Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

Supervisors plan to appoint Interim DA by Sept. 19 draws criticism

By 2 Comments

Ordinance on illegal solid waste collection postponed

By Daniel Borsuk

With the field of interim Contra Costa County District Attorney candidates pared down from 12 to 5, Contra Costa County Supervisors made it clear on Tuesday they’re determined to select an interim DA by Sept. 19, even in the face of increasing public criticism over the selection process.

On a 5-0 vote supervisors selected for further consideration Contra Costa Judge Diana Beckton, Contra Costa Judge Daniella Douglas, Contra Costa Assistant District Attorney Tom Kensok, Contra Costa Senior Deputy District Attorney Paul Graves and Santa Clara Supervising Deputy District Attorney Patrick Vanier.

Candidates not making the cut were former Contra Costa prosecutor and current private attorney David Brown, San Francisco deputy district attorney John Delgado, Contra Costa Bar Association Criminal Conflict Program Attorney William Green, private attorney Richard Madsen Jr., San Francisco assistant DA since 1996 Michael Menesini, Stanislaus County Prosecutor Brad Nix, and 50-year prosecutor veteran with the Alameda and Los Angeles DA offices Michael Roemer.

With the two judges as candidates, supervisors learned there might be a potential legal barrier where Judge Beckton and Judge Douglas might be found in violation of a state conflict of interest ruling that a sitting Superior Court justice cannot simultaneously serve as a county DA.  The supervisors decided to have each judge weigh in on whether they are in violation of the state conflict of interest law during the upcoming August 15 finalist interviews.

Supervisors forged ahead showing scant concern that there could potentially be a court injunction filed blocking their process to fill the $258,181 a year DA post that was vacated in mid-June when then DA Mark Peterson resigned from office after pleading in Contra Costa Superior Court to 15 felony charges that he illegally spent $66,000 of campaign funds for personal use.

In exchange for a no contest plea Peterson was sentenced to three years probation.  State prosecutors dropped 11 other counts of perjury and one count of grand theft.  The State Bar of California took steps to disbar Peterson last week.

Critics accused supervisors of privately meeting or consulting with interim DA candidates and some opponents said it is pointless to appoint a short-term DA when county voters could be electing a new DA next year.

“There is no need for the board to appoint an interim DA within a year of an election,” protested Marcie Garrett of El Cerrito.

“The Democratic Party of Contra Costa County calls for the board of supervisors to delay action to another date,” said Maria Alegria, chair of the county Democratic Party.

Alegria said the board needs to do more work to screen candidates because of the county DA office’s history of misconduct.  She referred to the recent Peterson case and the 2008 rape case involving DA Michael Gressett, who was accused of raping a junior DA colleague that resulted in a $450,000 out of court settlement.

Mainly because of the DA office’s track record, Walnut Creek resident Julie Davis commented, “I prefer that you consider candidates not in the Contra Costa District Attorney Office.  I’d prefer candidates from outside.  Your selection process is long, yet needs more transparency.”

Concerned about the rising human trafficking situation in the county, Judith Tannenbaum pitched to supervisors that they need to select Contra Costa Office Deputy Senior DA Paul Graves because of his work combatting human trafficking.

Concord Police Chief Guy Swanger representing the Contra Costa Police Chiefs Association encouraged supervisors to select an interim DA who will cooperate with police departments.  “Whoever you choose make sure your choice will work with us,” he said.

District 4 Supervisor Karen Mitchoff of Pleasant Hill attempted to defended the transparency criticism lodged against the board.  “This is a transparent process the board is using.  Everything is online,” she said.

Mitchoff also said state law requires the board of supervisors to appoint an interim DA under the circumstances the county faces.

“This is a challenging situation and ultimately the people of Contra Costa county will have to decide who will be their DA,” said District 2 Supervisor Candace Andersen of Danville.

“We’re not going to please everyone, but I look for someone who will defend racial justice, is fair, shows leadership style, and can move forward,” Board Chair Federal Glover of Pittsburg added.

