Loading...
2005-1195-Minutes for Meeting October 18,2005 Recorded 10/18/2005DESCN TES COUNTY OFFICIAL UBLANKENSNIP, COUNTY CLERK DS CJ 1oQ�•�19� COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 111111111111111111111111111 111 10/18/2005 04;26;18 PM zao�-ii�s DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK CERTIFICATE PAGE . -. I--,-, This page must be included if document is re-recorded. Do Not remove from original document. Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.orsz MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING DESCf UTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2005 Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St.., Bend Present were Commissioners Michael M. Daly and Dennis R. Luke; Mark Amberg, Laurie Kendall and Alison Hilber, Legal Counsel; Anna Johnson, Judith Ure, Liz Oja and Connie Thomas, Commissioners' Office; Larry Blanton, Undersheriff; District Attorney Mike Dugan; Timm Schimke, Solid Waste Department; Ronda Connor, Personnel; Renee Warner, Building Services; and Bob LaCombe, Juvenile Department. Also present were Ken Harms, Mike Viegas and Dick Ridenour, Risk Management; media representatives Molli Graham of News Channel 21, R. L. Garrigus, reporter; Chris Barker and Cindy Powers of The Bulletin; and approximately a dozen other individuals. Kent Mortimore, Chief Deputy District Attorney for Lane County, opened the meeting at 1: 03 p. m. After introducing himself, he read a news release. (A copy is attached.) After Mr. Mortimore read the statement, he opened the; meeting to questions. R. L. Garrigus asked if there are other incidents. Mr. Mortimore indicated these are the only ones of which he has knowledge. Chris Barker asked how the incidents came to light. Mr. Mortimore said that his office received a call from the Deschutes County District Attorney, asking for help due to a potential conflict of interest. Mr. Mortimore stated he is not aware of the specifics about how the incident was brought forward. Minutes of Special Meeting Tuesday, October 18, 2005 Page 1 of 3 Pages Molli Graham asked if there would be other incidents brought up. Mr. Mortimore answered that these two incidents are closed, and it is unknown if there are others. He will be happy to talk to anyone who comes forward. Ms. Graham asked what the cost of this investigation has been for Lane County. Mr. Mortimore said that the cost was not tracked; the Oregon State Police also had some time invested. Mr. Barker asked how the second victim was reached. Mr. Mortimore stated that a witness mentioned the incident, so the victim was contacted and interviewed. Cindy Powers asked if there is a reason for the first victim to not move forward. Mr. Mortimore replied that she felt they had resolved the issue on a personal basis. Mr. Mortimore was asked if names could be released. He said that at the request of the victims through their attorneys, their names would not be released at this time. A public records request will need to be submitted. Mr. Barker asked why the Lane County investigators came to Deschutes County today. Mr. Mortimore replied that this is a courtesy to local media, and he also needed to speak with several individuals earlier today. Ms. Powers asked what it means by not proceeding due to the facts of the matter. Mr. Mortimore stated that the victim delayed reporting the incident, and there was also a continuing close social relationship between the two; and the victim's wishes were to not prosecute. The District Attorney must weight the wishes and cooperation of the victim against the public interest. It would be hard to prosecute given these facts. The investigation was more thorough than it normally would be in this kind of case because Mr. DeWolf is a public figure and there was heavy public scrutiny. Under normal circumstances the local police would handle this kind of case. Mr. Barker inquired why the investigation took so long. Mr. Mortimore replied that the logistics of trying to interview everyone during the summer months made it more difficult. Mr. Barker asked if Jenny Birnie was interview. Mr. Mortimore confirmed she was. Minutes of Special Meeting Tuesday, October 18, 2005 Page 2 of 3 Pages Mr. Barker asked how many investigators were involved. Mr. Mortimore said that there were two people from the Lane County District Attorney's Office and two from the Oregon State Police. They did not track the hours; there could have been dozens of hours, but not hundreds. The three-hour drive from Eugene to Bend accounted for many of the hours; these visits were necessary because most of the people to be interviewed are in Central Oregon. Mr. Barker asked if the other Commissioners were interviewed. Mr. Mortimore said they were not, as they were not present at the incident. If they had wanted to discuss this case with him, they knew how to contact him. Mr. Barker stated that the two incidents seemed to be a poorly kept secret among many County employees. Mr. Mortimore stated that the earlier incident did not involve the County, and the number of employees present at the incident in Eugene was small. Ms. Powers asked what kind of "close social relationship" the two individuals maintained. Mr. Mortimore replied that this was an interesting fact in the case, but he is not sure what it means. He added that evidently this relationship was maintained outside of working hours. Being no further questions or discussion, the meeting ended at 1:20 p.m. DATED this 18th Day of October 2005 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: (b�uw� S", - Recording Secretary Minutes of Special Meeting Page 3 of 3 Pages Tom DeWolf, Chair y, Coylimissioner Dennis R. Luke, C6mmissioner Tuesday, October 18, 2005 F. DOUGLASS HARCLEROAD LANE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY October 18, 2005 NEWS RELEASE Contact: Kent Mortimore Chief Deputy District Attorney LANE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 125 EAST 8TH AVENUE, ROOM 400 EUGENE, OREGON 97401-2926 FAX ONLY (541) 682-3890 (541) 682-4261 On August 4, 2005, officials in Deschutes County notified the Lane County District Attorney's office of a report of possible criminal conduct by Deschutes County Commissioner Tom DeWolf occurring in Lane County on November 19, 2003. As a result of that report, the Lane County District Attorney requested assistance from the Oregon State Police in conducting an investigation. The Lane County District Attorney and Oregon State Police, in a joint investigation, interviewed several dozen potential witnesses. Initially, the investigation focused on a county -sponsored trip to Eugene by Mr. DeWolf and several other Deschutes County employees. As part of the Eugene investigation, investigators were told of a possible criminal incident in Deschutes County—in addition to the Eugene incident. On August 26, 2005, Deschutes County Circuit Judge Michael Sullivan signed an order appointing the Lane County District Attorney as a special district attorney for the purposes of investigating any possible Deschutes County matters. This occurred because Deschutes County District Attorney Michael Dugan had a conflict of interest in conducting the investigation. The Lane County District Attorney and Oregon State Police have, during the past two months, interviewed all known witnesses in regards to the two matters I have described. Here is a summary of our joint investigation: On November 19, 2003, Mr. DeWolf engaged in an incident that involved his touching of the genitals of a female Deschutes County employee; and it involved her touching of his genitals. The woman was 27 years old at the time. This incident was short in duration and occurred at a restaurant in downtown Eugene. The victim said that she did not consent to the touching. This incident was not reported to law enforcement officials . until our investigation. The victim in this incident was an employee of the Deschutes County juvenile department at the time of the incident. She has since left her position to pursue another opportunities. By the victim's description, she and Mr. DeWolf discussed the incident at a later point in time and the two reached an agreement that nothing further needed to be done to address Mr. DeWolfs behavior. In fact, nothing further was done by anyone in an official capacity. It is very relevant that the victim and Mr. DeWolf maintained a strong social relationship from the date of the incident until this matter came to light this summer. The victim has urged me in the strongest terms possible that she does not support criminal prosecution of Mr. DeWolf. I am told that Mr. DeWolf admitted to inappropriate behavior in a statement to the news media several weeks ago. However, Mr. DeWolf declined to cooperate in our investigation. We were not permitted to speak with him. That is a summary of the Lane County incident—which actually occurred later in time than the incident that came to our attention as a result of the initial investigation. Approximately 12 years ago, at a time when Mr. DeWolf was involved in a project with the Cascade Community Theater, he had sexual contact with another alleged victim. This woman, who was approximately 28 years old at the time, was also working with the theater group. During a meeting at a theater, she reported that Mr. DeWolf approached her and put his hand down her pants, touching her genitals. She said that she did not consent to this touching. She pulled away from him and left the area. This matter was also never reported to law enforcement authorities until our investigation this year. ORS 131.105 imposes a four-year statute of limitations for the crime of sexual abuse in the third degree—which arguably describes Mr. DeWolfs actions at the theater. We have determined that there will be no prosecution based on the theater events for the sole reason that the statute of limitations has run. The case in Eugene is not as simple. In cases like this, it is our general practice to honor the wishes of an adult victim—especially when the conduct does not rise to the level that would constitute a felony. While that is not always the case, great weight is given to what the victim wants because the victim is an essential and significant part of the prosecution of any case. In this matter, the victim is married and is a new mother. She is no longer employed by Deschutes County. She has both in person and through her attorney strongly indicated her unwillingness to proceed with a prosecution. Given her position and given the facts of the matter, we have made the decision that we will not bring criminal charges based on the November, 2003 Eugene incident. Our investigation into these two incidents is closed. I would typically provide the media with copies of the written reports. I believe Oregon's public records laws make these documents available to you. However Mr. DeWolf's attorneys have informed me that they believe at least some of the information cannot be released. Because that issue may need to be resolved in court, I am not prepared to provide you with copies of our investigation today. -30- MEDIA NOTICE Tuesday, October 18, 2005 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 www.deschutes.orp- The Lane County District Attorney To Announce the Results of His Investigation Tuesday, October 18, at 1:00 p.m. at the Deschutes County Administration Building 1 st Floor Conference Room 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend The Lane County District Attorney will announce the results of his investigation concerning Commissioner Tom DeWolf at this time.