Judge rejects bid to oust Santa Clara County DA from concealed-gun permit corruption case

A court Thursday rejected a defense bid to disqualify Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen’s office from prosecuting a corruption case involving concealed-gun permits issued by the sheriff’s office.

Superior Court Judge Eric Geffon handed down the ruling after a hearing in a San Jose courtroom, and soon after denied a defense motion to seal now-public transcripts of the grand jury proceedings in the case.

Joe Wall, attorney for South Bay litigator and political fundraiser Christopher Schumb, argued in a motion filed last month that his client’s friendship past financial support for Rosen — and plans to call on Rosen as a defense witness — posed an insurmountable conflict of interest.

Rosen had repeatedly said the state Attorney General’s office deemed there was no conflict. Ultimately, Geffon sided with deputy attorney general Sharon Loughner — in court to oppose recusal — in deciding that emails illustrating the friendship between Rosen and Schumb were not sufficient grounds to disqualify Rosen’s office.

“I don’t believe the evidence before the court supports a finding of a conflict of interest,” Geffon said.

In court filings, Rosen downplayed his relationship with Schumb. He also stated that he returned $1,500 in campaign contributions from him in August 2019 after his office served a search warrant on Schumb and made him a formal subject of a conspiracy and bribery investigation, that culminated in him being indicted along with three other defendants: sheriff’s Capt. James Jensen, attorney Harpaul Nahal and gun-maker Michael Nichols.

Wall’s disqualification motion was accompanied by a trove of emails between Schumb and Rosen, and sometimes Chief Assistant District Attorney Jay Boyarsky, showing a chummy relationship and references to Schumb’s fundraising for Rosen’s re-election. Rosen did acknowledge 125 personal emails involving Schumb between 2015 and 2019, but noted in his filing that they had one email in 2019, seemingly to indicate their contact had tapered off by the time Schumb came under investigation.

“Thank you and Jill again for opening up your home and hosting a lovely event for my re-election,” Rosen writes to Schumb in a June 29, 2013 email with the subject line “Just Getting Started.” “I appreciate it very much. You’re a good and generous person.” In a May 22, 2016 email, Rosen wrote to Schumb: “Thank you very much for all your advice, counsel support and encouragement. I’m very glad that you’re in my corner.”

As recently as February 2018 — two months before Schumb is alleged to have taken part in the alleged crimes — Rosen was writing to Schumb seeking advice for repairing an heirloom Swiss watch.

“For Mr. Rosen to deny there was a friendship defies logic. It’s absurd,” Wall said in court Thursday. “His role in this case taints our criminal-justice system … All we’re asking for is a fair playing field.”

… Schumb, Nahal, Nichols and Jensen are scheduled to return to court next week to continue their arraignment. All four were indicted on felony conspiracy and bribery charges that allege they plotted with Christian West, former CEO of the executive security firm AS Solution, and AS manager Martin Nielsen to get the firm up to a dozen concealed-carry permits for their agents in exchange for $90,000 in donations to committees supporting Sheriff Laurie Smith and her 2018 re-election campaign.

When the four indicted defendants first appeared in court together Aug. 31, West pleaded guilty to two conspiracy counts, on the agreement they are downgraded to misdemeanors for his cooperation with prosecutors. Nielsen and another AS manager testified before a criminal grand jury that they both were in line for similar consideration.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/09/17/judge-hears-bid-to-oust-da-from-concealed-gun-permit-corruption-case/

Out of a job over face mask, former teacher in San Antonio pushes anti-racism plan at charter network

A former Great Hearts Academies elementary school art teacher is calling on the charter network to implement anti-racism action plans in its schools.

Lillian White, who taught at Great Hearts Western Hills, said she had tangled with an administrator’s order against wearing face masks that reference the “current political climate” by refusing to stop wearing masks with phrases that included “Black Lives Matter,” “No Justice, No Peace” and “Justice delayed is justice denied,” according to a month’s worth of e-mails that culminated in her job loss Sept. 5.

She published an online petition two weeks ago that has garnered nearly 900 signatures, calling for anti-racism training for employees and board members, diverse representation in curriculum and campus-based monitoring of the plan.

“This is not an accusation of racism. We all have biases, and we must learn to recognize and face them in order to come together to heal and support each other,” White wrote. “An educational institution should not be opposed to learning.”

White did not respond to an interview request and Great Hearts declined one, citing privacy for current and former employees. Officials provided a statement that quoted from a June 6 letter its interim superintendent sent to families and employees.

