Library board ponders reply to grand jury report

The Sacramento Public Library's governing board weighed a proposal Thursday to reject the bulk of the recommendations made in a blistering assessment by the county grand jury, including a suggestion that library director Anne Marie Gold be fired.

The board did not vote on the draft response, putting it off until an Aug. 6 meeting. But members of the panel gave little indication they opposed much in the proposal, instead discussing only technical changes.

In a closed session preceding their public meeting, the 14-member board met for more than an hour to discuss a performance evaluation of Gold and to talk about a criminal case involving the library and two former workers.

Such sessions are held in secret. Board member Roger Dickinson, a Sacramento County supervisor, emerged and said simply, "No news."

There was no sign any action had been taken against Gold, who remained for the rest of the meeting and participated in the public session.

Elizabeth Silver, special counsel to the library board, cautioned members they could not discuss in public many aspects of the grand jury findings because they involve personnel matters and because grand jury proceedings are confidential.

"As the employer of the library director, you must protect her privacy rights," Silver said.

The library board, which is composed of 14 elected officials from area jurisdictions, received the grand jury report in May after a six-month investigation that found management problems in the library system.

The report laid out an array of concerns about library management, including alleged credit card abuses, questionable travel expenses, excessive use of consultants and a lack of oversight by the 14-member board.

The grand jury also found what it termed a "major problem with uncollected fines" totaling $2.5 million. Since the report's release, library officials have concluded that the actual total of unpaid fines and value of unreturned materials is $4.6 million.

The grand jury's harshest criticism focused on library director Gold, saying she ignored library employees who tried to warn officials of an alleged overbilling and kickback scheme involving two former employees and the wife of one of those employees.

The three – former library maintenance director Dennis Nilsson, former library security chief James Mayle and his wife, Janie Rankins-Mayle – were indicted in March on felony grand theft and bribery charges. They have not entered pleas, and are expected back in court Aug. 1.

The case came to light following a Bee investigation of spending practices that found that bills for maintenance work at library branches were being submitted by Hagginwood Services Inc., a firm owned by Rankins-Mayle.

Hagginwood was having subcontractors perform work and then inflating the amounts charged to the library, documents showed.

The library sued the Mayles and Hagginwood, seeking $1.3 million in restitution, and in May, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Shelleyanne W.L. Chang issued a judgment finding the Mayles and the company liable for $4.3 million in restitution and penalties.

The grand jury issued 14 recommendations in its report, including telling the board it should "seriously consider" removing Gold from her $145,000-a-year job.

The board has made no move to remove Gold, and some members have voiced strong support for her. The performance evaluation conducted Thursday was the third time this year that she has faced such an evaluation. Board agendas indicate she faced previous evaluations in closed sessions in February and March.

The proposed response to the grand jury report takes issue with the findings, partly because of library officials' complaints that they have not seen all the grand jury evidence and partly because the board says it cannot discuss the fate of employees in public.

"While the Grand Jury can – and should – speak freely about the Library Director's management style, and critique her management skills, we cannot, and will not, participate in a public discussion of what must for us be a private personnel issue," the proposed response states.

The library board is required to issue a response of some sort by Aug. 15 to the presiding judge of Sacramento Superior Court.

Last month, the board authorized spending $300,000 on a performance audit of the library, but the panel rejected a proposal Thursday to tack on $30,000 for a telephone survey of how the library serves its patrons.

"I'm just not going to support spending any more on consultants at this time," said board member Sandy Sheedy, a Sacramento city councilwoman.

The grand jury report questioned the library's use of consultants, noting that "since November 2003, the library has spent over $2.2 million for consultant services" ranging from employee investigations to contract negotiations to long-term planning.

Critics have questioned the need for spending money on the performance audit given the grand jury probe included the review of 1,500 documents and 70 subpoenas.

James F. Spagnole, a Sacramento attorney who was on the grand jury, sent a letter to The Bee this week noting that the panel consisted of four attorneys, a former police chief and numerous other professionals. He said the investigation took place "often in the face of obfuscation, indifference and non-cooperation from Library leadership."

His view was echoed in a letter that the grand jury foreman, Donald W. Prange Sr., sent June 30 to Superior Court Judge Raymond M. Cadei, who served as adviser to the panel.

"The Grand Jury's investigation into the management of the Sacramento County Library met not only indifference, but also active resistance and determined efforts to thwart the investigation," Prange wrote.

Among the grand jury recommendations the draft response says the library agrees with:

• Library employees should be evaluated regularly.

• Create more oversight and stronger internal controls.

• Publish an annual budget summary that includes year-end accomplishments and future plans.

About the writer:

• Call The Bee's Sam Stanton, (916) 321-1091.