Mitchoff was surprised to learn that the Bay Area Newspaper Group had filed in the past two days a public records request that the county disclose personal information that the five finalists provided in their applications.   The newspaper group had complained the county had redacted personal information and that it should now be public information.  That information will now be unredacted.

Ordinance on Illegal Solid Waste Collection Postponed

In other business, supervisors postponed action until their August 15 meeting on a proposed ordinance that would take aim at cracking down on the illegal solid waste collection and transportation operations in the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County.

The county environmental health department has identified more than 41 illegal solid waste transfer stations located in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of the county and 32 of those operations have been closed down, since early 2015.

In order to regulate the solid waste collection industry, the Contra Costa Environmental Health Department has been developing an ordinance where persons engaged in this business in the county would be required to apply for permits, have collection and transport vehicles undergo inspections, and operators must post bond.

Morgan Hill resident arrested for arranging to meet 13-year-old girl for sex at Contra Costa park

By Leave a Comment

On Thursday, July 27, 2017, investigators from the Silicon Valley Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force arrested 42-year-old Morgan Hill resident Jose Francisco Toledo for attempting to meet a minor for sex.

On June 16, 2017, Toledo contacted an undercover police officer who was posing as a 13-year-old girl on the internet. Over the course of the last two weeks, Toledo attempted to get the girl to send him nude images of herself and eventually arranged to meet the girl in person to engage in sex with her.

On July 27, 2017 at approximately 10:00am, Toledo arrived at Hidden Lakes Park at the Martinez/Pleasant Hill border, a location he had agreed upon to meet the minor.  Investigators from the Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office, District Attorney’ Office and Martinez Police Department took Toledo into custody and recovered electronic items from car, as well as candy he had promised to bring the girl, and condoms. Toledo was booked for felony violations of attempting lewd acts with a child under 13 in violation of Penal Code section 288(a) and enticing a minor to meet for sex in violation of California Penal Code section 288.4. His bail was set at 2.5 million dollars.

Toledo will make his initial appearance in Contra Costa County Superior Court on Monday July 31st, 2017 in front of the Honorable John T. Laettner. He currently is in the custody of the Contra Costa County Sheriff.

The investigation was conducted by a multi-agency Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, which is managed by the San Jose Police Department.  In Contra Costa County, detectives and investigators from the Walnut Creek, Antioch, Martinez, San Ramon, Concord and Moraga Police Departments, the Sheriff’s Office, Probation Department and District Attorney’s Office participate in the task force. 

Parents are encouraged to discuss online safety with their children, and can visit the website www.kidsmartz.org for further information.

For any further questions, please contact Senior Deputy District Attorney Paul Graves at (925) 957-8731.

Supervisors narrow list of Interim District Attorney applicants to five

By 1 Comment

County to Host Public Forum on Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Five applicants remain under consideration to serve as the Interim District Attorney for Contra Costa County. The Board of Supervisors found all 12 applicants to be highly qualified, but during its August 1, 2017, public meeting, decided that only five individuals would move on to the next stage of the selection process. The finalists will be invited to participate in a moderated discussion to be held on Tuesday, August 15, beginning at 6:00 p.m. The public will have an opportunity to provide comments in advance beginning at 5:00 p.m.

The five applicants continuing in the process are: Diana Becton, Danielle Douglas, Paul Graves, Thomas Kensok and Patrick Vanier. Application materials for all 12 of the original applicants are available online. Background investigations will now be conducted on the five finalists. (See the related article.)

At the public forum on August 15, a discussion with the applicants will take place, moderated by former Contra Costa County Clerk-Recorder Steve Weir. The forum will be held in the Board of Supervisors Chamber at 651 Pine Street in Martinez. While the public will have an opportunity to offer questions and comments that evening, you can also provide your input electronically prior to the event. Find out how at the District Attorney Recruitment Information website. If you are unable to attend the forum in person, it will also be televised live on CCTV and streamed live online.

The June 14 resignation of Mark Peterson from the position of District Attorney created a vacancy that will extend until the current term of office expires on January 7, 2019. The next election for the District Attorney will take place in June of 2018, with a potential runoff election in November of 2018.

