Since the defeat of Measure G, Salinas attorney Michael Pekin
has dropped three of the six counts in a lawsuit alleging
corruption by county government officials
– one of them an allegation of a Brown Act violation.
Since the defeat of Measure G, Salinas attorney Michael Pekin has dropped three of the six counts in a lawsuit alleging corruption by county government officials – one of them an allegation of a Brown Act violation.
During a court hearing Tuesday, Judge Alan Hedegard ruled to allow Pekin to amend one count of his complaint and decide the fate of the subsequent two counts within a week.
The complaint, filed by plaintiff and Hollister resident Juan Monteon, now alleges three separate counts of corruption against the San Benito County Board of Supervisors and expressly Supervisor Richard Scagliotti.
Before being dropped, the suit alleged that the Board had violated the Brown Act Open Meeting Law by meeting secretly with the Citizens for Responsible Growth in regards to drafting Measure G, a count that alleged misconduct by Scagliotti in regards to obtaining payment in the Dunneville Estates Development and a third count alleging failure by the county to comply with competitive bidding requirements.
Pekin’s suit now alleges that the county’s vehicle maintenance contract was awarded to San Benito Tire Company, owned by Bob Cain, unlawfully because Scagliotti is the landlord of the property and had a financial interest in the contract being awarded to a tenant of his.
It also alleges that Scagliotti profited from the acquisition and later selling of land previously owned by the Churchill Nut Shelling Plant by influencing county employees to rezone the property from agricultural to manufacturing status – garnering a profit of $1.2 million.
The third count, the one Hedegard ordered Pekin to amend, alleges that the Board of Supervisors, doing business as the San Benito County Financing Corp., did not file “proper and truthful” tax returns or account for profits, according to the complaint.
Attorneys for the county, William Owen and Nancy Miller, argued that the complaint did not sufficiently state facts backing up the allegations.
“Originally we argued that he should … amend to make the complaint certain,” Owen said. “(Pekin has) failed to do so for literally months, so it’s our position that he has no facts and he cannot go on a blind fishing expedition, therefore the complaint should be stricken.”
After hearing the county’s arguments, along with arguments by Cain’s attorney Harry Damkar, Hedegard ruled that Pekin’s “prayer for relief,” which is a list of actions the county must do to rectify their alleged wrongdoing concerning the financing corporation, be amended and brought back for further review.
“(The judge said), ‘I’m not going to order these people to do the things you asked me in your prayer,'” Pekin said. “Which means I’m going to come back with this, and I have to think it through again. It makes me very accurate with the law – each time I’m doing these things I’m reading the cases more carefully, and each time my case gets better.”
Pekin argued at length extensive case law in the hopes of showing Hedegard that the crux of his argument, in direct opposition to the county’s, is that this is not the time for proof or to state the facts of the pleadings, but to simply make the allegations, he said.
“This is as difficult an argument as there can be legally, because it’s an argument of whether or not this case is correctly stated,” he said. “It’s very difficult.”
When Hedegard issues his decision in a week, three things could happen: He could state that Pekin cannot state his case and dismiss the entire case, order Pekin to amend his arguments once again, or determine that the arguments are stated correctly and the defendants must answer and a trial will eventually ensue.
“I think the people of Hollister deserve better of the government,” Pekin said. “And the sooner the better.”
Pekin’s complaint has been amended three times already since the suit’s inception in October of 2003, and the defendants’ attorneys are ready to see what Hedegard decides concerning the remaining two counts, Miller said.
“We would have liked him to kick him out of court entirely,” Miller said. “But that’s probably not going to happen.”
