What We Do
We provide the general public with information and educational materials and activities on the California Civil Grand Jury system that will help increase public awareness of the valuable role the civil grand jury plays in our democratic system of government.
We provide comprehensive training on all subjects relative to empaneled civil grand juries available to all 58 counties within California including civil grand jury training as well as specific workshops on key topics relevant to civil grand jury service.
What Are You
Looking For?
Find valuable information on these subjects
Civil Grand Jury Resources
Here you can find sample documents, templates, examples of well-written reports, links to local government resources,
and FAQs.
Our Annual Conference
Every year in the fall, CGJA holds an Annual Conference and Membership Meeting to provide an opportunity for members and civil grand jurors to meet and discuss experiences and hear from speakers and panels on relevant topics of interest.
Chapter Resources
Includes chapter resource documents, suggested activities for chapters, guidance for forming a chapter along with templates.
Get Involved
Join CGJA as an active member, volunteer for CGJA, become a civil grand juror, join a chapter, or support us through a tax deductible donation.
Grand Jurors' Journal
This bimonthly journal is a major source of information about the civil grand jury system and recent updates on CGJA activities of interest to our members.
CGJA and California's Civil Grand Jury System
Learn about CGJA and details about California’s unique system of civil grand juries.
Our Awards
Annual awards recognizing civil grand jury reporting and media coverage along with the Angelo Rolando Service Award.
We can help you become
an effective civil grand juror
CGJA conducts training seminars for civil grand jurors and alternates on their various civil functions. These seminars include twelve full hours of presentations and over 300 pages of training materials. Experienced and highly qualified trainers who have served as civil grand jurors or grand jury legal advisors present these programs locally, throughout the state as “onsite” seminars or via Zoom if Covid-19 restrictions exist.
We also conduct Foreperson and Pro Tem Workshops, Legal Advisors’ Workshops, and Report Writing Workshops.
Stay Updated with Civil Grand Jury News
www.actionnewsnow.com/news/tehama-county-grand-jury-releases-2025-2026-grand-jury-report/article_...
Tehama County Grand Jury releases 2025/2026 Grand Jury Report
Channel 12 Action News Now, by Will Anderson, June 24, 2026
RED BLUFF, Calif. - On Wednesday, the 2025-2026 Tehama County Grand Jury released their final report, documenting what it described as a pattern of misconduct by the Tehama County Sheriff Dave Kain that has created a toxic work environment and damaged county government operations.
According to the report, the Grand Jury during their investigation found consistent evidence of intimidation, bullying, retaliation and undermining of county administration by the Sheriff.
The investigation included interviews with 39 individuals and a review of extensive documentary evidence including official reports, emails and personnel records.
The report detailed a November 2002 California Department of Justice determination that the Sheriff, then a TAGMET Agent, "fabricated a basis for the stop" of a drug trafficking suspect.
The DOJ referred the matter to the Tehama County District Attorney with a Brady List referral and described the conduct as "irresponsible and unethical."
"The evidence establishes a clear and consistent pattern of conduct that undermines the Sheriff's credibility," the Grand Jury wrote in its findings. "These facts are corroborated across official reports, documentary evidence and consistent testimony from current and former law enforcement, current and former county administration and elected officials."
The Grand Jury found the Sheriff often attempts to use his position to intimidate county elected officials and staff members.
Multiple witnesses described having good relationships with the Sheriff until disagreeing with him, after which the Sheriff would terminate the relationship and avoid interaction.
"The Sheriff has purposefully intimidated, harassed, bullied or retaliated against multiple elected or appointed County employees," the report stated. The Grand Jury found the Sheriff has contributed to a toxic work environment through retaliation and intimidation against those who challenge him.
The investigation revealed several specific incidents.
In one case involving a suspected impaired driver report in March 2025, the Sheriff's Office continued investigating county employees for filing a "false" police report even after the Red Bluff Police Department and District Attorney determined the report was appropriate and the complainant resigned and waived all complaints.
