The following demonstrates that the grand jury was unable to determine violations of current law based upon testimony. Instead, they relied upon the commissioners' pleas to "establish" guilt.
"Throughout this investigation, as detailed later in this report, we were hampered by inconsistent testimony (both among witnesses and within a witness's own testimony) and a consistent lack of any documentation to support or refute certain claims."
"A public bidding process for the sale of Conestoga View was not required by the County Code."
"The grand jurors heard during the investigation widely divergent views on the financial health of Conestoga View...Moreover, all of the various figures, according to the grand jury testimony, were viable depending on the accounting method used."
"Mr. Espenshade's explanation for Ms. Judge's appointment as special counsel approximately 16 months after beginning work on the project was that any payment was contingent on Conestoga View transaction being completed and, therefore, appointment at any point before the completion of the transaction would be legal under the County Code."
"The Grand Jury recommends that the General Assembly review, update and amend the County Code."
"The Sunshine Act also should be amended to prohibit "avoidance techniques" currently used to avoid the Sunshine Act, including 'information meetings', 'walking the halls', and 'back briefs.'"
"The Grand Jury recommends that the Commissioners' office implement stringent guidelines for determining what subject matter is appropriate to discuss outside of Sunshine and what is not."
"The Grand Jury recommends a mandatory training session on the Sunshine Act for all county commissioners and administrative assistants (and) that a refresher class should be mandatory every year."