Following the August 15th public forum, the Board of Supervisors will interview the final applicants at the September 12th public meeting; a decision could be made that day, or possibly at the following meeting on September 19, 2017.

Twelve apply for vacant position of Contra Costa County District Attorney

By 2 Comments

Board of Supervisors to review applications on Tuesday, August 1, 2017

Twelve people have submitted applications to serve as the Interim District Attorney for Contra Costa County. The Board of Supervisors will begin the next phase of the process by reviewing candidate materials at the August 1, 2017, regular public Board meeting. The meeting starts at 9:00 a.m., and the agenda and supporting documents will be available online this Friday morning.

“We remain committed to an open and transparent process during the selection period of our next District Attorney,” said Supervisor Federal Glover, Chair of the Board of Supervisors. “It is unfortunate the County is faced with this situation, but it important that the public have ample opportunity to provide input as we make this very important decision.”

The June 14 resignation of Mark Peterson from the position of District Attorney created a vacancy that will extend until the current term of office expires on January 7, 2019. The next election for the District Attorney will take place in June of 2018, with a potential runoff election in November of 2018.

The twelve candidates are:

  • Diana Becton – Judge, Contra Costa Superior Court
  • David G. Brown – Retired Deputy District Attorney, Contra Costa County
  • John Delgado – Assistant District Attorney, San Francisco County
  • Danielle Douglas – Judge, Contra Costa Superior Court
  • Paul J. Graves – Senior Deputy District Attorney, Contra Costa County
  • William H. Green – Director, Criminal Conflict Program of the Contra Costa Bar Association, criminal defense attorney
  • Thomas J. Kensok – Assistant District Attorney, Contra Costa County
  • Richard A. Madsen, Jr. – Criminal defense attorney
  • Michael Martin Menesini – Assistant District Attorney, San Francisco County, former Martinez Mayor and Councilman
  • Brad J. Nix – Deputy District Attorney V, Stanislaus County, former Oakley Mayor and Councilman
  • Michael James Roemer – Retired Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County
  • Patrick Vanier – Deputy District Attorney, Santa Clara County

You can view the application materials from each candidate online. So far, only two of the applicants are announced candidates for the 2018 election, Paul J. Graves and Patrick Vanier.

During the August 1, 2017, Board of Supervisors meeting, the Board will determine which candidates will be selected to continue in the process. The County Administrator’s Office will be conducting background checks on those applicants. The finalists will be invited to participate in a public forum to be held on August 15 at 6:00 p.m. At the forum, a moderated discussion will take place, with questions solicited from the public in advance, as well as during the forum. If you would like to offer a question, you can submit it online via the recruitment section of the District Attorney’s website. On that site, you can also offer public comment to be submitted to the Board of Supervisors and entered into the public record. The forum will be open to the public, televised live and streamed live online. More details about the public forum will be available after the August 1st meeting.

Following the August 15th public forum, the Board of Supervisors will interview the final candidates at the September 12th public meeting; a decision could be made that day, or possibly at the following meeting on September 19, 2017.

Recruitment for Interim Contra Costa DA closes Friday

By 1 Comment

Candidate Forum set for August 15

Friday, July 21, 2017, is the deadline to submit an application for the vacant position of District Attorney for Contra Costa County.  The June 14 resignation of Mark Peterson from the position of District Attorney created a vacancy that will extend until the current term of office expires on January 7, 2019.  The next election for the District Attorney will take place in June of 2018, with a potential runoff election in November of 2018.

At the August 1, 2017, Board of Supervisors meeting, the Board will review the applications and determine which applicants will continue in the process. The finalists will be invited to participate in a public forum to be held on August 15 at 6:00 p.m., with final candidate interviews by the County Board scheduled for September 12, 2017.

At the forum, a moderated discussion will take place, with questions solicited from the public in advance, as well as during the forum.  If you would like to offer a question, you can submit it online via the District Attorney recruitment section of our website. On that site, you can also offer public comment to be submitted to the Board of Supervisors and entered into the public record.  The forum will be open to the public, televised live and streamed live online.

