Clayton Watch Fighting to Amend Civil Grand Jury Report on City of Clayton
by David King, Diablo Gazette (October 2025)
 |
| Petition filed with the superior Court of
Californina, Contra Costa County |
The council responded mostly with disagreement with almost all of its findings, citing the report was filled with errors, guided by misinformation, and rejected the recommendations. So, that was the end of it right?
Not so fast.
While the Council is ready to move on, Diablo Gazette received a copy of a 56-page petition submitted by the Political Action Committee, Clayton Watch, submitted to the Contra Costa County Superior Court of California, datestamped on Oct. 23, asking for the court to amend the record.
According to Gary Hood, a founding member of Clayton Watch, Clayton Watch feels the Grand Jury Report maligns Clayton and that damage needs to be mitigated with the facts.
With the report as is, the concern is should Clayton have future recruiting needs to fill key government and law enforcement positions, the report can dissuade top candidates, as well as be weaponized in future political campaigns to misinform voters.
The first challenge was to confirm that Clayton Watch even had standing to challenge the Grand Jury Report, which it claims it does for being a duly registered civic organization acting on matters of community concern, government transparency, and accountability.
The petition was submitted after several written requests to simply review the report and correct misstatements with verified facts, but those requests were at first unanswered, then eventually rejected.
There is no precedent for such action. Further complicating a formal review is that the Jurors who conducted the investigation are protected by anonymity, and have all been replaced with a new set of Jurors.
The petition cites several problems with the original report, notwithstanding its prejudicial title. Supported by exhibits, the petition identifies six additional specific factual and procedural deficiencies in the report.
The report misstates the general fund revenues, expenditures and balances by relying on unaudited figures. The exhibit provides the audited figures which Hood says dispels the Jury’s findings.
The report criticizes the City for not taking action for revenue enhancement; the exhibit verifies actions that were taken.
Citing extreme turnover in City manager positions, the petition points out that it is overstating that turnover by counting interim assignments.
Regarding Brown Act violations, the petition accuses the Civil Grand Jury of not understanding the functions and procedures of special committees and that no Brown Act violations occurred.
Speaking of procedures, the petition charges that it was the Grand Jury that failed its legal obligations by not providing the Council and any other affected agencies with a copy of the report prior to publication as required by Penal Code 933(f).
Since the original Report cannot be changed, the petition asks that an amendment be filed with the provided factual remedies and suggestions presented.
Copies of the petition were sent to the presiding Judge, Hon. Terri Mockler, Matt Malone, Chief Counsel and Public Information Officer, County Supervisor Ken Carlson, Clayton City councilmembers, President of the Grand Jurors Association and others.
Now waiting for the Superior Court’s response, Hood seems to be swimming in uncharted waters.
Ironically, The Civil Grand Jury Association, a statewide organization that trains and educates Civil Grand Jurors, met in San Luis Obispo on October 26 and 27. The theme of the conference, “Civil Grand Jury, the Cornerstone of Transparency and Accountibility”.
Perhaps Clayton Watch’s efforts will be a training tool in the future. To read the entire petition and its exhibits, click here.
The fact the civil grand jury did NOT comply with the law by making sure the city had the report so it could address inaccuracies AS REQUIRED BY THE LAW but instead somehow a nefarious news website had it first followed by Tamara Steiner handing out printed copies that evening at the CBCA meeting raises a lot of suspicion as to someone having their thumb on the scale. Was this a fabricated political hit job on Clayton from a group that was upset they didn’t have control?
ReplyDeleteIt was a political witch hunt by a disgruntled former city manager, two council members (one former and one current), and a defunct local paper. Now the truth is out.
DeleteIt's amusing how Cloven and Tillman, with their group, remain quiet, knowing no one is buying any of the garbage they are selling. Truth always comes to light when you do dirty deeds in the dark - remember that, Holly!
DeleteAnd what evidence do you have that the city was not in receipt of the report prior to its release to the public and that Tamara Steiner had it in advance or public release?
DeleteAll I can say is, "Wow Clayton Watch". Thank you for trying to set the record straight. Someone spent many hours researching the "How To" process and putting this together. Again thank you Clayton Watch.
ReplyDeleteClayton’s political rodeo is over. Folks thought the civil grand jury had it all figured out—but even they got played. The truth is the system was rigged, and a few sore, self-serving varmints tried to twist it to grab power and pull the strings. Lucky for us, Clayton Watch rode in and called out the whole mess.
DeleteIt’s about time the truth was told. Some of these people are full of themselves.
ReplyDeleteTillman, Cloven, Wolfe, and Steiner are all ego-driven and look at me, aren't I great.
DeleteBig shoutout to Clayton Watch! We’re new, we’re paying attention, and we couldn’t be happier that you’re standing up for our town. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteAnd tell me again how all this got by the grand jury foreperson Peter Appert.
ReplyDeletePeter and Tamara are friends, enough said!
DeleteCalifornia Penal Code § 95 makes it a felony to corruptly influence a civil grand juror—through threats, promises, or manipulation. Maybe the so-called “gang of six” will lose a bit of sleep knowing they’ve been exposed, and that someone may be knocking on their door sooner than they think. If I were the foreperson, I’d be packing my bags and heading for the hills. And for the others? Let the court decide—maybe some community service, cleaning up our trails while losing a little bit of weight…or maybe some jail time while they’re at it. 😂 From a retired attorney
ReplyDeleteAnd who corruptly influenced a civil grand jury. Who is the gang of six?
