Grand jury: Fire D.A. for misuse of funds
In an unusual legal maneuver, a Contra Costa grand jury in a Thursday filing said that the county’s district attorney who spent more than $66,000 in campaign funds on himself should be removed from office, alleging “willful misconduct” in his handling of the matter.
Though the grand jury, which consists of 19 county residents, has the ability to issue a criminal indictment, jurors did not do so for District Attorney Mark Peterson, said foreman Jim Mellander.
“This is a process that’s somewhere in this murky area between civil and criminal,” Mellander said.
Since Peterson in December admitted to inappropriately spending the $66,000 on personal expenses — including meals, clothes, phone bills and movie tickets — there have been growing calls for his resignation. Peterson spent the funds, which later were reimbursed in full, and in part after an audit was announced, while serving as treasurer of his own re-election campaign from 2011 to 2015.
The district attorney was fined $45,000 by California’s Fair Political Practices Commission in December. A spokeswoman for Peterson declined to comment Thursday.
“I am humbled and embarrassed by my mistakes, for which I take full responsibility, and I apologize for my regrettable errors,” Peterson told The Chronicle in a December statement.
The grand jury’s findings next go before a Contra Costa Superior Court judge, who can either appoint a special prosecutor or turn the case over to a district attorney from a nearby county. If Peterson is found guilty in a trial, he would be removed from office.
Aron DeFerrari, the president of the union for the district attorney’s office, declined to comment Thursday night. DeFerrari said he scheduled an “emergency” meeting of the union’s board to discuss the association’s next steps at 8 a.m. Friday.
It’s quite rare for a grand jury to recommend the removal of an elected official from office, which in Peterson’s case was done under a California law that requires a determination of “willful or corrupt misconduct” while in office.
The jury’s report specifically cited the 600 instances, or transactions, that Peterson admitted to making from his campaign funds over the fouryear period, referring to them as “malfeasance.”
Though Peterson could not specify the number of jurors in favor of recommending Peterson’s removal, legally at least 12 of the 19 jurors must concur to bring such an accusation forward.
The jury outlines three civil charges to make their case against the district attorney. Criminal charges could be brought by another grand jury at a later date — but that would require members of Peterson’s office to indict their own boss.