In the latest salvo in the District 5 fight, embattled
supervisor-elect Jaime De La Cruz and his campaign adviser Ignacio
Velazquez filed a $5 million lawsuit against the county and
Supervisor Ruth Kesler Thursday claiming civil rights violations
and racial harassment.
Hollister – In the latest salvo in the District 5 fight, embattled supervisor-elect Jaime De La Cruz and his campaign adviser Ignacio Velazquez filed a $5 million lawsuit against the county and Supervisor Ruth Kesler Thursday claiming civil rights violations and racial harassment.
The suit claims Board members conspired to keep De La Cruz off the Board because he’s Latino and not part of the “good ol’ boy network,” and that Kesler made racial slurs against De La Cruz – repeatedly calling him “boy” and a “criminal.”
It also claims the Board investigated Velazquez and De La Cruz, who District Attorney John Sarsfield charged with felony forgery and perjury on Wednesday, for election fraud because they publicly criticized Board members. The men also want a federal investigation of what they call corruption within the Board and the District Attorney’s Office.
Kesler denied the claims of racial harassment Friday, and Sarsfield has dismissed the corruption allegations as ridiculous.
“I never called him anything – not that I remember. Why would I call him boy? That’s something you don’t do,” Kesler said. “I didn’t even know De La Cruz was Latino. I don’t know one race from another. I think they’re all people and people should be treated equally.”
Supervisor Bob Cruz, who lost to De La Cruz by 10 votes in March, also denied the corruption allegations and said he has no respect for De La Cruz and Velazquez for playing the “race card.”
“What the hell am I, chopped liver? I’ve been Latino all my life,” Cruz said. “The truth will come out.”
He said he never heard Kesler make racial slurs against De La Cruz and called the conspiracy allegations laughable.
“I am laughing at that question – that’s my answer,” Cruz said. “I’m not going to lower myself to say no or yes. It’s a stupid thing to imply.”
Supervisor Pat Loe could not be reached for comment because she is on vacation and Supervisor Richard Scagliotti did not return phone calls Friday.
Supervisor Reb Monaco – the only supervisor not named in the suit – declined to comment.
De La Cruz, said filing the suit isn’t about the money, but about bringing justice to a community.
“This is a suit to bring to the public’s awareness the corruption that’s been going on in this community,” De La Cruz said. “The reason why it’s $5 million is that it makes them say, ‘We need to take this as a serious issue.'”
De La Cruz and Velazquez approached lawyer Bill Marder several weeks ago to discuss filing the suit and put a rush on it after De La Cruz was charged Wednesday with four felony counts related to signature gathering in his campaign for the seat. The men claim the charges are a result of ongoing corruption involving members of the Board and Sarsfield.
“We feel that the Board of Supervisors and the DA found out about (the suit) and that’s why they moved so quickly to charge Jaime,” Velazquez said. “It’s another way of retaliating against Jaime.”
Marder said he took the case because he believes county officials are trampling on the basics of American democracy.
“It’s probably the most important of civil rights, which is the right of the people to vote,” Marder said. “What the county is doing is interfering with that right. County officials are telling the people of San Benito, ‘Your vote doesn’t count.'”
Sarsfield charged De La Cruz on Wednesday with four felony counts arising from his campaign for supervisor in 2003. Sarsfield alleges De La Cruz illegally signed a nomination petition circulated by someone else, but the supervisor-elect said the charges stem from a petition with three signatures worth a 75-cent discount toward his filing fee that he mistakenly signed and submitted to the elections office.
De La Cruz hired lawyer Arthur Cantu on Wednesday to represent him after learning about the criminal charges. Cantu has had an ongoing feud with Sarsfield since he lost to the prosecutor in the 2002 race.
Sarsfield offered De La Cruz a deal that would whittle the felony charge down to a misdemeanor charge of filing false election papers if he resigns from all of his political offices – including his supervisor seat. The deal and any chance of one in the future expired at 4pm Friday, but De La Cruz was adamant from the beginning he would “absolutely” refuse to be part of any deal to escape prosecution.
The suit and criminal charges against De La Cruz are the latest developments in a conflict that began when De La Cruz beat Cruz by 10 votes in the March 2 race. Shortly after the race, the Board of Supervisors launched an investigation into claims that De La Cruz and Velazquez broke election laws by improperly returning absentee ballots. In addition, Cruz’s wife filed a lawsuit against De La Cruz challenging the election results, but dropped the suit when she realized there wasn’t enough evidence to overturn the 10 votes.
The large dollar amount tacked to the latest suit against the county wasn’t chosen randomly, Marder said. While it’s very rare to put a dollar amount in a lawsuit he included the $5 million because of a pending lawsuit in Southern California dealing with an almost identical issue. He said an incoming city councilman filed a similar suit to De La Cruz and Velazquez’s, and an appellate court ruled the amount was appropriate based on the damages, Marder said.
The men are also demanding the case not be settled but that it go to a jury trial so the information can become as public as possible, Velazquez said. The suit was filed in federal court in San Jose Thursday to ensure objectivity, he said.
“The only way we’re going to get a fair trial is to take it to a federal court,” Velazquez said. “So they’re not going to let the Board of Supervisors twist the facts around like they did around here.”
De La Cruz, who is still scheduled to be sworn in Jan. 4 and is scheduled to appear in court nine days later, also said the men are organizing a petition drive in the hopes of gathering 5,000 signatures to initiate a federal investigation into the Board of Supervisors and the District Attorney for corruption.
They are working with proponents of an effort to recall Sarsfield that failed because the group couldn’t get enough signatures, he said. They needed more than 5,000 and only got around 1,000.
“The recall was not well organized. You need a good team,” De La Cruz said. “This is more of an organized effort.”
Erin Musgrave covers public safety for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or [email protected]
