Welcome Progress on New Grand Jury : Ethnic Makeup of Panel Better Reflects Area’s Diversity

The 11 men and eight women of the Orange County Grand Jury who took up their one-year terms starting July 1 reflected the demographic makeup of the county more than did many of their predecessors. That is welcome progress.

The current panel has two more Latinos, two more Asians, and one more African American than did last year’s. The changing makeup is the result of an aggressive recruiting campaign by the past grand jury and the Superior Court judge who oversaw its operations, Michael Brenner. And that campaign was the result of the deserved firestorm that erupted over the 1992-93 panel’s call for a three-year moratorium on immigration, legal and illegal. That group had only two members from minority groups.

Unfortunately, this year’s grand jury is much like previous ones when it comes to age: 16 members are retired and the average age is 61. The reason is that grand jury service pays $25 a day and the workweek is usually four or five days. Most people under 60 must work for a living and cannot afford to perform public service for a year.

A grand jury that better reflects the diversity of Orange County, where minorities now account for more than one-third the population, is necessary because members from different backgrounds can bring new insights to problems and identify new areas for investigation. Still, the grand jury that ended its term June 30 deserves credit for providing valuable public service.

The jurors made the right call in recommending consolidation of the county’s too numerous water agencies, and trimming the number of all special districts. The panel provided a much-needed reality check on crime, too, pointing out that the politically popular “three strikes” legislation to put felons behind bars for life was appealing but likely to overload the already overcrowded county jails, the first stop for criminals. To make room, other criminals likely will have to be cut loose early, unless county residents are willing to build a new jail.

The grand jury properly shined a spotlight on the problem of overloaded telephone lines at the county Child Abuse Registry, where too many callers never got through. The panel also suggested a sensible remedy: Counselors required by law to report allegations of child abuse should use facsimile machines as much as possible, leaving the phone lines open for neighbors and relatives wanting to report abuse.

It is that civil function of the grand jury, monitoring county government, that is so important. The jurors receive hundreds of suggestions a year on topics for investigation. The new panel has already heard from the Los Amigos of Orange County, a group of Latino educators, business leaders, community activists and professionals. Members of Los Amigos directed withering criticism at the grand jury report on immigration more than a year ago and then were helpful in urging Latinos to volunteer for grand jury service. Other minority groups joined the effort.

That was a wise move, and the groups concerned about the panel’s diversity should keep tabs on its reports this year. There is nothing wrong with having watchdogs monitor the watchdog, and the grand jury can profit from constructive criticism.

Although the grand jury also can return criminal indictments, prosecutors have the option of holding a preliminary hearing to persuade a judge that there is enough evidence to require a defendant to stand trial. There is no other organized group to keep tabs on government operations, which is why the grand jury is so important.