Gilroy
– City attorneys refused to release contracts for Gilroy’s top
two police officials, days after the Dispatch revealed their
hush-hush winter retirements. The denial flouts public records law,
according to one attorney, and has raised suspicion among
councilmen and the rank-and-file cops.
Gilroy – City attorneys refused to release contracts for Gilroy’s top two police officials, days after the Dispatch revealed their hush-hush winter retirements. The denial flouts public records law, according to one attorney, and has raised suspicion among councilmen and the rank-and-file cops.
“What is there to hide?” asked councilman Craig Gartman. “When people hide behind the law, it makes me suspicious.”
Police chief Gregg Giusiana retired in December, and began collecting his pension on top of his pay, nearly doubling his income; Assistant Chief Lanny Brown did the same in January. Neither police nor city council members knew of the deals, engineered by city administrator Jay Baksa last fall. Nonetheless, the plan is legal, according to state officials, and will save the city roughly $116,000 this year in benefits and pension contributions, said Baksa.
“It’s a win-win situation,” Baksa explained, and it didn’t need council’s approval.
But the scheme’s secrecy has furrowed brows. Police were blindsided by Giusiana’s Thursday night announcement that he had retired in December; council members learned of the retirements via e-mail, only after the Dispatch interviewed Baksa. After city attorneys nixed the Dispatch’s request for the chiefs’ most recent contracts, some grew more suspicious.
“I’m concerned about the secrecy,” said Cpl. Jim Callahan, president of the Gilroy Police Officers Association. “My salary is subject to disclosure, and I’m concerned about why this contract wasn’t. Certainly it’s public funds that are being spent.”
City attorneys cited a portion of the Public Records Act that permits agencies to withhold police officers’ personnel records, Govt. Code 6254(k). But the same law states that public employment contracts aren’t subject to that subsection, nor to Section 6255. The law “expressly” forbids using either exemption to withhold employee contracts, said Terry Francke, legal counsel for Californians Aware, a nonprofit group supporting open government.
“It’s about as clear as any law can be,” said Francke. “There are no ifs, ands or buts here.”
The vast majority of law enforcement agencies supply their chief’s contract upon request, added Francke, who recently surveyed 200 California agencies. Not every agency writes a contract for its chief, he said, but almost every agency that does handed it over when asked. Thirty-eight agencies released their top official’s contract; only one, the Fresno County Sheriff, withheld it.
The Dispatch first requested the contracts Feb. 12, and did not receive a response until Tuesday, after the request was forwarded to the city attorney. Francke called the delays “an abuse of the process.”
“It should only take a few minutes – certainly no longer than a day – to figure out that the employment contract provision [for public records] is categorical, and without exception,” said Francke. “Anyone who deals with requests should be instructed, ‘Don’t even bother the city attorney with this.’ ”
Mayor Al Pinheiro has pooh-poohed “the hoopla” over the retirements, and said he supports the city attorney’s decision.
“I’m not a lawyer … I have no idea why it is [withheld], but our attorneys state that the law says that,” he explained, “and we won’t put ourselves in legal jeopardy.”
Councilmen Russ Valiquette, Peter Arrellano and Dion Bracco likewise deferred to the attorney’s judgment, though Valiquette and Bracco expressed concern with the city’s transparency.
“I don’t see why you wouldn’t release it,” said Valiquette, but “I’m not as well-versed in labor law as they are, so I have to trust their judgment.”
Echoing his comments, Bracco said, “There is stuff in there you wouldn’t want released,” such as home addresses, “but their wages are public knowledge … I don’t see any problem with that being released. In fact, I think it should.”
Council member Roland Velasco said he was not sufficiently informed to comment, and Paul Correa could not be reached for comment.
The decision to withhold the contracts struck some as strange, given that Baksa already cited Giusiana and Brown’s salaries in a previous interview with the Dispatch. Between his pension and his paychecks, Giusiana stands to earn $277,772 this year, if he works the full year. Brown could earn $247,426 for the full year, but has said he’ll quit the job in July. Giusiana plans to stay at work until at least January 2008.
Gartman wondered why city attorneys couldn’t “take a black pen through” sensitive information such as addresses and Social Security numbers, and release the rest of the contracts.
“They sent it off to their lawyers and said, ‘What are we legally obligated to do?,’ ” he said. “I say, OK, that’s what you’re legally obligated to do. But what are we morally obligated to do? … Where is the transparency here?”
Public information?
– Feb. 12
– The Dispatch requested copies of Gilroy Police Chief Gregg Giusiana and Fire Chief Dale Foster’s most recent contracts with the City of Gilroy, via e-mail with LeeAnn McPhillips, the city’s human resources director.
– Feb. 13
-LeeAnn McPhillips responded via e-mail that she sent the request to the city
attorney for review, and the attorney should respond shortly.
– Feb. 14
– The Dispatch sent an e-mail to McPhillips asking for salary information for Giusiana, Foster and assistant chief Lanny Brown.
– Feb. 16
– The Dispatch reiterated the request for contracts for Giusiana and Foster, and added Brown to the request, via e-mail to McPhillips and a phone call to city administrator Jay Baksa. McPhillips responded in an e-mail, “You will receive a response from the City Attorney’s Office. I expect that you will receive a response from them before the end of the day.” The city attorney did not send any information, and did not respond to repeated calls from the Dispatch.
– Feb. 20
– Dispatch reporters stopped at City Hall in person to ask to view the contracts. McPhillips was in a meeting, and staff said the only person who can disclose the records is McPhillips. Reporters left a phone number and passed along a section of public records law that shows that all contracts with public employees are public information.
– Dispatch reporters returned two hours later, and McPhillips was unavailable.
– McPhillips called the Dispatch in the afternoon to say that she was waiting on a cover memo from the city attorney, which she expected before 5pm, and should have the documents ready to go by the end of the day.
– The Dispatch received a fax from the city attorney, denying the request for Giusiana and Brown’s contracts. Requests for the city contracts for Foster, Baksa and Mike Dorn were approved.
