CASE # 1799: Webster Middle School
Reason For Investigation
A citizenís complaint was received alleging misappropriation of school funds, theft, misuse of school property and harassment.
Method of Investigation
Members of the San Joaquin County Civil Grand Jury (SJCCGJ) held meetings with district officials and the Stockton Unified School District (SUSD) Police Department.† Certain school documents and police reports were subpoenaed.† The SJCCGJ obtained and reviewed district policies, procedures and operational agreements between SUSD police and other law enforcement agencies.† A site visit was conducted at Webster Middle School.
Findings and Conclusions
After receiving and reviewing all documentation, the SJCCGJ concluded the following:
1) Misappropriation of Staff Association funds were adequately investigated by SUSD Administration and the allegations could not be substantiated. Cafeteria funds were deposited directly to the District office and accounted for by school officials. However, the investigation of the PE funds were determined by SUSD Police Department to be a theft.† The SJCCGJ commends the SUSD Administration on the implementation of a full-time auditor.† The auditor will be making visits to all school sites to monitor budgets and school funds.
2) Members of the SJCCGJ could not find evidence to support the allegation of a stolen computer.† Security measures are in place to prevent users from accessing inappropriate web sites from the Internet.†
3) Allegations of harassment have been directed to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which is out of the SJCCGJ jurisdiction.
The SJCCGJ recommends that all school principals adhere to policies and procedures on how money is handled as stated in the Administrative Site Guide.
Pursuant to Sections 933.05 of the Penal Code:
Section 933.05 also requires as to each recommendation, the response indicate one of the following:
a. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of the action taken.
b. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be, with a time frame for implementation.
c. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation of the scope of the analysis and a timeframe not to exceed six (6) months.
d. The recommendation will not be implemented, with an explanation therefore.