The following letter is being shared in the interest of transparency and community awareness. As an engaged and active voice in the community, Clayton Watch is committed to shedding light on the kind of political behavior that has long affected our town.
The author of this letter is an active member of Clayton Watch and a strong advocate for truth, accountability, and the end of divisive politics that have undermined our local values for years. We firmly believe that no one is above scrutiny, even if that means calling the judge and jury out when fairness is compromised.
We encourage you to read this letter with an open mind. The concerns raised are significant and deserve thoughtful consideration. Those involved in perpetuating or enabling such conduct should be held accountable for their actions.
Thank you for your time and commitment to ensuring Clayton remains a community of integrity.
Sincerely,
The Clayton Watch Team
Hon. Terri Mockler Supervising Judge
Contra Costa County Superior Court
725 Court Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Peter Appert, Foreperson, 2024–2025 Civil Grand Jury
Contra Costa County Grand Jury
725 Court Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Request for Oversight and Clarification Regarding Clayton Grand Jury Report
Dear Judge Mockler and Grand Jury Foreperson,
On behalf of concerned residents across Clayton, Clayton Watch writes to express serious concern and disappointment with the recent Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury report titled “Clayton: Small City, Big Concerns.” This report has raised significant alarm due to its sensational tone, misstatements, and potential political influence, factors that undermine public confidence in both the findings and the Grand Jury process.
From the outset, the title projected bias and sensationalism, rather than the impartial tone expected of a judicially supervised body. When political talking points begin to appear in official findings or rulings, it becomes a concern for all of us, as it weakens public faith in the integrity of the judicial system itself.
Unfortunately, the report includes multiple errors, misrepresentations, and misunderstandings that deserve immediate attention:
Misrepresentation of Leadership Turnover: The report inflates the number of City Managers by counting interim and acting officials, an inappropriate method that falsely suggests instability.
Financial Misstatements: Assertions of ongoing deficits contradict the City’s publicly available audited financial statements. How were these core financial facts overlooked?
Brown Act Allegations: The claim of Brown Act violations appears based on a misunderstanding. Agenda-setting in Clayton is not conducted by any committee, standing or otherwise.
Misunderstanding of Governance Structure: The report confuses the roles of standing committees versus ad hoc committees, reflecting a troubling lack of understanding of local government operations.
These issues raise serious questions about the diligence, fairness, and subject matter competence of the Grand Jury’s investigation.
Even more troubling are signs that the process may have been influenced by local political actors. Of particular concern is Tamara Steiner, owner of the Clayton Pioneer, who publicly called for an investigation and is reportedly connected to several individuals affiliated with the Grand Jury and Clayton politics.
Given these individuals’ visible involvement in local political matters, we request confirmation that no Grand Jurors held personal, political, or financial affiliations that would compromise impartiality. Transparency here is essential to protect the credibility of the findings.
We are also deeply concerned about apparent breaches of confidentiality:
• Just recently, in a social media post, former Councilmember Peter Cloven acknowledged receiving a Grand Jury letter in September 2024 and noted that similar letters were placed in all council members’ mailboxes. Interestingly enough, in December 2024, Councilmember Holly Tillman publicly declared that residents would “soon be eating crow,” a remark that strongly suggests foreknowledge of the report. She repeatedly requested an “investigation” during council meetings in September, October, November, and December 2024 despite allegedly knowing one was already underway. Such actions distort public discourse, drain staff resources, and appear to be politically motivated.
Additionally, while several past and present officials, including residents, were reportedly interviewed, no one from Clayton Watch, one of the most active nonpartisan civic groups in the city was contacted. Why was our perspective excluded? This omission further erodes confidence in the report’s fairness and neutrality.
Because your Court oversees the civil grand jury process, we respectfully request clarification and oversight on the following key issues:
Conflicts of Interest - Were any Grand Jurors personally, politically, or financially affiliated with Tamara Steiner, Councilmember Holly Tillman, former Councilmember Peter Cloven, or former City Manager Bret Prebula?
Report Title Authorization - Who approved the use of the report’s biased and inflammatory title?
Financial Accuracy - What sources of financial data were used, and why were the City’s audited financials seemingly disregarded?
Leadership Count Manipulation - Why were interim and acting City Managers included in the total count, when this practice is not standard?
Governance Competency - Were jurors properly trained to understand public agency structures, including the distinction between standing and ad hoc committees?
We recognize that the 2024–2025 Grand Jury may have already been discharged. However, since your Court maintains jurisdiction over this process, we respectfully request that appropriate former jurors be contacted and asked to provide answers.
We also acknowledge that mistakes happen and that every city, including Clayton, can improve. However, releasing a report riddled with misinformation and bias does not build public trust. Instead, it divides our community, misleads the public, and diminishes confidence in the Grand Jury system.
Public trust depends on transparency, fairness, and accountability. We hope you will treat this matter with the seriousness it deserves and offer the residents of Clayton the clarity they are entitled to.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. We respectfully request a timely response.
Sincerely,
Gary Hood
Clayton Watch
Political Action Committee
FPPC ID #1471612
cc: Clayton City Council and Staff
City Manager, City of Clayton
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Hon. Christopher Bowen, Presiding Judge