DA: No crime in St. Helena school clash
By ALISHA WYMAN
Register Staff Writer
October 31st, 2009
October 26th, 2009
October 21st, 2009
October 5th, 2009
October 4th, 2009
November 26th, 2009
November 25th, 2009
The Napa County district attorney’s office has found no evidence of crimes related to the conflict over the St. Helena Unified School District board of trustees.
Napa County District Attorney Gary Lieberstein dismissed allegations that board members violated California public meetings laws in 2008 and 2009. Lieberstein also said his office found no violation of law related to the awarding of retirement options to certain school employees.
“There is no credible evidence to support the conclusion that any members of the board of trustees, including their management team, took any action that would constitute a violation of any civil or criminal laws within our jurisdiction,” Lieberstein said in a prepared statement.
Finally, Lieberstein also found "insufficient evidence" of criminal conduct on the part of those who accused the school board of wrongdoing.
The swirl of accusations are at the heart of a recall effort targeting four members of the St. Helena school board.
In the wake of former Superintendent Allan Gordon’s resignation, the board awarded the job without a search to Gordon’s assistant superintendent, Robert Haley. Parents who had wanted the board to conduct a full search have accused the board of mismanaging the superintendent hiring and of improperly granting generous benefits to Gordon and others.
School board members deny wrongdoing, defend the decision to hire Haley and say the pension decision was fiscally sound.
Earlier this year, a group of parents met with school board officials, demanding their resignation and stating they believed a criminal probe was warranted. The clash led to both sides asking the district attorney’s office to investigate.
Earlier this month, supporters of a recall election secured enough valid signatures to force all four board members — Ines DeLuna, Cynthia Lane, Carolyn Martini and Cindy Warren — to face a recall vote.
Correction: An earlier version of this story stated that prosecutors "found no criminal conduct" on the part of recall proponents.
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
abouttime wrote on Sep 30, 2009 6:47 AM:
Demo Cracy wrote on Sep 30, 2009 7:51 AM:
The Saint wrote on Sep 30, 2009 8:19 AM:
MarkMiwords wrote on Sep 30, 2009 8:37 AM:
shadowynewcomer wrote on Sep 30, 2009 2:38 PM:
Shirley U. Jest wrote on Oct 1, 2009 10:47 AM:
As for the recall, there are SO many reasons beyond just this one that demand this kind of grass roots action from the community. The Board's consistent lack of transparency and independent thought, it's refusal to listen to concerned members of the community and, above all, it's incredible fiscal irresponsibility are all more than valid grounds for a recall. "