Garcetti Gets Extension on Saving Special Unit : Budget: District attorney is granted a delay to resolve a funding shortfall. He objects to appointment of an outside negotiator to try to save environmental division.

Because Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti objected to having a private lawyer explore ways to save a special environmental crimes unit, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Thursday delayed action on the plan to give him time to resolve the underlying budget issue.

Supervisor Gloria Molina introduced a motion to authorize Barry C. Groveman to negotiate with state, federal and local agencies to find ways to maintain the district attorney’s unit that prosecutes felony cases against companies that violate environmental and workplace safety laws.

Garcetti has strongly opposed the arrangement. In a letter to supervisors, he said it would raise serious questions of propriety because Groveman has “regularly represented defendants charged by this office with criminal environmental law violations, including felony violations” in his practice.

The board delayed a vote on the motion for a week to give Garcetti time to work out a budget plan that would be satisfactory to him and the board.

Groveman, a prominent environmental lawyer, volunteered for the task last month during a radio talk show discussion of Garcetti’s decision to trim several special units. Garcetti said attrition and budget constraints have forced him to transfer lawyers from those units to divisions that prosecute street crime.

He has contended that the only way to save the units is for supervisors to lift a hiring freeze and rescind a requirement that he stay within his allocated budget.

The environmental crime and workplace unit stopped taking new cases March 21. Other units that have been trimmed include the major fraud and workers’ compensation units. Garcetti has said he will close down the units by July 1 if he does not get the money and personnel he is seeking.

Groveman, appearing before supervisors Tuesday, said that reviewing alternatives to closing the unit and reporting to supervisors on his findings did not present a conflict of interest. He said Garcetti’s objections were “a facade over a stalemated budget process” and a “smoke screen.”

He said alternatives he would propose, such as trimming the unit’s staff and deputizing prosecutors from other agencies to handle cases, would not cost Garcetti’s office or the county any money.

As the board conducted its hearing, Garcetti met with representatives of the state attorney general’s office, the city attorney’s office and several private attorneys to discuss ways to save all the special units. After he finished testifying, Groveman joined the meeting.

“If things do no work out with supervisors in a week we’ll get this group or another group together to see if they can be of any assistance in solving the problems,” Garcetti said after his meeting. “The question is how we get the resources to prosecute violent crime and environmental crime and major fraud and all the others. It’s a much larger problem than just environmental crimes.”

Supporters of Groveman note that he helped create the environmental crimes unit when he was a special assistant district attorney under former Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner. He also is the author of Proposition 65, considered one of the toughest environmental crimes laws in the country.

“He knows the unit from the inside and from the outside,” said Dennis Zane, executive director of the Clean Air Coalition.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich said Groveman had a “confrontational attitude” and expressed reservations about how effectively he could work with Garcetti.

Molina said she was willing to have the other supervisors appoint parties to sit on a panel with Groveman and present a report to the board within 30 days.