"Continuing to investigate the District 3 Supervisor 'false' police report matter, even after her resignation waived all criminal and civil complaints, appears to be in retaliation toward County employees and officers," the Grand Jury found.
The report also documented an August 7, 2025, automobile collision involving an immediate family member of the Sheriff who was hired as a Deputy Sheriff.
The California Highway Patrol investigation showed high speed prior to impact and the Accident Review Board classified the collision as preventable, but the Sheriff claimed he "remained outside the investigation" and that vehicle data showed "rapid deceleration."
"These statements directly conflict with the official ARB and CHP findings and reflect a minimization of the documented facts and severity of the incident," the Grand Jury stated.
The Grand Jury found the Sheriff employed two of his immediate family members at the Sheriff's Office, which has 26 family members among its employees.
The report stated the Sheriff applies a Lexipol policy on nepotism rather than Tehama County Personnel Rule 1308, which explicitly prohibits department heads from employing family members in their department.
"The Sheriff has determined that the Lexipol Policy 1050 Nepotism and Conflict of Interest allows him to employ his own family members," the Grand Jury found. "This has resulted in the perception of nepotism, favoritism and conflict of interest existing in TC Sheriff's Office and has eroded a sense of fairness and trust."
The ongoing dispute between the Sheriff and Chief Administrator Gabriel Hydrick originated in November 2022 when the then-Sheriff issued a press release suspending daytime patrol services without prior discussion with the Board of Supervisors or County Administration.
The current Sheriff was Sheriff-elect at the time and involved in the decision.
"The conflicts between the Sheriff and county administration continue to plague Tehama County government," the Grand Jury stated. "The dysfunction has damaged employee morale, increased turnover, deterred recruitment and impaired county government operations."
The Grand Jury recommended the Board of Supervisors order structured, mandatory mediation between the Sheriff and Chief Administrator by November 2, 2026.
The 2024-2025 Grand Jury had previously recommended mediation with an October 1, 2025, deadline, but that recommendation remains unfulfilled.
"The delay in its implementation has exacerbated the chasm between the polarized factions and negatively affects the efficient operation of many facets of County government," the report stated.
The Grand Jury also recommended the Board of Supervisors mandate annual conflict-resolution and anti-retaliation training for both elected and appointed department heads.
The panel recommended creating an ombudsman or third-party process to respond to complaints filed between employees.
The report recommended all county departments apply Tehama County Personnel Rule 1308 as the countywide standard governing the employment and supervision of family members.
The Grand Jury recommended the Board of Supervisors update the rule to clarify that the definition of department head includes elected officials.
In addition, the Grand Jury found communication between county leadership is inconsistent and not reliably conducted through formal channels. The panel found a lack of trust negatively impacts communication and that communication failures contribute directly to escalation of conflict.
"Communication frequently occurs outside formal channels," the report stated. "Phone calls, side conversations and undocumented meetings are used in place of consistent, trackable communication."
The Grand Jury recommended the Board of Supervisors establish and enforce a formal communication protocol defining clear expectations for communication, including response timelines, escalation procedures and mandatory training.
In addition, the Tehama County Grand Jury completed its annual review of detention facilities across the county, inspecting 3 of the 4 facilities between October 2025 and May 2026.
According to the grand jury report, California law requires the panel to inquire annually into the condition and management of detention facilities in Tehama County. The 2025-2026 Grand Jury conducted inquiries but no full investigation into 3 of the 4 facilities in the county.
3 grand jury members toured Salt Creek Conservation Camp on Oct. 28, 2025. The camp is operated jointly by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
The Camp Commander, Assistant Commander and CAL FIRE Division Chief led the tour and provided information on inmate selection, housing, duties, vocational and rehabilitation programs and community service projects. The facility has a capacity for 120 inmates with a current population of 78.
On May 12, 2026, 3 grand jury members inspected the Tehama County Juvenile Detention Facility at 1790 Walnut Street in Red Bluff. The Juvenile Detention Facility Superintendent and Chief Probation Officer led the tour of the facility operated by the Tehama County Probation Department.