DeleteWho is part of the "gang of six"?
DeleteThey should face criminal charges. They made false claims under oath. Horrendous!
DeleteGang of six? I'm already up to ten and counting.
ReplyDeleteName them!
DeleteHey, I’ve heard there is a business owner in town who can tell us exactly who the people were who filed the complaints to the civil grand jury.
DeleteWhat business? Please tell us more.
DeleteI’m going down to talk to them. The people who filed complaints should be exposed for their dirty, underhanded pay-for-play schemes.
DeleteWord is, these people were overheard discussing the shenanigans at a local restaurant before the complaint was even filed with Contra Costa County. Interestingly enough, I was at the city council meeting where councilmember Holly Timan publicly stated that “the people in the back of the room would be eating crow soon.” At the time, I thought it was a strange comment, but now I understand what she was up to. Stay tuned, more to come.
DeleteI just read the petition. Great job!
ReplyDeleteThe contradictions between the City’s record and the Grand Jury’s conclusions are too significant to ignore. The Civil Grand Jury process must never be used as a political tool, yet that’s precisely what appears to have happened. A handful of politically driven voices—amplified by a now-defunct local newspaper, whose owner was a past member of the Grand Jury’s editorial board, and echoed by a sitting councilmember—managed to turn personal grievances into “official findings.” What began as rumor evolved into a government-issued report carrying the County’s seal. That is not accountability. That's a crime
What do you have to say now Holly? Everything you have been pushing for the last 4 years is all BS.
ReplyDeleteHolly needs to resign. She is a lying, manipulative narcissist.
DeleteThe entire Tillman family is full of BS. It's all about money, prestige, and power for them. They are in a " look at me mode 24/7, 365 days a year.
DeleteI just finished reading the petition, and I have to say. . .how was that civil grand jury report ever allowed to be released? It was clearly a hit job on the city. The whole thing reeks of bias and insider influence. Someone must have known somebody to let that report see the light of day. The jury foreperson absolutely needs to be investigated.
ReplyDeleteAnother issue with civi grand juries, the folks who are interviewed are not under oath. There is no penalty of perjury. A “witness” can make up any story they want as was done in this report with the city’s finance and the civil grand jury can choose to believe what would normally be perjury in a real grand jury. The county was sued recently because a past civil grand jury coached a witness into saying things that were later proven to be untrue when the matter went to a real trial. The entire process of the civil grand jury is ripe for political gamesmanship. The jury foreman is a very very wealthy Wall Street executive who lives in a 4.2 million dollar home. He is part of the elite. How many phone calls from one friend to another to get this made up report on the docket?
ReplyDeleteTo the genius above who earned his law degree out of a Cracker Box snack.
DeleteRelevant California Laws
Here are the statutes that apply even when no oath was taken:
1. Penal Code §72 — Filing a False Statement or Information
Knowingly submitting false statements to a public body (which includes a Civil Grand Jury) is a crime.
PC §72: It is illegal to knowingly present false written statements to any public officer or board with intent to influence their actions.
This is often the charge when someone files a knowingly false grand jury complaint.
2. Penal Code §182 — Criminal Conspiracy
If two or more people knowingly worked together to create a false complaint or testimony, even if they were not under oath, that can constitute conspiracy.
3. Penal Code §134 — Preparing False Evidence
If a document, timeline, narrative, or “packet” was knowingly fabricated or altered, that is preparing false evidence — a felony.
Even if the person never testifies.
4. Penal Code §148 — Obstruction of an Investigation
Knowingly interfering with or misleading an official investigation is also a crime.
Important Grand Jury Rule
The identities of the complainants and witnesses are confidential under PC §914.1.
But confidentiality does not protect someone who filed false statements.
If evidence shows they intentionally misled the Civil Grand Jury, the confidentiality does not shield them from criminal liability.
Sleep well, "Gang of Six." Listen closely for the knock on your door
If wasn't a Cracker Jacks box but if only the court would investigate this thing to the degree these other laws demand. If not, perjury is the first one to come to mind. And make no mistake, false information was given to the Civil Grand Jury about the city's finances. But the bigger question is why did they ignore FACTS like the city's audited financial statements and instead accept the false financial data provided by a "witness" who would be up on clear perjury charge? The bigger point is why did these supposed jurors make up this report? Why did the judge permit this? Did the judge even read the report and review the evidence? The defenders of this report tell us all to ignore this and focus on the pattern? What pattern? The only pattern here is false information was given to the civil grand jury who willingly accepted it in the face of evidence that disputed it. Someone on that civil grand jury or perhaps a few had an agenda. Getting anyone to really look into this will be difficult but the Clayton Watch folks are to be commended for doing this.
DeleteThe petition is spot on. Thank you, Gary and Clayton Watch
ReplyDeleteI just received my copy of the Diablo Gazette today and read the article about the Civil Grand Jury and the petition. After flipping through the petition, I couldn’t help but think it was well-organized, thoroughly researched, and professionally written. Thank you, Clayton Watch, for your dedication and concern for our city. How could something like this be allowed to happen? Hopefully, the Superior Court will do its job and handle the matter appropriately.
ReplyDelete