“We stand with the Black community and all who are suffering,” wrote Daniel Scoggin, who is also the network’s co-founder. “Great Hearts deplores bigotry and its crushing effects on all those subjected to it. Great Hearts is committed to an America where racism, violence, and injustice do not happen, because such acts find no home in the hearts of a great people.”

The emails, which White posted online, show she contacted Andrew Ellison, executive director of Great Hearts San Antonio, on Aug. 4 to argue against the mask directive.

“I do not quite understand why this is a problem,” she wrote in a four-page document attached to the email, adding that if anyone is offended “by the idea of equal rights for all students at our school, does that really seem like the kind of person that belongs in the Great Hearts family?”

The Black Lives Matter movement should be seen as a human rights issue, not a political statement, White wrote.

Ellison’s response pointed to a board policy adopted July 29 that face coverings be devoid of visual references to popular culture, including brand logos. The policy was drafted by school leaders and teachers and posted online July 17 for review before the board voted, officials said.

“While this rule does not expressly exclude them, it implicitly rules out verbal messages, regardless of content,” along with everything from symbols promoting autism awareness or the “police lives matter” movement to the “Go Spurs!” exhortation, Ellison wrote.

He also referenced Scoggin’s letter. White asked that the letter’s message supporting the Black community be prominently posted, saying she would “have no problem avoiding political statements mask-wise” if that happened.

Receiving no response, White sent the request to Scoggin on Aug. 17. He offered a 30-minute phone call, which White welcomed on the condition they both record it. Scoggin retracted the offer and wrote that he would discuss her request with his colleagues.

https://www.expressnews.com/news/education/article/Out-of-a-job-over-face-mask-former-teacher-in-15575351.php

Newsom signs bill requiring businesses to disclose coronavirus infections

California businesses must disclose infections or exposures to the coronavirus in the workplace after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law Thursday outlining company reporting standards to workers and the state.

Supporters of the bill, AB685, say it is a crucial step in protecting many essential workers still on the job. Opponents say it is not clear when employers have to sound the alarm to workers and what exactly needs to be disclosed.

Newsom also signed SB1159, which establishes a presumption around workers’ compensation eligibility applicable to most California employers with virus outbreaks into 2022, expanding on a previous executive order from the governor.

He also signed SB1383 into law, which allows Californians who work for an employer with five or more employees to use paid family leave benefits without fear of losing their jobs.

“We’ve asked our workers to keep food on the table, food on the shelves, and ensure that other essential services were also provided” during the pandemic said the bill’s author Assemblywoman Eloise Reyes, D-San Bernardino, during a virtual signing ceremony Thursday.

Reyes said state law did not previously require companies to tell workers about confirmed or potential infections at work, something that had largely been left up to the discretion of companies during the pandemic.

“We feel like there's been a lot of information that's been hidden from us,” said Sharon Hechler during the signing, a union grocery store worker of nearly five decades in Southern California.

AB685 goes into effect Jan. 1 and requires employers to tell workers in writing they may have been exposed to the virus and tell them about their options for taking time away from work and other safety steps.

“What's a little confusing about AB685 is the notices to employees,” said Ben Ebbink, a Fisher & Phillips attorney in Sacramento.

The law requires companies to tell their employees about any potential exposure to the virus, particularly those employees at a worksite who may have been exposed to a infected person, along with anyone else who might have been infected.

“Notification has to include all the COVID-related benefits the employee might be entitled to under federal state and local law,” Ebbink said, noting companies also have to inform employees of their disinfection and safety plan.

That might be a particular challenge for small businesses, with localities enacting different rules around safety and sick leave during the pandemic.

“Not every employer has an HR department or legal counsel they can turn to,” Ebbink said.

Companies already must disclose some cases of the coronavirus to local health departments, but that information is not made public. Companies have to report workplace-related injuries to state safety regulator Cal/OSHA, but there has been disagreement on if that applies to cases of the coronavirus.

The state’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board is also considering holding employers to stricter rules similar to the state’s aerosolized transmissible disease standard intended to protect health care workers from diseases in the air.

AB685 also requires that businesses notify health authorities if infections become widespread, information that the California Department of Public Health can then make public, potentially with a company name published alongside a notice of infection.

Opponents have criticized that section of the bill as a “name and shame” strategy that will not increase workers safety.

The bill also creates anti-retaliation protections for employees who report infections, to encourage them to come forward.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Newsom-signs-bill-requiring-businesses-to-15576216.php