With San Benito County’s collective jaw still hanging over the
scandal involving District Attorney John Sarsfield, some leaders
say his credibility has vanished, while others defend his actions
and hope the dark political cloud dissipates soon.
With San Benito County’s collective jaw still hanging over the scandal involving District Attorney John Sarsfield, some leaders say his credibility has vanished, while others defend his actions and hope the dark political cloud dissipates soon.
But most people among a host of public figures polled this week didn’t offer simple answers to a question on many minds: Should Sarsfield resign?
Among three county supervisors who spoke about the district attorney this week, supervisors Bob Cruz and Reb Monaco said a resignation is solely Sarsfield’s decision. But Supervisor Ruth Kesler defended him and said he shouldn’t step down, though she didn’t elaborate further.
Supervisors Pat Loe and Richard Scagliotti didn’t return calls or respond to e-mails on the matter.
“That would be his decision,” Cruz said when asked if Sarsfield should resign. “That would be one hell of a decision.”
Despite Monaco’s ambiguity about the question of resignation, he acknowledged turmoil surrounding the District Attorney’s Office could affect its efficiency.
And he subtly griped at the 17 days Sarsfield took to send a controversial report on the District 5 supervisor’s race to the state.
“I have a firm belief you give a job to somebody and you expect them to do it,” Monaco said, referring to the Board of Supervisors’ request that Sarsfield investigate the District 5 election scandal in March, and the events unfolding since.
According to Anthony Freitas, who faces Anthony Botelho in November for the District 2 seat, several local residents have broached the topic of recalling Sarsfield. Though Freitas declined to mention their names.
“Once everything comes out and all the evidence is put forward,” Freitas said, “I think he should start thinking about saving the credibility of this county and maybe stepping aside.
“It’s going to be in the back of a lot of people’s minds for a long time, and I don’t think they’re going to be able to forget it.”
Cruz, though, still believes Sarsfield could successfully run the prosecutor’s office. Though the district attorney has dealt with “nothing but turmoil” during his time on the job since January 2003, he said.
Most recent were events that led to Sarsfield dropping a grand jury’s plans to investigate Jaime De La Cruz and his campaign adviser Ignacio Velazquez for alleged elections violations.
Twelve days before the grand jury was set to convene, Velazquez’s lawyer Mike Pekin warned the prosecutor he would file a court motion to remove Sarsfield from overseeing the probe. Velazquez was ready to allege an inner-office affair that compromised Sarsfield’s objectivity.
Sarsfield agreed to cancel it. Then he reversed course on the deal. Velazquez followed by filing the embarrassing motion. And Sarsfield sent the probe to the state anyway because the affair allegation created its own conflict. At the time, Sarsfield also claimed he sent a claim Pekin extorted him to the FBI.
Two weeks later neither agency had received anything. Though Sarsfield did say this week he was sending the election report to the attorney general.
News of the scandal in San Benito has spread to surrounding counties, Freitas said. The county’s integrity, he said, “is being lost” because of it.
Freitas and several other former leaders and incoming supervisors were more outspoken on the issue than current board members.
Freitas believes Sarsfield “waffled” on the grand jury issue, he said, and that his decisions on the matter “made it look like he just backed down.”
Botelho expressed concern about the future of the District Attorney’s Office as well. He didn’t call for Sarsfield’s resignation because “a lot of it is speculation, and I don’t know if it’s true or not.”
But if any circumstances of the scandal affect Sarsfield’s performance, he said, “Then (resignation) is something that he needs to consider very deeply.”
Botelho did criticize Sarsfield – who did not return phone calls from the Free Lance on Thursday – for a lack of openness with the public on the matter.
“It would help if he was straightforward with the press so that people can get some adequate answers,” Botelho said.
Don Marcus will take over the District 1 seat on the board in January. He didn’t say whether Sarsfield should resign because he has “a limited knowledge of the facts.”
If something hinders Sarsfield’s ability on the job, though, Marcus said, “I hope he does what’s right.”
But Marcus also said he hopes Sarsfield can get past the scandal and restore reliability to the District Attorney’s Office.
“It’s easy to throw darts. But I’m sure the truth will prevail, and I have faith in that,” Marcus said.
Former District Attorney Harry Damkar, who has held an adversarial relationship with Sarsfield since he left office in 2002, said the prosecutor has been “short on getting the truth out.”
Damkar has awaited completion of the De La Cruz probe because he represents Cruz’s wife, who sued in civil court to nullify the race’s result using many of the same fraud allegations.
He believes Sarsfield should “seriously consider resignation” if he’s incapable of doing the job adequately.
“He has flip-flopped on that to where the public feels his credibility is compromised,” Damkar said. “When he speaks, he lacks credibility now.”
Former county Supervisor Richard Place also mentioned several “inconsistencies” coming from Sarsfield’s office that have diminished his credibility, he said. But he also hopes Sarsfield can mend his image.
“I think it’s up to the DA to reestablish his relationship with the community,” said Place, who called Sarsfield’s credibility “about as good as the Board of Supervisors’ right now.”
Other community leaders – Sheriff Curtis Hill, Hollister Mayor Tony Bruscia and Clerk John Hodges – declined to comment on the issue of Sarsfield’s future.
“Hopefully we can put this behind us as a community,” Bruscia said.
