Human Relations Panel Joins Foes of Grand Jury Report

The county Human Relations Commission on Thursday joined the chorus of criticism leveled at a June report by the Orange County Grand Jury advocating a three-year, nationwide moratorium on all immigration.

In a unanimous vote, the commission said it would petition the U.S. Civil Rights Commission to evaluate the jury and its method of selecting members.

Commissioners also will write letters to the county Board of Supervisors and District Atty. Michael R. Capizzi asking to participate in the selection of future grand jurors by supplying lists of qualified minority candidates.

The grand jury outraged civil rights groups after issuing a 13-page report that drew parallels between immigration--and, in particular, the influx of illegal immigrants--and a host of societal ills.

“This really is disquieting for a county as diverse as ours to have a grand jury issue a report of this type,” said Liz Carson, one of the commissioners. “It’s a slap in the face that tells us we have no rights.”

Becky Esparza, chairwoman of the commission, said she applied to be on the grand jury two years ago and was turned down but never given a reason. The report, she said, “feeds the fires of scapegoating.”

The 12-member Human Relations Commission advises the county supervisors and the Orange County League of Cities, which appoints its membership. Thursday night’s vote was 9-0 in favor of the recommendations with three members absent.

Critics of the grand jury have blasted its membership makeup, which is white, affluent and elderly for the most part. The 1992-1993 grand jury, for example, had 17 Anglos and two Latinos, and an average age of 61. The current panel, which took office July 1, has 15 Anglos, two Latinos, one African-American and one American Indian.

Because the positions pay $25 a day, many minorities or younger members cannot afford to be members, critics say. The commission suggested paying minimum wage instead to get a broader pool of candidates.

In its report, the grand jury cited immigration as a catalyst for school and housing overcrowding, strains on government services, the spread of disease and Orange County’s failure to mount a successful war on drugs.

The commission’s condemnation of the report follows a flurry of criticism by Latino groups who described the panel’s recommendation to curb immigration as thinly veiled racism. A coalition of county Latino leaders on June 22 demanded the censure of the grand jury for inflicting “mindless injury” to thousands of local families.

When the report was issued, Tom Dalton, co-chairman of the grand jury’s Human Services Committee, described the move as a necessary commentary on an issue that had not been addressed.

“If somebody didn’t say this, it probably never would get said,” said Dalton, whose committee wrote the report. “We know that a recommendation like this might never get enforced, but having not said this would have been a disservice as a grand juror. The problem is that bad.”

But human relations commissioners took exception to the analysis.

“It’s not a factual document,” said Rick Rodriguez, member of CAFE de California, a Latino state employees group. “It’s largely one-sided, a politically motivated paper and most of all, it’s mean-spirited.”