The facility has a capacity for 64 youths with a current population of 16. Grand jury members received information on the condition and management of the operation and had their questions answered.
4 grand jury members visited the Tehama County Jail at 502 Oak Street in Red Bluff on May 20, 2026. The Captain of the Custody Division led the tour of all areas of the jail facility operated by the Tehama County Sheriff's Office.
The captain explained inmate management procedures, staff recruitment, management and training and other management policies. Grand jury members also toured the new Reentry Facility, which was scheduled to be turned over to the Sheriff's Department for occupation on June 1, 2026.
The jail currently holds 171 inmates with a capacity of 193. With the new Reentry Facility added, the capacity will be more than 250.
The grand jury could not visit Ishi Conservation Camp at 30500 Plum Creek Road in Paynes Creek. The camp is operated jointly by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
At the time of the inquiry, the camp was undergoing a comprehensive audit by the California Board of State and Community Corrections and could not accommodate the site visit. The grand jury completed its required annual review of detention facilities across Tehama County.
The report also addressed the new Re-Entry Facility, which was scheduled to be turned over to the Sheriff's Department on June 1, 2026.
The Tehama County Grand Jury found the facility will be staffed by current jail staff and occupied by the current inmate population once operational.
According to the report, the Board of Supervisors plans to present a public safety sales tax initiative to voters in November 2026. The largest portion of the funds would be directed to the Sheriff's Department for staffing purposes.
The Grand Jury conducted site inspections of detention facilities in the county, including the Tehama County Jail, which currently holds 171 inmates with a capacity of 193. With the new Re-Entry Facility, the capacity will be more than 250.
The report was submitted to Honorable Judge Todd Bottke, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Tehama.
The Tehama County Grand Jury was led by Foreperson Joan Allen and included 19 members.
Responses to the Grand Jury findings and recommendations are required within 60 days for elected officials and within 90 days for governing bodies of public agencies.
The Tehama County Board of Supervisors and Tehama County Sheriff are required to respond to multiple findings and recommendations.
Tehama County Grand Jury releases 2025/2026 Grand Jury Report
www.actionnewsnow.com
On Wednesday, the Tehama County Grand Jury released their report for the 2025/2026 session.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Santa Cruz County not on pace to meet housing goals, Civil Grand Jury Finds
www.santacruzsentinel.com/2026/06/29/santa-cruz-county-not-on-pace-to-meet-housing-goals-civil-gr...
Santa Cruz Sentinel, by PK Hattis, June 29, 2026
A new report from the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury found that local policymakers and planning officials must find a way to “close the gap between planning and production” if the county wants to meet its housing goals by 2031.
SANTA CRUZ — Santa Cruz County is not on pace to meet its state-mandated housing goals and a new report from a local government watchdog group has laid out a vision for how administrators can help translate planning into actual production.
The Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury’s latest findings related to the housing landscape in unincorporated regions were summed up in a 19-page study titled “Santa Cruz County’s Housing Crisis: Closing the Gap Between Planning and Production.” The group’s investigation found that as of the end of 2025, the county had permitted 279 housing units, a fraction of the 4,634 it is expected by the state to have completed by 2031. Put another way, the county has permitted 6% of its targeted housing units despite it being more than 25% into the current eight-year housing cycle.
“The central issue identified in this report is that the County’s zoning and regulatory framework, while legally sufficient to satisfy State planning requirements, does not ensure that housing development is financially viable,” the jurors wrote. “High construction costs, combined with County-controlled factors such as density limits, development standards, impact fees and permitting timelines, significantly constrain the financial viability of housing projects, particularly multifamily developments, which are critical to achieving the County’s housing goals.”
Under state law, local jurisdictions must update their housing element every eight years to ensure that all local governments are pulling their weight in the effort to address the state’s chronic housing woes. A key component of the comprehensive planning document is the regional housing needs allocation, which is the overall number of units the California Department of Housing and Community Development has assigned to each jurisdiction. The county is not responsible for actually constructing the units themselves over the eight-year timeline, but it must, at a minimum, create the conditions that make that goal possible through appropriate zoning plans.
