance to the rear yard of the residence and then climbed up a 4 x 4” post more than 20’ in the air. 

The evidence also established incontrovertibly that Mr. Lafferty had never met Mr. Konz prior to the shooting and had no idea who Mr. Konz was.  It was later determined that Mr. Konz was intoxicated, with a blood alcohol level greater than .17.

The jury was instructed that if Mr. Lafferty reasonably believed in the need to use deadly force, then he was not guilty of the charged offense.   The law imposes upon the prosecution the burden of disproving a defendant’s self-defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt.  If the prosecution is unable to do so, the law requires a jury to render a verdict of not guilty.   

Jordan Funk made the following statement on Mr. Lafferty’s behalf after trial: "This case is a tragedy for everyone involved. It is certainly a tragedy for the Konz family who lost a beloved son and brother. It has not been a cake walk for Mr. Lafferty either. He has lost his job, his livelihood and the ability to continue to reside in Surprise Valley as a consequence of this case.  Mr. Lafferty very much appreciates the attentive and conscientious manner in which the jury discharged its duties. The jury reached the correct conclusion and Mr. Lafferty is grateful for their conscientious service."

Balancing the County’s Budget Deficits

                           on the Backs of Children
                                                              By Ray A. March

Part 21

An Analysis of Knoch’s Letter

Cheryl Knoch’s letter to the Children and Families Commission strongly suggested that she wanted the commission’s Prop. 10 funds to remain in the treasury even though Donna Michelson was arguing that it was against California law.
   
The initial eight points that Knoch quotes appear to come from a website such as the California State Association of Counties or another state website and are based on state code. At the very least they are considered “boilerplate,” whether the commission was aware of that or not.   
   
The eight points are basic and four or five of the requirements can be found in any bank's policy and services manual or similar materials. The internal controls are also basic and required regardless of the option chosen by the commission.
   
Knoch’s emphasis on internal controls is interesting because it appears that at times she neglected to follow and implement even some of the basic controls. The same comments can be made for safekeeping of public funds, but these were already in jeopardy in 2002 as Knoch was allowing a $2 million negative balance to grow, according to reports.
   
Knoch’s comments about the audits reflects she has a basic understanding of the purpose of the audits. It’s interesting to note, and it will be disclosed later in this series, that the audits from the 2004 period and as recent at 2010 clearly raised issues about the management of the county's treasury citing the negative balance. 
   
It is helpful that these audits identified the problem, but they should have identified the multiple problems surrounding the negative balance as a material deficiency and "qualified" the audit. 
   
If the independent auditor had made a "qualified" finding, the State Controller’s Office (SCO) would have been obligated to respond to it and consequently would not have accepted the audit.
   
Even so, Knoch saw these audits and should have responded to the identified problem and fixed it. The treasurer should have demanded the county manage the negative balances according to code using both short-term and long-term financing tools. Her memo of Jan. 29, 2002 indicates Knoch knew and understood the basics of her job. Documents do not indicate if she responded in attempting to fix the problem.
   
Finally, Knoch recommends that the commission keep its funds with the county. She does not state why the commission should do so other than most county commissions use the county treasury.
   
Of course, apparently no other counties in California had illegal negative balances in their treasury either -- at least at the time.
   
Editor’s Note -- This analysis was made with the consultation of sources familiar with the workings of county treasury and auditor’s offices.
   
Next: Part 22
    How Knoch’s letter was received by Kristin Domenichelli, the commission’s outside certified accountant, will be seen in her memo the next day to Michelson. But, first an incriminating memo from Phillip Smith.

                The SV Health Care Debate – A Recap
                                                             
                                                    By Barbara March

In the two months since the Surprise Valley Health Care District Board held a strategic planning retreat there have been contentious community meetings, strong employee reaction including a list of demands and petition and criticism of both the board and the hospital's administration.
   
Added to the list, embattled Wanda Grove, hospital administrator, was granted a three-month medical leave of absence and the board is searching for an interim administrator.
   
The catalyst behind the upheaval was the open session strategic planning retreat in January facilitated by M.J. Philps & Associates, a healthcare consulting company  based in  Upland. Participants from the community-at-large and hospital employees were asked to envision the “ideal” future for the district and to prioritize what they considered to be the most crucial needs of the district.
   
Personnel staffing was first, followed by financial, quality of services, medical staff, affiliation with other health care providers, market position, scope of services in that order, and lastly the physical plant.
   
In the process there was a turn of events.
   
A group of citizens posted fliers in Cedarville questioning the quality of care at the hospital's skilled nursing facility. Although the hospital board intended to discuss the results of the strategic plan, instead the meeting was dominated by a standing-room-only crowd vehement in their criticism of the lack of care for residents at the hospital’s skilled nursing facility.
   
The vocal crowd challenged board members on their knowledge of hospital business and daily hospital function. Administrator Wanda Grove came under fire after defending the quality of care at the skilled nursing facility.
   
Disgruntled employees who raised issues related to health insurance and fair treatment were summarily dismissed from the conversation by John Erquiaga, board chairman.
   
The negative tone of the meeting prompted board member Jim Laacke to call for a series of community sessions to further discuss the strategic planning topics.
   
“The task of the board and the community is how to solve our problems within the next few months,” he explained. “All the desires and plans in world must face reality. What can we do with what we have and how can we structure it?”
   
 “We are looking for solutions,” Laacke said. “I want a real discussion between the board and the community.” Later board members solicited community comments.
   
A group of 23 hospital employees expressed their support for the hospital's administration by delivering a manifesto to the board that included a “want list” pertinent to the personnel portion of the strategic plan.
   
They asked for a voice in strategic planning, a staff team, they asked that protocol for discussion of employee and patient issues be followed, they criticized negative press coverage, and they supported administrators Wanda Grove and Bill Bostic, and they affirmed their dedication to the community.
   
The group of 23 also requested an employee compensation fairness plan. Employee spokesperson Diana Dix, hospital radiology supervisor, told the board the employees are currently filling out a survey which the group will share with board members when the results are compiled.
   
Subsequently the group of 23 delivered a petition to the board signed by 39 employees, among an approximate total of 64, expressing support for Grove and Bostic.
   
“The employees are not saying things are perfect,” Dix told the Modoc Independent News. “There always things that can be improved. The employees are interested in working with the strategic plan to help.”
   
A number of employees not included in the group of 23 see things differently.
   
“There are employees who do not agree with the 23 who spoke up,” said a source who spoke anonymously because of the sensitive nature of the subject.
   
“They are absolutely in favor of the hospital, but at the same time they want fair working conditions across the board. Right now there is favoritism. They want equal pay for equal work but they’re quiet because they are not brave enough to speak up,” the source said.
   
Consequently, the board granted Grove a three-month unpaid medical leave of absence effective Feb. 24. She is entitled to family medical leave in compliance with the Federal Family Medical Leave Act and the California Family Rights Act, according to a source who asked not to be identified.
   
“The board guarantees her position will be available to her upon receiving a medical release from her health care provider,” the source said. “She may maintain her health insurance and is eligible for unpaid leave, accrued paid time off and the short term liability benefit through the district, and can apply for State Disability Insurance, (SDI).”