TS - The People vs. Deborah August

The People vs. Deborah August: Conflict of Interest case headed to court
By Kimberly Wear The Times-Standard
Article Last Updated: Sunday, May 22, 2005 - 6:14:17 AM PST

The Players

EUREKA -- The conflict of interest case against Fortuna City Councilwoman Debi August is set to begin Monday after months of accusations and tears, charges filed and dismissed, hundreds of pages of legal papers, numerous hearings, thousands of dollars and a 11th hour appeal to a higher court.

To some it's the story of a politically naive real estate broker and part-time councilwoman who became entangled in the vendetta of a highly placed governmental official for her outspoken beliefs. For others, it's simply the case of an elected official who used her position of power to get special treatment for a friend.

Now a jury will decide if there was a conflict of interest when August advocated for a friend's subdivision in front of the Fortuna Planning Commission. She faces removal from office for the remainder of her term, which ends in April 2006.

One year has passed since the District Attorney's Office filed the accusation case against August following a several-month grand jury investigation.

Charges that August improperly filed required annual financial forms and violated a grand jury secrecy admonition were dismissed last week. Her attorneys went to the 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco to have the last count removed, but that requested was denied along with another to stay the trial.

August is facing what is known as an accusation proceeding. The 100-year-old procedure is a rarely used method for removing corrupt government officials from office. The last time it was applied in Humboldt County was 1975.

Her attorneys have argued August may have made some political mistakes, but publicly apologized and did nothing to spur an attempt to remove her from office.

"The whole world could see how miserable she was for making those political mistakes ... that's all she did. She violated no law," defense attorney Greg Rael told Judge John T. Feeney in an unsuccessful bid to have the entire case dismissed earlier this month.

Meanwhile, August has racked up nearly $75,000 in legal costs.

Deputy District Attorney Tim Stoen, who is prosecuting the case, said the accusation was brought by grand jury members who were "citizens good and true who set up the investigation and did a lot of the work."

Stoen has adamantly denied implications he steered the grand jury toward initiating the accusation proceeding in response to strong words August and other members of the Fortuna City Council had for the civil suit he and District Attorney Paul Gallegos brought against the Pacific Lumber Co. The company is one of Fortuna's largest employers.

"The facts in this case show this was a case of special favoritism," Stoen said at the same hearing. "The grand jury in this case decided this was a case of special favoritism."

Defendant

Debi August: The first term Fortuna City Council woman faces removal from office for allegedly giving special treatment to a friend when she advocated for her subdivision project before the Planning Commission.

August, who is also a real estate broker, served on the Planning Commission before garnering her council seat.

Defense attorneys

William Bragg: A well-known local defense attorney, when August was notified an accusation proceeding was being brought against her. He attended the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy for his undergraduate education and graduated from the University of California Hastings School of Law. He was admitted to the bar in 1976.

Greg Rael: Another well-known local defense attorney who has handled several high profile cases in Humboldt County. He attended Stanford University as an undergraduate and graduated from Stanford University Law School. Rael was admitted to the bar on the same day as Bragg in 1976.

Prosecutor

Tim Stoen: Previously, the second in command to District Attorney Paul Gallegos, he was recently returned to the title of deputy district attorney after a reshuffling of positions in the office.

Stoen is handling a number of high profile cases for Gallegos, including August and the controversial suit against Pacific Lumber Co. He was admitted to the bar in 1965.

Grand jury:

The 19-member civil grand jury looks into citizens' complaints and is authorized to investigate county and city government, elected officials, special districts, jails, service districts and nonprofit agencies that receive public money.

At the end of the year, the grand jury submits a final report to the Superior Court and the County Board of Supervisors.

Accusation Proceeding

Government Code Section: Sections 3060-3075 cover the 100-year-old process for removal corrupt officials from office. Any public official subject to the section may be removed for willful or corrupt misconduct in office occurring at any time within six years immediately preceding the presentation of the accusation by the grand jury. The proceeding can be appealed to the court of appeal.

August case timeline

June 1987: Debi August is appointed to Fortuna Planning Commission.

January 2001: August files the first of two Statement of Economic Interest forms for which she is later accused of failing to report income.

January 2002: August submits a second round of Statement of Economic Interest papers, this time in her bid for a City Council seat, which she is accused of improperly filling out. The two counts were dismissed Wednesday by Judge John H. Feeney.

April 2002: August is elected to a Fortuna City Council seat.

March 2003: After District Attorney's Office files civil suit against Pacific Lumber, August attacks legal action at a Fortuna City Council meeting where Stoen, who penned the suit, was giving a presentation.

June 2003: Subdivision application is filed on Carmen Smith's project listing August as agent.

August 2003: Witnesses called to testify before grand jury about August inquiry.

September 2003: August reads a prepared statement at a City Council meeting, saying it has come to her attention that some Fortuna residents believe she has a conflict of interest because of the proposed development and she understands there is a grand jury investigation. August apologizes to any citizen who may have had concerns. She said the city attorney informed her there was no conflict as long as the project was 12 months in the future.

A week afterward she receives letter from grand jury asking for information.

Later in the month, after speaking at a Planning Commission meeting in support of her friend's proposed subdivision, August again apologizes in a letter written the same night to "each commissioner and each member of the public" saying she was "sorry, truly sorry."

December 2003: August questioned by grand jury. Discusses concerns about an e-mail she told the grand jury she would provide with city officials. August is later accused of not following secrecy admonition. Feeney also dismissed that count.

February 2004: August receives letter from grand jury saying it is commencing an accusation proceeding against her for misconduct. Letter states she is not permitted to show the letter to anyone.

May 2004: The District Attorney's Office files accusation case against August following grand jury investigation.

September 2004: Arcata City Councilwoman Elizabeth Conner resigns because of potential conflicts of interest between her spot on the council and her day job as director of the nonprofit Humboldt Bay Housing Development Corp.

October 2004: Ending two weeks of uncertainty, August says she won't resign and vows to fight conflict of interest and other charges against her. At a previous meeting, August said the financial and emotional cost was becoming too difficult.

January 2005: August's attorneys file motion to remove Stoen from prosecuting the case saying Stoen has a vendetta against August because she supported the recall of District Attorney Paul Gallegos and was one of the most vocal critics of Stoen and the suit against Pacific Lumber.

February 2005: Feeney denies the motion saying he found no reason to believe there would not be a fair trial. Stoen called the attempt to remove him a "ploy" to delay August's trial.

April, 27, 2005: August's attorneys file court papers asking for judge to dismiss the four counts against the real estate broker, saying Stoen hadn't shown legal sufficiency for the conflict of interest, failure to properly file economic statements and violation of grand jury secrecy admonition counts.

May, 17, 2005: Feeney dismisses three of the four counts against August, ruling the people did not meet the threshold needed to show August should face losing her seat. Conflict of interest count still stands.

May 19, 2005: August's attorneys ask the 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco to direct the trial court to dismiss that last count and delay trial.

May 20, 2005: Both requests are denied.