7/20/2021 - AGENDA ITEM 10 - CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2021-62 - VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCONAGENDA ITEM NO. 10
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
City of West Covina I Office of the City Manager
DATE: July 20, 2021
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: David Carmany
City Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO.2021-62- VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE IN
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCON.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council provide direction on adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION NO.2021-62 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING AND AFFIRMING A VOTE OF NO
CONFIDENCE IN LOS ANGELES DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCON BASED ON
ISSUED SPECIAL DIRECTIVES AND THEIR IMPACT ON CRIMINAL FILING PRACTICES
AND PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
BACKGROUND:
The District Attorney (DA) is a constitutionally elected county official. The District Attorney is responsible for
the prosecution of criminal violations of state law and ordinances under California Government Code Section
26500. This includes investigation and apprehension, as well as prosecution in court. The District Attorney
serves as legal advisor to the Grand Jury and, through its family support division, enforces parental financial
obligations. The County Board of Supervisors exercises budgetary control but not operational control over
elected District Attorneys.
At the May 4, 2021 regular City Council meeting, Mayor Lopez-Viado requested a presentation by the Los
Angeles County District Attorney's Office (DA's Office) to discuss Special Directives issued by Los Angeles
County District Attorney George Gasc6n. Interim Chief Deputy Joseph Iniguez of the District Attorney's
Office made a presentation to the City Council at its regular meeting on June 1, 2021.
Below is a summary of cases that have been affected by Special Directives that the Los Angeles County
District Attorney has put in place:
• Filing of West Covina Police Department cases as a result of District Attorney Gasc6n's special
directives (specifically 20-07):
v5
The West Covina Police Department (WCPD) submitted 96 cases to the DA's Office for criminal filing,
which included 156 separate crime charges (some cases had more than one crime charged). These cases
were accumulated from January — May of 2021. While the WCPD filed more cases with the DA's office,
the 96 cases were the ones affected by the new DA directives. As such none of the 156 crime charges
were filed by DA's office, which means the DA's office is following the new filing guidelines.
a Three cases not filed and not a direct result of new District Attorney directives:
Of the 156 crimes, there were only 3 cases that were not filed, that were not a direct result of the new
DA's Office filing directives:
1.One was not filed because there was a statute of limitations issue
2.One case the victim refused to prosecute
3. One case involved a juvenile, who was sent to a diversion program in lieu of filing criminal
charges.
Additionally, in a response from the DA's Office, there were 3 additional cases that WCPD had
submitted, which were rejected, that the DA was looking into for possibilities of filing, but there has
been no indication that a filing will occur.
a Drug related offenses:
Eighty-two (82) of the cases that WCPD presented to the DA's Office for filing that were rejected
pertained to drug related offenses. According to the DA's Office, currently, there is no prosecution for
these offenses based on DA Gascbn's Directives (20-07). Basically WCPD makes a drug related arrest
(possession, under the influence, possession of drug paraphernalia), they book the suspect at our WCPD
jail, issue a citation, and the suspect walks out of our jail with a promise to appear in court. The case is
sent to DA's Office for criminal filing, at which time, due to the new filing directives, gets rejected and
the case is closed with no follow up and the suspect no longer is mandated to appear in court. There is
no court ordered diversion in this scenario. This current process creates community safety issues, effects
quality of life for our residents and business owners, and provides no means of addressing the root
causes of these issues as intended.
As a means of addressing issues like addiction, mental illness, and homelessness, Los Angeles County
has adopted and has begun to implement recommendations from a report submitted by the Los Angeles
County Alternatives to Incarceration Work Group, established in February of 2019. This report, entitled
"Care First, Jails Last" program as a means of finding alternatives to incarceration, aimed at addressing
to root causes of these issues. It is important to note that this program was adopted by the LA County
Board of Supervisors, and has been in the works since 2019, and coincides with DA Gascon's filing
directives.
DISCUSSION:
The Los Angeles County District Attorney (DA) is an elected county official. The DA is responsible for the
prosecution of criminal violations of state law and county ordinances occurring within the county in
which they are elected. This includes investigation and apprehension, as well as prosecution in court. The DA
serves as legal advisor to the Grand Jury and, through its family support division, enforces parental financial
obligations. The Board of Supervisors exercises budgetary control over elected DAs but not operational
control.
Every four years, the voters of Los Angeles County elect a nonpartisan DA to serve as the chief prosecutor for
the County. In November 2020, the voters of the County elected George Gascon as the DA. DA Gascon was
subsequently sworn in on December 7, 2020. Since being sworn in, Mr. Gascon has issued numerous Special
Directives and two subsequent amendments, which outline new policies and procedures for the Los Angeles
County DA's Office. Several directives are of concern for the public safety of the residents of Los
2/5
Angeles County and the residents of West Covina.
