-PDBM/FXT
Water board member’s loyalty questioned SANTOS MAY HAVE CONFLICT DUE TO ALVISO HOLDINGS, GRAND JURY SAYS By Nick Veronin
T
he director of a subdivision of the local water district “has failed to uphold his ethical obligations,� according to a recent grand jury report. Richard Santos, District 3 director for the Santa Clara Valley Water District, “has significant property interests in Alviso� — an area of North San Jose within his jurisdiction — “that greatly limit his ability to ethically participate in SCVWD projects in Alviso,� the report by the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury stated. The report filed June 18, “Is a Conflict of Interest Guiding the Santa Clara Valley Water District in Alviso,� said that “Santos has
focused his efforts primarily on enhancing Alviso ... less than 1 percent of his constituency.� Santos is a part of several community action groups focused on improving Alviso and owns multiple properties in town. It is unclear if water services in Mountain View have been or would be adversely impacted by projects supported by Santos, a spokeswoman from the grand jury said. District 3 does not cover Mountain View. However, money used to fund projects that may benefit Santos, his holdings and his family’s holdings would come out of funds available to all cities and areas within the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Santos denied the implications of the report. While he admits
to owning property in Alviso, he said that his holdings in no way prohibit him from faithfully executing his duties as a water district board member. “Just because I own property there doesn’t mean I’m in conflict of interest,� he said. Santos said he only acted in the interest of helping the community and his constituents. “I vote for everybody,� he said. “There is no conflict. It is a perception.� “I don’t know how you can say that’s a perception when the facts are in front of you,� said Angie Cardoza of the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury. The jury’s findings can be viewed online at www.sccsuperiorcourt. org/jury/GJ.html. V
Suspect in attempted rape pleads not guilty By Nick Veronin
T
he man accused of attempting to rape a Mountain View woman as she jogged along the Steven Creek Trail last year has pleaded not guilty at a July 7 plea hearing at the Palo Alto
Courthouse. John Detches, 32, a transient San Jose man, was arrested Dec. 6, 2009, in connection with the attack. He pleaded not guilty to all charges against him — two counts of assault with intent to commit rape, two counts of felony false imprison-
ment and one count of kidnapping to commit a sexual offense. Crystal Stokes, 28, reported being attack on Nov. 29, 2009, as she jogged along the Stevens Creek Trail, near the Dana Street overSee DETCHES, page 10
HSR
Continued from page 5
federal stimulus funding. The rail authority has to begin construction on the San Francisco-to-San Jose line by September 2012 to qualify California for a $2.25 billion grant. “Common sense is absent from the high-speed rail discussion,� Cline said. “Right now the Authority plans to select a final alignment and release its draft environmental impact report by December of this year under an extremely rushed project schedule that is dictated solely by the desire for federal funds.� Federal funds play a prominent role in the authority’s plan to fund the project, which carries an estimated price tag of about $43 billion. The authority expects to get about $17 billion in federal grants for the project, though so far only $2.25 billion has been committed. California voters also approved $9.95 billion in state funds for high-speed rail and related improvements in 2008 when they passed Proposition 1A. But many of the project’s earliest supporters have lashed out at the authority over the past year about what they perceive to be the agency’s inadequate outreach and
shoddy planning. Two of the consortium partners, Menlo Park and Atherton, had also joined a coalition of nonprofit groups in challenging the rail authority’s selection of Pacheco Pass over the Altamont Pass as the preferred route for the new line. The authority’s ridership projections took a hit last week when the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, concluded that the models these projections were based on were flawed and unreliable as a basis for decision-making. The conclusion followed similar criticisms expressed by the Palo Alto-based watchdog group Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design earlier this year. The latest review, along with critical recent reports from the Office of the State Auditor and the Legislative Analysts Office, have created a “credibility problem� for the rail authority, Cline said. He also challenged the authority’s assertion that the system, once built, would be financially self-sustaining. “There also is no stated plan for paying to operate high-speed rail once it is built, and we fear local taxpayers may be left holding the bag,� Cline said. —Daniel DeBolt contributed to this report. V
! ! $ %" ") $ " ' $ $ # $ )# # $ " " ## # # $ $# ) ) % $ # %# ' & #%" # " " " ' " ' # $ " # $ "# $ # $ %$ $ $ #%" ") " " " # # $ $ # $ $# $ %" ") $ " ' # ' " ( $ $ $ # $ # $ # " # $ #$ !% $) #%" # "& #
) % " #%" " % $ $ ' " )# # $ " ## # $ " $ " "
! ! 6
â– MOUNTAIN VIEW VOICE â– JULY 9, 2010
" "
! !