Completed applications and a supplemental questionnaire must be returned to the County Human Resources Department no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, July 21.   Materials can be found online at: https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/contracosta. A background investigation will be conducted on all finalists. Any offer of employment will be contingent upon the successful completion of a thorough background investigation, which will include fingerprinting; county, state, and national criminal records checks; Economic Disclosure Form 700; and civil filings.

 

Pittsburg man sentenced to over 21 years for felony insurance fraud, other crimes

By 2 Comments

Faced but was acquitted of charges in murder-for-hire plot against nine jurors while in jail

Charles Waldo. Photo from Contra Costa District Attorney

Martinez, CA – The Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office announced on Wednesday that after an extensive four-year investigation, a long jury trial and a conviction by a jury of 37 separate counts relating to 19 separate incidents that occurred over a seven-year time span, Charles Waldo was finally sentenced on June 27, 2017 for his crimes. Waldo was the owner of a recycling business.

After being convicted of multiple felony counts of insurance fraud, embezzlement, grand theft, vandalism, perjury, elder abuse, illegal gun possession and arson, among other things, Judge Barry Baskin sentenced Waldo to 40 months in county jail followed by 21 years and 8 months in state prison, one of the longest sentences obtained for insurance fraud in the history of Contra Costa County.  Mr. Waldo must register as a California convicted arson offender pursuant to Penal Code 457.1.  He has also been ordered not to contact one of his victims and to pay $22,500 in fines.

According to a 2014 report by NBC Bay Area News, “the District Attorney’s investigation into Waldo began in the spring of 2012 when its office received information about a vehicle arson and a suspected fraudulent car insurance claim, Deputy District Attorney William Murphy said. The investigation revealed multiple fraudulent insurance claims of arson and vandalism on five cars over a five-year period beginning in July 2007 with losses from the vehicles exceeding $100,000, Peterson said. Further investigation revealed Waldo was suspected of embezzling over $100,000 from a former employer and stealing a $38,000 generator from his former employer’s business.

As the manager, Waldo reportedly ‘forced out’ other employees so he could hire his associates, and then directed the new employees to commit other crimes, including stealing recyclable metals and an electrical transformer, prosecutors said. At one point, Waldo was traveling with employees from the business when a police officer attempted to pull him over for speeding. Waldo escaped after traveling at speeds of over 100 miles per hour, Murphy said.

He also allegedly ordered the workers to help build a 2,000-square-foot addition to his Pittsburg home while they were supposed to be working for Waldo’s employer.”

Waldo was also accused by the “Investigators from the California Department of Insurance…that he committed worker’s compensation insurance fraud, along with tax code violations.”

“After his employer fired him, Waldo allegedly drove to his employer’s business, and to the homes of several employees, and punctured the tires of their cars. He also continued to claim unemployment benefits for a year even though he had found other employment.”

According to a CBS new story in 2014, Waldo was also “charged with plotting to kill nine witnesses set to testify against him.

Prosecutors say investigators found a hit list that included the witnesses’ names, in what order they were to be killed, and suggestions to kill them in car crashes, with drug overdoses and in robberies ‘gone bad.’”

However, he was later acquitted of those charges.

Multiple agencies assisted the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office with this investigation including: the CA Department of Insurance, the CA Highway Patrol, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, the National Insurance Crime Bureau, Geico Insurance Company, Progressive Insurance Company, and Hertz Equipment Rental. Allen Payton contributed to this report.

County organizations ask Supervisors for transparent process in Interim DA appointment

By Leave a Comment

Following is an open letter to the Board of Supervisors from the organizations in Contra Costa County, listed below:

Dear Chairman Glover, and Supervisors Andersen, Burgis, Gioia, and Mitchoff,

We the undersigned would first like to commend the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors for holding the special June 23rd meeting to discuss the appointment process for our next district attorney and for posting the process and timeline on the county website. While we believe your intent is to engage in a transparent, community-first process to appoint the interim DA of our county, we have serious concerns about the current process as laid out.