The Special Directives (SD) included the following:
1. Special Directive 20-06: Pretrial Release Policy (Elimination of Cash Bail)
SD 20-06 sets forth new policies and protocols on pretrial release and the use of cash bail. The SD
prohibits Deputy District Attorneys (DDAs) from requesting cash bail for any misdemeanor, non -
serious felony, or non-violent felony offense. If cash bail is requested for other offenses, DDAs
must recommend cash bail amounts that are aligned with the accused's ability to pay. Furthermore,
bail and/or pretrial detention may only be considered if there are no other options to protect public
safety and reasonably ensure the defendant's return to court. Additionally, DDAs shall not object
to the release of anyone currently incarcerated in Los Angeles County on cash bail who would be
eligible for release under this SD.
2. Special Directive 20-07: Misdemeanor Case Management
SD 20-07 states that the following misdemeanor charges shall be declined or dismissed before
arraignment and without conditions unless exceptions or factors for consideration exist:
trespassing, disturbing the peace, driving without a valid license, driving on a suspended license,
criminal threats, drug and paraphernalia possession, minor in possession of alcohol, drinking in
public, under the influence of a controlled substance, public intoxication, loitering, loitering to
commit prosecution, and resisting arrest. Exceptions and factors for consideration include repeat
offenders in the preceding 24 months. However, some misdemeanors listed do not have
exceptions or factors of consideration identified.
3. Special Directive 20-08: Sentencing Enhancements/Allegations, Special Directive 20-08.1:
Amendment to Special Directive 20-08, and Special Directive 20-08.2: Clarification of Special
Directive 20-08:
SD 20-08 states that the following sentence enhancements or sentencing allegations shall not be
filed in any cases and shall be withdrawn in pending matters: any prior strike enhancements,
including the Three Strikes Law; STEP Act enhancements (also known as gang enhancements);
violations of bail; and firearm allegations. Amendments 20-08.1 and 20-08.2 were issued on
December 15, 2020 and December 18, 2020, to make further clarification of SD 20-08. The
amendments state that DDAs may pursue the following allegations, enhancements, and alternative
sentencing schemes: hate crime, elder and dependent adult abuse, child physical abuse, child and
adult sexual abuse, human sex trafficking, and financial crimes.
6. Special Directive 20-09: Youth Justice
SD 20-09 implements policies for crimes involving youth. Pursuant to this SD, youth accused of
misdemeanors will not be prosecuted. If necessary and appropriate, youth accused of
misdemeanor offenses and low-level felonies will be referred to pre -filing, community -based
diversion programs. Youth will not be charged for crimes involving property damage or minor
altercations with group home staff, foster parents, and/or other youth if the youth's behaviors can
reasonably be related to the child's mental health or trauma history. The SD also provides that
filings will generally consist of the lowest potential code section that corresponds to the alleged
conduct and mandate one count per incident. Furthermore, youth will not be sent to the adult court
system and enhancements shall not be filed on youth petitions.
7. Special Directive 20-10: Habeas Corpus Litigation Unit
SD 20-10 establishes policies regarding the Habeas Corpus Litigation (HABLIT) Unit's review of
non -capital cases.
8. Special Directive 20-11: Death Penalty Policy
SD 20-11 provides that the DA's Office will not seek the death penalty in any case charged on or
after December 8, 2020. The DA's Office will also not defend any existing death sentences and
3/5
will engage in a thorough review of every existing death penalty judgment from Los Angeles
County.
9. Special Directive 20-12: Victim Services
SD 20-12 establishes policies related to services currently provided by the Bureau of Victim
Services (BVS). These new policies include the following: (1) BVS will contact all victims of a
violent crime within 24 hours of receiving notification; (2) BVS will contact the families of
individuals killed by law enforcement and provide support services; (3) BVS will support
survivors and all others harmed by violence and crime regardless of immigration status, reporting,
cooperation, or documentation; (4) BVS will establish a Victim Emergency Fund; and (5) BVS
will not require cooperation as a condition of offering services.
10. Special Directive 20-13: Conviction Integrity Unit
SD 20-13 establishes policies regarding the Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU). These policies relate
to case review criteria, access to discovery, investigations in claims of wrongful conviction, and
case resolution. This SD also provides that the CIU shall develop and maintain a database to track
errors and other causes of wrongful convictions uncovered in the course of its case reviews.
