THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Opinion: Hit piece proves grand jury’s irrelevance


image_pdfimage_print

By Larry Weitzman

Supervisor Ron “Mik” Mikulaco doesn’t always vote with the majority of the Board of Supervisors. His most important vote was a dissenting no vote on the last budget (FY 2014-2015 which had a large structural deficit), which happened to be the last budget submitted by ex-CAO Terri Daly.

Someone during this last grand jury term must not like Mik as this last GJ produced a report (GJ 14-15) that looked more like a political hit piece by a potential future opponent. Mik is up for re-election next year. And one of the most frequent, if not the most frequent visitor to this GJ, is none other than Terri Daly.

Larry Weitzman

Larry Weitzman

In its opening background statement the GJ had the audacity to belittle Mik’s campaign style in his first election campaign commenting that he wore a “depression style” sandwich board sign on El Dorado Hills Boulevard asking for votes. Much to the chagrin of the GJ it worked. Who and in what place is the GJ to write a report on campaigning? It’s not within their charge or purview. This is just another reason why the GJ should be eliminated.

Penal Code Section 933.05(e) provides that if the subject of a GJ investigation is a department head or other official then it is mandatory that the subject be interviewed by the GJ. There is no question the subject of this investigation is Mik. Mik claims he was never interviewed by the GJ with respect to anything within the report. If that fact is true, and I see no reason why it wouldn’t be, not only is the report unfounded, but it is just another reason for its illegitimacy. This GJ of 2014-2015 may have been operating beyond its legal capacity.

But there is so much more. The GJ complained that Mik used his approximately $250,000 discretionary budget, which pays for assistants and office and other sundry expenses, was misused. Every supervisor gets such a discretionary budget. Mik spent about $25,000 of his budget on a second office in El Dorado Hills near Town Center. The GJ claims this wasn’t proper use of his discretionary budget. What doesn’t the GJ understand about the meaning of the word “discretionary”?

Perhaps the GJ needs a course in remedial English, which in the UC system is known as “dumbbell English.” Since the GJ obviously doesn’t know the definition of “discretion or discretionary,” let’s enlighten them. According to Webster the definition of discretion is: “1. the freedom or authority to make decisions or choices.” Discretionary is defined as “left to one’s own discretion; regulated by one’s own choice.” What does the GJ not understand about the supervisor’s having a $250,000 discretionary budget? Mik made the conscience choice to have an office in his district. It’s solely his choice and the GJ has no right or basis to say anything. Yet they make a big deal about the use of Mik’s discretionary budget. One could say the GJ’s claim is an oxymoron.

Of course, the other explanation for this oxymoron is the real purpose of the GJ report. When combined with the opening paragraph it should be considered a political hatchet job. It only further cements the argument that the BOS should abolish the GJ or in the least defund it.

In a final attempt to smear the independent thinking Mik, the GJ says his behavior is odd. He “can be moody or he terrorizes many female employees.” They claim this information was from testimony. Does that mean sworn testimony or from an interview? Since the GJ is allowed to conduct non-sworn interviews, such statements or answers to questions are nothing more than hearsay or gossip. According to the district attorney, much of the GJ testimony is nothing of the sort as it is not sworn and therefore not testimony or legal evidence as the GJ is a legal forum. Because grand juries are secret and considering the ridiculous and ludicrous things said in several other reports which were misleading or untrue, their claimed “evidence” has little, if any, weight. Mik denies all their allegations.

Even more telling is the GJ’s own admission that the other four supervisors “do not recognize Mikulaco’s aberrant behavior ….” Maybe it doesn’t exist so the GJ goes on to claim that the other supes “turn a blind eye to his antics ….” What kind of self-assuming GJ is this? That’s the kind of thinking that happens in Third World kangaroo courts like Iran, Venezuela and Cuba.

But wait there is more. One of the GJ members for the year 2014-2015 was Kenneth Steers.  According to a recent examination (July 7) of political contributions Form 460 for recently announced District I supervisorial candidate Beth Gaines, Steers contributed twice to her campaign coffers, an amount totaling $5,900. Gaines is running for the seat now held by Mikulaco who is the subject of this hit piece by the GJ of which Steers was a member. You can draw your own conclusion. Perhaps that tells the entire story of this civil grand jury.

Larry Weitzman is a resident of rescue.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (10)
  1. louis says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    So if I’m reading this right, this particular GJ does a shady job so every GJ in the future should be abolished? Isn’t that some sort of fallacy?

  2. Steve says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    It is my recollection that each Grand Jury functions under the oversight and supervision of one of the county judges. Who is the judge and why is he or she allowing such faulty performance?

  3. dumbfounded says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    …speaking of “hit pieces”…

  4. Isee says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    But wait there’s more…. talk about dumbbell English. You need to stick to critiquing vehicles and elected/appointed-officials and leave citizen volunteer GJ members alone. If there’s nothing to it than nothing will come of it.

  5. Justice says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    The problem with the GJ process in this county is it appears to be becoming nothing more than a political tool of some to promote an agenda and launch attacks without ever looking into why the county budget is in a growing deficit which does involve two former CAO’s and the former Board. That is the real business of the GJ. The idea to eliminate the civil GJ as some counties have done is looking like a good idea. The fact that another Gains is trying to run in this county, isn’t good either, they need to stay in Placer county where I thought they lived and let residents of this county run this county.

  6. nature bats last says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    This dude is always pointing fingers at someone else. He seems to be a “pat myself on the back” kinda guy. Is there anyone out there he dosent ridicule? He has buddies at the Mtn. Democrat paper, that says alot about his motivations…

  7. Cranky Gerald says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    Larry Weitzman is not a great writer, and doesn’t seem to claim to be one.

    It is apparent to me that most of his articles and opinions are an attempt to expose fiscal folly, extremely bad management practices and non transparent government on behalf of El Dorado County. Weitzman would like to see a balanced budget, and so would we all.

    He has provided lots of facts to substantiate his various claims and opinions, facts which generally have not been repudiated by anyone because they come largely from county documents. This means that they are largely true.
    So he has a connection with a local newspaper.
    This is bad, or wrong, or illegal how?

    I do not see these letters as the rantings of a wingnut. I have read in these pages hints of his criminal or law breaking past, but have yet to see how that has anything to do with the issues he writes about. If he was not square with the justice system, paid for his mistakes, he’d be in jail.
    I think more people should listen to him.

  8. louis says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    Gerald you are absolutely correct, a lot of what Larry does is good investigative work. I personally approve and appreciate to find out about most of it. The problem is this is an opinion piece and his conclusions can sometimes be a little out of whack.

    Don’t like how the GJ is being used? Rather than a reform, just get rid of it.

    Some local administrator is screwing things up? They must be fired rather than get further training.

    An elected official is gruff and has bad manners, (because s/he doesn’t deal with stupidity or crap?) lets all band together and get rid of him/her.

    Get it? Its the opinion part of the piece that is getting in the way of the journalistic part.

  9. rock4tahoe says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    Larry says, “Someone during this last grand jury term must not like Mik…” There are 12 jurors Larry!

    I have read the report(s)… here they are folks…

    http://www.edcgov.us/Government/GrandJury/2014-2015_Grand_Jury_Report.aspx

    Reads a lot better then the opinionated nonsense on this thread.

    Gettin’ high on your own supply are we Larry?

  10. by gosh says - Posted: July 20, 2015

    Rocky, it is a grand jury not a petit jury. Therefore it has 19 members not twelve or less.