In our June 22, 2017 letter to the Board, we expressed an interest in a transparent, community-first and community driven process to appoint the next DA. To us, this means the community is included in ALL decision-making points and is able to weigh in on substantive policy questions posed to each applicant. As currently outlined, we believe the process you have laid out excludes community input and fails to deliver on the promise of transparency.

Specifically, page 2 of the June 23rd press release[1] issued by the County Administrator’s Office states, “With applications due July 21, the Board of Supervisors will select finalists in early August. The Board of Supervisors will host a moderated candidate forum at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 15, 2017.” This indicates that while the community will be allowed to ask questions of finalists selected by the Board, the community will have no involvement in the selection of finalists from the initial pool of applicants. We believe that narrowing the pool to 3-5 candidates is a critical first step and involvement from the community in this step, and all other steps until appointment, is essential to rebuilding trust.

To remedy this, we urge the Board of Supervisors to revisit the interim DA appointment process before July 21 by placing it on a July meeting agenda and consider some options, including:

  • Create a community selection committee comprised of community leaders, reflective and representing the geographic and demographic diversity of the county, as well as representatives from the following constituencies and/or organizations: criminal justice reform, immigrant rights, formerly incarcerated individuals, victims’ rights, the Public Defender Union, the District Attorney Union, labor, consumer rights and law enforcement. This committee will be responsible for formulating questions for applicants to answer as part of the application process. This committee will also work with the Board in early August to select the finalists and the final rationale for why applicants were, or were not, selected as finalists.
  • Host at least two community forums with applicants, one which will include all applicants and a second which will include the finalists.
  • Disclose the following information in a timely manner: any past or present endorsement, campaign contribution, private meeting, and/or personal dealing between any member of the Board of Supervisors and any applicant for interim DA.
  • Require all applicants for interim DA to disclose if they share the same political consultant and/or fundraiser with any members of the Board of Supervisors.

We the undersigned and the residents of Contra Costa County demand integrity from our Board of Supervisors in this process. We will not stand for corruption, closed door meetings or the doling out of favors. It is important to remember that the DA is an elected official and is ultimately accountable to us, the voters. We are fully aware that whomever the Board appoints to be our interim DA will have the advantage of incumbency come the June 2018 election. It is for this reason that the Board must include the community in all phases of the process and why we continue to advocate for a fully transparent and community-first process.

If the Board refuses to modify the process and address the concerns outlined in this letter, the public will not let the Board move forward without significant resistance.

Thank you again for your consideration of our requests and we look forward to re-establishing trust between the community and government by way of a modified process. If you have any questions for our coalition, please contact Sharlee Battle from Safe Return Project at SharleeBattle@gmail.com.

Thank you,

County Supervisors begin recruitment for interim District Attorney

By 1 Comment

Board seeks input; goal to fill position in September

The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors met Friday, June 23, 2017, to determine the process for filling the vacant office of the District Attorney.  When a vacancy occurs in an elective county office, the Board of Supervisors has the responsibility to appoint a successor to serve for the duration of the unexpired term.   The June 14, 2017 resignation of Mark Peterson from the position of District Attorney created a vacancy that would extend until the current term of office expires on January 7, 2019.  The next election for the District Attorney will take place in June of 2018, with a potential runoff election in November of 2018.

The Office of District Attorney is provided in the State Constitution.  The District Attorney represents the people of the County in prosecuting all public offenses in the Superior Courts, including all felonies, misdemeanors, juvenile criminal offenses, and certain civil offenses, including high-tech crimes, environmental crimes, and many instances of fraud.

Although the Board of Supervisors has discretion in how to fill the position, there are some minimum requirements for the job.   To qualify, a candidate must be at least 18 years old, a California citizen, a registered voter in Contra Costa County at the time of appointment, and admitted to practice law in the California Supreme Court.   The Board of Supervisors is seeking candidates with experience in criminal law, familiarity with criminal justice issues in California, and the ability to effectively manage a County department with an annual budget of $19.5 million and more than 200 employees.

