Letter: Sutter grand jury report not why workers lost their jobs
Sutter County received your refusal to correct an article, written by Nancy Pasternack, implying a grand jury report led to adverse employment actions against two county employees.
The 2010 grand jury report about conditions at the Sutter County Animal Shelter placed community focus on plans, already under way, to build a new shelter.
Pasternack's reporting of the findings raised awareness about overcrowding and health conditions at the shelter. She reported on subsequent events: the creation of the Sutter Animal Services Authority, veterinary services and disease management at the shelter, efforts to increase the number of adoptions and the beginning of construction of a new facility.
Unfortunately, her end-of-year article on the shelter wrongly implied that the grand jury report resulted in negative job actions against two county employees. This is not true.
Had the Appeal-Democrat covered the 2012-13 budget hearings, it would have understood that my reluctant decision to recommend elimination of the assistant community services director position, and the Board of Supervisors' adoption of my recommendation, was based on direction to reduce General Fund budgets by 10 percent (this on top of a previous 20 percent reduction).
It had nothing to do with the grand jury report. Likewise, no managerial duties were taken away from the lead animal control officer. Animal control officers are not in management positions. Both individuals maligned by the newspaper advocated for a new shelter long before funding was approved. Instead of ridicule based on guesswork, they deserve praise and, from you, an apology.
Sutter County Community Services director