Santa Cruz County not on pace to meet housing goals, civil grand jury finds
www.santacruzsentinel.com
“The central issue identified in this report is that the County’s zoning and regulatory framework, while legally sufficient to satisfy State planning requirements, does not ensure that housing dev...0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Toulumne County Grand Jury 2025-2026 Report-Media Coverage
mymotherlode.com/news/local/10954762/final-tuolumne-county-grand-jury-reports-focus-on-public-tru...
myMotherLode.com Your Gateway to California’s Gold Country
Final Tuolumne County Grand Jury Reports Focus On Public Trust, CDD
By B.J. Hansen Published Jun 26, 2026 12:04 pm
Grand Jury Cover
Sonora, CA — The final two Tuolumne County Grand Jury reports of the current cycle were publicly released today.
The Grand Jury serves as a government watchdog and reviews issues and complaints related to local government, and makes recommendations. The term of the current Grand Jury expires at the end of the month, and five reports were completed.
We noted earlier that the first report focused on correctional facilities, and the second and third were in relation to past responses by county leaders to last year’s reports and the payroll practices of the Twain Harte Fire District.
The fourth installment is a 26-page report entitled, Governance Practices Impacting Public Trust. A big focus was on complaints made surrounding Tuolumne County District One Supervisor Mike Holland. A main aspect was that Holland did not recuse himself when the county debated a mobile home rent control ordinance (he owns spaces within Hill Haven and rents out a mobile home there). It also examines whether it is ok for him to continue to serve on both the board of supervisors and the Sonora High Board of Trustees simultaneously.
Regarding the conflict of interest matter, the Grand Jury made various recommendations, including that all publicly elected officials complete training on the Political Reform Act of 1974, the Levine Act, and the Fair Political Practices Commission.
Related to the issue of serving as both a county supervisor and school board member, the Grand Jury’s investigation stated it “creates the appearance and opportunities for a clash of duties,” and recommended that the County Counsel submit the issue to the California Attorney General’s Office for further guidance.
The Grand Jury also highlighted challenges in doing the investigation, including Supervisor Holland requesting that two members of the jury be removed due to bias. There was also a difficulty in finding specifics about past meetings (all accessible via video). In response, a recommendation was to have all of the board meetings transcribed, potentially using AI software. There were also concerns about a policy where county emails are automatically deleted after 90 days.
Click here to view the full 26-page report.
The fifth and final report that the Grand Jury will release this cycle was 80 pages and entitled Behind the Devastation: Tuolumne County Community Development Department. The report highlighted the handling of the departure of the Community Development Director, staffing losses, declining morale, and moving the CDD forward. It partially focused on Supervisor Holland, again, and a property he owns at 17411 High School Road. That issue was mentioned in past news articles (click here to find).
The report made 19 findings with various related recommendations. Find the 80-page report here. Written by BJ Hansen.
Final Tuolumne County Grand Jury Reports Focus On Public Trust, CDD
mymotherlode.com
The final two Tuolumne County Grand Jury reports of the current cycle were publicly released today.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
lookout.co/civil-grand-jury-faults-santa-cruz-transportation-commission-for-decades-of-flawed-rai...
Civil grand jury faults Santa Cruz transportation commission for decades of flawed rail planning
Lookout Santa Cruz, by Hillary Ojeda, July 1, 2026
The rail line running under the trestle near the Santa Cruz Wharf. Credit: Kevin Painchaud / Lookout Santa Cruz
A new civil grand jury report faults the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission for decades of flawed planning on the coastal rail corridor. It says officials advanced proposals without adequately accounting for engineering, legal and financial realities, and recommends that the commission adopt stronger project evaluation and strategic planning processes.