All applicants must apply online at www.cccounty.us/hr and submit the information as indicated on the job announcement no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, July 21, 2017.  NOTE that a background investigation/fingerprint exam will be conducted on all finalists, and a permanent job offer is additionally contingent upon the successful completion of a thorough background investigation, which will include a criminal records investigation and an economic disclosure (FPPC Form 700).

The legislature does not specify a deadline for making an appointment like this, but according to the California Attorney General, the appointment should be made within a “reasonable time.”   With applications due July 21, the Board of Supervisors will select finalists in early August.  The Board of Supervisors will host a moderated candidate forum at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 15, 2017.  Members of the public will be invited to submit questions for consideration that may be asked of the finalist candidates.   The Board will interview those candidates during a public meeting on Tuesday, September 12, with the goal of making a selection in September as well.

The June 23 meeting of the Board of Supervisors is available online in the video library found on the County’s homepage at www.ContraCosta.CA.gov.   It will also be replayed in its entirety on Sunday, June 25, at 6:00 p.m., Monday, June 26, at 5:00 p.m., and Thursday, June 29, at 6:00 p.m. on Contra Costa Television (CCTV.) CCTV can be viewed on Comcast Channel 27, Wave Channel 32, and AT&T U-Verse on Channel 99.

 

Groups recommend process for appointing Interim Contra Costa District Attorney

By Leave a Comment

Following is a letter from six groups in the county to the members of the Board of Supervisors:

Dear Chairman Glover and Supervisors Andersen, Burgis, Gioia and Mitchoff,

Our community was shocked and angered last week to hear that former District Attorney Mark Peterson pled guilty to felony charges related to the illegal use of campaign funds, leading to his resignation. This unethical and dangerous abuse of power by the elected District Attorney is deeply concerning to us and we write today in the spirit of working to rebuild trust between local government in Contra Costa, including law enforcement and the District Attorney’s office, and the community they are meant to serve.

We believe a critical first step to rebuilding trust is for the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors to engage in a fully transparent and community-centered process for appointing an interim District Attorney.

On behalf of Contra Costa County voters, we urge our Board to commit to a transparent, community-first process in making its selection of an interim District Attorney. In addition, we believe it is important for the Board to only consider applicants who have not filed to run in the June 2018 primary.

The District Attorney is one of the most powerful elected officials in county government and is the most powerful actor in our criminal justice system. The decisions made by the District Attorney impact every county resident, not just those who are directly involved in the criminal justice system. From determining when and what charges to file in individual cases; to making policy decisions that affect local communities as well as county and state budgets; to holding law enforcement accountable for unfair policies and practices, the Contra Costa District Attorney holds significant power and responsibility for the protection of our civil rights and freedoms.

For these reasons and more, it is critically important that our Board protect and uphold the right of the people of Contra Costa County to an inclusive and transparent process for appointment of an interim District Attorney.

In a transparent, community-first process, the Board of Supervisors should consider the following:

  1. Publicly post a proposed process and timeline for appointment of an interim District Attorney;
  2. Allow for public comment on the proposed process for appointment, consider comments, and post final process;
  3. Only consider applications for interim appointment from individuals who are not currently running for District Attorney of Contra Costa County in 2018;
  4. Solicit applications from lawyers in the community to apply for interim appointment and make submitted applications available for review by the public;
  5. Hold public hearings at times convenient to working people with commute schedules, to receive input about nominees and other recommendations; and
  6. Hold a final public hearing to vote for the interim District Attorney.

Due to the recent resignation and guilty plea by former District Attorney Mark Peterson, the people of Contra Costa County deserve transparency and fairness in the appointment of the interim District Attorney. It is incumbent upon the Board to begin to remedy the breakdown of trust between the community and government by taking the lead to ensure a fair and community-first process. We welcome the opportunity to support the efforts of our Board of Supervisors to achieve these very important goals.