Pursuant to this SD, the database will track official misconduct, including the names of law
enforcement officers found to have committed misconduct or whose testimony has otherwise been
proven to be unreliable.
11. Special Directive 20-14: Resentencing
SD 20-14 provides that the DA's Office will seek to review and remediate every sentence that
does not comport with the new Sentencing Enhancement and Juvenile Policies. The DA's Office
specifically commits to an expedited review of the following categories of cases: (1) Those who
have already served 15 years or more; (2) Those who are currently 60 years of age or older; (3)
Those who are at increased risk of COVID-19; (4) Those who have been recommended for
resentencing by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation; (5) Those who are
criminalized survivors; and (6) Those who were 17 years of age or younger at the time of the
offense and were prosecuted as an adult.
Additional Los Angeles County cities have expressed concerns with the Special Directives. Their discussion
focused on the impacts to public safety and crime victim rights. The following cities have held discussion
and/or adopted Resolutions of "No Confidence" in the District Attorney and/or the Special Directives:
• Beverly Hills
• Santa Clarita
• Whittier
• La Mirada
• Lancaster
• Pico Rivera
• Azusa
• Covina
• Rosemead
• Santa Fe Springs
• San Gabriel
• Diamond Bar
• Redondo Beach
• Arcadia
• Manhattan Beach
• Temple City
• Palos Verdes Estates
• Lancaster
4/5
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the resolution and approved it as to form.
Prepared by: Lisa Sherrick; Assistant City Clerk
Attachments
Attachment No. 1 - Resolution No. 2021-62
CITY Enhance the City Image and Effectiveness
COUNCIL Protect Public Safety
GOALS &
OBJECTIVES:
5/5
►:11Y :T .11/I Z Z► =
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-62
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING AND
AFFIRMING A VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE IN LOS
ANGELES DISTRICT ATTORNEY GEORGE GASCON
BASED ON ISSUED SPECIAL DIRECTIVES AND THEIR
IMPACT ON CRIMINAL FILING PRACTICES AND
PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of West Covina values and places the highest
priority on public safety and protecting its community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that all of the criminal laws and penalties contained
in the California Penal Code serve to deter crime and criminal elements in the state and the City
of West Covina; and
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2020, George Gascon was elected as the Los Angeles
County District Attorney with 54% of the vote; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2020, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon
issued a series of Special Directives to reform criminal prosecutions in Los Angeles County; and
WHEREAS, the Special Directives include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Special Directive 20-07, which declines ordismisses several misdemeanor
charges, including trespassing, disturbing the peace, criminal threats, drug
and paraphernalia possession, being under the influence of a controlled
substance, public intoxication, and resisting arrest.
2. Special Directive 20-08, which eliminates several sentencing
enhancements, including the Three Strkes Law, gang enhancements, and
violations of bail
3. Special Directive 20-13, which relates to relates to case review criteria,
access to discovery, investigations in claims of wrongful conviction, and
case resolution; and
WHEREAS, some of the Special Directives contradict state laws that were enacted by the
Legislature as well and undemvne the deterrent effects of various criminal laws and penalties that
were meant to protect the public, including the residents of the City of West Covina; and
WHEREAS, it is of the utmost importance for the City of West Covina that policies aim
to restructure or amend prosecutorial directives are consistent with state law and issued with
reasonable intent and priority to enhance public safety and protect the general public and victims'
rights.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA,
CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of West Covina demands that Los Angeles
District Attorney George Gascon uphold state law and refrain from issuing firrther Special
Directives that contradict or violate the spirit, letter, or intent of state laws as enacted by the
legislature or cote of the people.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of West Covina demands that Los Angeles
County District Attorney George Gascon rescind Special Directives 20-07, 20-08, and 20-13,
and review all other directives to ensure that public safety, victims' rights, and the rule of law
are maintained or enhanced.
SECTION 3. By adopting this Resolution, the City Council declares and affirms that & Cly
Council of the City of West Covina has no confidence in Los Angeles County District Attorney
George Gascon.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption ofthis Resolution andshal erierthe
same in the book of original resolutions and it shall become effective immediately.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of July, 2021.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Thomas P. Duarte
City Attorney
Letty Lopez-Viado
Mayor
ATTEST
Lisa Sherrick
Assistant City Clerk
I, LISA SHERRICK, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK of the City of West Covina, California,
do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2021-62 was duly adopted by the City Council
of the City of West Covina, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of July,
2021, by the following vote of the City Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Lisa Sherrick
Assistant City Clerk