For decades, the debate over Santa Cruz County’s coastal rail line has been framed as a bitter public divide. But a new civil grand jury report turns the blame squarely on the county’s transportation commission, arguing that officials spent years pushing unviable options because they failed to accurately evaluate costs and engineering challenges.
“[K]ey policy choices were not adequately grounded in a realistic assessment of the corridor’s physical constraints, engineering requirements, legal limitations, and financial costs,” the 28-page report reads. “As a result, the [Regional Transportation Commission] and the public have spent years debating options that, in some cases, were not viable given financial and engineering realities.”
The RTC has long tried to find a way to best use the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line, a 32-mile coastal rail system that runs from Davenport to Pajaro Junction in Monterey County.
The grand jury’s report comes days after it released five reports on issues including the county’s behavioral health system and its housing crisis. The grand jury is a state-mandated, volunteer-led government watchdog composed of 19 members who carry out annual investigations on regional issues.
As part of its report on the rail corridor, the grand jury laid out its findings and issued a list of eight recommendations. It recommends that the transportation commission develop a framework for future major capital projects that would direct when projects can advance only after obtaining a certain level of confidence in cost estimates and timelines.
The grand jury further recommends that the RTC adopt a comprehensive strategic planning framework to lay out decision-making criteria for transportation investments, policy decisions and guidance for navigating conflicts when faced with competing transportation objectives.
Additionally, it recommends creating a plan to improve public communication to reduce misinformation, as well as exploring options to change the makeup of the board’s 12 members to “avoid deadlocks and delays.”
The RTC is made up of the five members of the county board of supervisors, one representative from each of the county’s four cities and three members from Santa Cruz Metro.
“This structure reflects county, city, and metro interests, but also creates a governing body with frequent turnover and competing priorities,” according to the report. “Personal and political considerations can result in delayed decision-making and makes maintaining consistent long-term direction more difficult.”
RTC Executive Director Sarah Christensen said in a statement that the report acknowledges the changes that the commission has made over the years to deliver on its goals.
“We’ve made significant investments in strengthening our project delivery and property management expertise,” she said. “These improvements have strengthened our ability to ground decisions in sound technical analysis, deliver complex projects, and responsibly manage our assets. We see the Grand Jury’s recommendations as a constructive roadmap, and we’re committed to continuing to build on the progress we’ve already made.”
Established in 1972 by the state of California, the RTC was initially limited to planning regional transportation and divvying out transportation funding to local agencies, and was not focused on or staffed for the development of projects. But with the public’s interest in preserving the rail corridor, it purchased the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line in 2012 with the aim of maintaining freight and recreational rail as well as trail infrastructure.
The commission hired consultants who conducted planning studies into the rail’s development that “relied on 10,000-foot estimates rather than ground level engineering,” according to the civil grand jury report.
“They assumed passenger rail and a trail could coexist without rigorously analyzing the costs of retaining walls and bridge replacements required by the corridor’s topography,” the report reads. “The studies focused heavily on the benefits of rail but wildly underestimated the true costs.”
Over time, with ownership of the rail, the commission worked to develop in-house expertise and hired engineers and technical staff starting in 2017. Still, its reports didn’t “meaningfully advance environmental review or required engineering and scoping,” the report said.
The grand jury cites a 2021 Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis that estimated a passenger rail system would cost about $480 million to build on the corridor. Only four years later, the commission released another report, conducted by the same firm, HDR, with much more extensive analysis that brought the total cost for the rail system to about $4.3 billion.
“This ten-fold increase highlights the failure of early studies to capture the difficult engineering realities of the [rail line], doing a disservice to both the [transportation commission] and the general public,” the report reads.
The grand jury report also evaluates the geographic challenges as well as the infrastructure constraints the rail system presents.
Civil grand jury faults Santa Cruz transportation commission for decades of flawed rail planning
lookout.co
A new civil grand jury report faults the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission for decades of flawed planning on the coastal rail corridor. It says officials advanced proposals without ...0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Monterey County Grand Jury
www.govtech.com/public-safety/grand-jury-monterey-county-calif-needs-better-emergency-radios
Grand Jury: Monterey County, Calif., Needs Better Emergency Radios
Monterey Daily Herald, by Kyarra Harris, May 05, 2026
A new civil grand jury report details gaps in emergency radio coverage across Monterey County, raising concerns about communication failures during fires and other emergencies.