Thank you,

Contra Costa DA announces three sentenced to prison for $6.0 million in wage theft, tax fraud and insurance fraud

By Leave a Comment

Owned restaurants including one in Brentwood

On Friday, June 16, 2017, the Honorable Charles “Ben” Burch sentenced defendants Yu Chen, Feng Gu, and Rongdi Zheng to three years and four months of state prison each and imposed a $6.1-million-dollar restitution order, including restitution for approximately $4.5 million in unpaid minimum wage and overtime, as well as approximately $1.5 million in unpaid taxes.

The investigation began in 2013 when investigators from the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office, California Employment Development Department (“EDD”) and the California Department of Insurance (“CDI”) conducted surveillance of several restaurants in three counties.

On January 10, 2014, investigators from all three agencies, assisted by representatives from the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”), Bureau of Field Enforcement, and law enforcement officers from Alameda, Contra Costa, and Placer Counties served simultaneous search warrants on nine locations, including four restaurants and several private residences.  The restaurants were the Golden Dragon Buffet in Brentwood, the Golden Wok Buffet in Roseville, the Kokyo Sushi Buffet in Hayward, and the New Dragon Buffet in San Leandro.

Investigators interviewed the employees and seized business records.  Many employees reported being recruited from outside the Bay Area.  Once they arrived, the employer kept them in crowded housing and bussed them to work six days each week for twelve hour shifts per day.  Auditors determined that the four restaurants underpaid minimum wage and filed tax returns that underreported payroll tax and sales tax.

In December of 2016, the Contra Costa County Grand Jury returned an indictment of several defendants related to the investigation.  That same month, investigators from the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office arrested Yu Chen, Rongdi Zheng, Feng Gu, Shao Rong Zhang, and Zhou Xian Chen related to the indictment.

On May 23, 2017, Defendant Shao Rong Zhang pled no contest to a misdemeanor charge of enforcing a policy on behalf of her employer that employees not report minimum wage violations, in violation of Labor Code section 1102.5.  Pursuant to the negotiated disposition, Judge Burch sentenced Ms. Zhang to one hundred and twenty days in jail and probation.

Also on May 23, 2017, Defendants Yu Chen, Rongdi Zheng, and Feng Gu pled guilty to charges of conspiracy to violate the minimum wage law, payroll tax fraud, sales tax fraud, and insurance premium fraud pursuant to a negotiated disposition that provided for the judge to choose the term of imprisonment in a specified range at the sentencing hearing.  Each of these three defendants were alleged to be joint owners of either the Brentwood or Roseville restaurants during some timeframe of the charged conspiracy.

On May 24, 2017, charges were dismissed against defendant Zhou Xian Chen.

On June 16, 2017, in Martinez, Judge Burch heard argument and then announced sentence.

Attorney Tomas Margain who represents two of the workers submitted a letter to the Court for sentencing calling the “the most egregious case of wage theft I have seen” in nineteen years of handling these types of cases.  He continued, “I was to commend the District Attorney’s Office and the law enforcement officials who worked on this case.”

Several workers from the restaurants spoke at the sentencing hearing and submitted written statements to the Court.  Worker M.T. wrote, “We were always getting yelled at and nothing we did was ever good enough for them.  They lived to instill the fear in us and they succeeded because we did not know any better and we did not know who to turn to.  This experience has damaged me emotionally.  I will never forget it.  I truly do not wish this upon anyone.  I would have family and friends ask me how my ‘experience’ in the U.S. was and I could not bring myself to tell them because I was so ashamed.  I lived in shame for the situation that I was in but, I know that I have to move forward and not look back anymore.”

Worker E.F. also submitted a letter, “I will never be the same.  At my current job there are moments where I must get a look on my face because my coworkers ask me if I am ok, If I need to go home, . . . I tell them all that I have lived through and that there is fear that this might happen to me all over again.  I want justice to be served so that this won’t happen to anyone else.  This shouldn’t happen to anyone else.”

Judge Burch cited the impact that these crimes had on real people in sentencing all three defendants to three years and four months in prison.

Deputy District Attorney Jeremy L. Seymour prosecuted the case.  The prosecution is a result of a multi-agency investigation effort led by the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office that included case agents and representatives from four different state agencies including DIR, CDI, EDD, and the Board of Equalization.