The report, released Friday, examined radio communication systems used by fire agencies serving unincorporated areas and found that challenging terrain, limited funding and delayed adoption of newer technology have contributed to inconsistent coverage.
According to the findings, large portions of the county experience unreliable radio signals. Radio signals also may not be available in their area. Digital radio coverage, which is widely used for clearer communication, does not reach about 42 percent of the county’s geographic area. Analog radio, which has broader reach but lower quality, still leaves about 18 percent of the county without coverage.
The report states that these gaps create a risk for both residents and emergency responders, particularly during life-threatening situations where communication is critical.
Investigators identified several areas with limited or no coverage, including parts of North Salinas, Prunedale, Carmel Valley Village, Big Sur and south Monterey County. Coverage issues also extend indoors, where buildings can block radio signals.
Monterey County’s geography was cited as a major factor. The region spans more than two million acres, with elevations ranging from sea level to over 5,800 feet, creating natural barriers that interfere with radio transmission.
The report also points to the complexity of the county’s fire protection system. Multiple independent fire districts operate across unincorporated areas, each with its own funding and equipment. This has led to uneven adoption of communication technology and coordination challenges between agencies.
Firefighters often rely on a mix of analog and digital radios and must manually adjust frequencies depending on their location. The report found that while experienced personnel are able to navigate these systems, newer responders or those working outside their usual areas may face delays or communication breakdowns.
Efforts are underway to improve the system through the county’s Next Generation Radio Network project, which is testing newer technologies such as LTE, Wi-Fi and low-orbit satellite communication. Early testing suggests these options could reduce coverage gaps, but they have not yet been fully implemented.
Cost remains a major barrier. Building additional radio towers can improve coverage, but each tower can exceed $1 million due to difficult terrain and limited access. Newer radios that support multiple communication modes can cost about $12,000 per unit, placing additional strain on fire districts that must purchase their own equipment.
Funding for fire districts largely comes from property taxes, which have been limited since the passage of Proposition 13. The report found that this funding model does not provide enough revenue to support necessary upgrades to communication systems.
The civil grand jury issued several recommendations, including directing the Monterey County Board of Supervisors to develop a plan to address radio coverage gaps, identify funding sources and support fire districts in upgrading equipment.
County officials are required to respond to the findings and recommendations within 90 days.
Grand Jury: Monterey County, Calif., Needs Better Emergency Radios
www.govtech.com
A new civil grand jury report details gaps in emergency radio coverage across Monterey County, raising concerns about communication failures during fires and other emergencies.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Santa Barbara Grand Jury
Grand Jury Warns Santa Barbara Is Falling Behind on Disaster Prep New Report Says County Agency Is Understaffe
d and Underfunded
www.independent.com/2026/06/24/grand-jury-warns-santa-barbara-is-falling-behind-on-disaster-prep/
Santa Barbara Independent THU JUL 2, 2026
News
Public Safety
Grand Jury Warns Santa Barbara Is Falling Behind on Disaster Prep New Report Says County Agency Is Understaffed and Underfunded
Grand Jury Warns Santa Barbara Is Falling Behind on Disaster Prep
www.independent.com
A new report says the county agency is understaffed and underfunded.1 CommentsComment on Facebook
CGJA Journal
This bimonthly journal is a major source of information about the civil grand jury system and recent updates on CGJA activities of interest to our members.
The Gift of Your Time
is Priceless
CGJA is an all-volunteer membership organization. We succeed mainly because our members volunteer to serve on our committees and/or train civil grand jurors. Serving on committees almost never requires travel as we communicate via email and computer video. Our trainers do travel to venues throughout the state and we reimburse them for lodging, mileage, and a modest per diem for other expenses.
