Fairfax County Public Schools is making a series of changes in response to an external probe that found two high school football programs in the Northern Virginia suburb violated state rules.
Fairfax County Public Schools is making a series of changes in response to an external probe that found two high school football programs in the Northern Virginia suburb violated state rules.
In a letter to families this week, Superintendent Michelle Reid and School Board Chair Sandy Anderson said the Chicago-based law firm Baker McKenzie finished its investigation into allegations regarding student-athlete transfer and eligibility practices across the division. Hayfield Secondary School and Fairfax High School were found to have violated Virginia High School League rules.
Now, transfer eligibility will be handled at the central office level instead of high school level. The school district is also coming up with a set of standards that will scrutinize new student registrations the same way transfers within the division are reviewed.
The steps come after 2024 allegations accusing then-Coach Darryl Overton of recruiting violations for allegedly encouraging his former players at Freedom High School in Woodbridge to transfer to Hayfield. Overton was in his first season leading the Fairfax County school, and also worked there as a security specialist.
Hayfield ultimately withdrew from the postseason after playing just one game.
And at Fairfax High, Fox 5 DC reported coaches had been accused of paying thousands to recruit a football player.
Reid, meanwhile, had publicly apologized for the county’s handling of the Hayfield scandal.
“When a student wants to play on a team or play a sport, whether it’s a team sport or an individual sport, they want to know that it’s a level playing field,” Board member Mateo Dunne told WTOP on Friday. “They want to know that there are rules. They want to know that the refs will judge in a neutral manner. And unfortunately, that hasn’t been the case in recent decades, but going forward, it certainly will be.”
Dunne said having an external law firm that hasn’t done work for the county in the last 10 years lead the investigation was critical, because it “quickly became apparent that the internal investigation was not credible.”
In response to the Hayfield situation, the division started using a platform that allows for centralized collection, review and processing of transfers, the district said. It also gave the Office of Student Activities and Athletics authority to investigate questions or concerns about a student’s eligibility.
Fairfax County is expanding its mandatory training requirements to include all levels of coaches, including unpaid volunteers, in response to training gaps highlighted during the investigation.
The changes, Reid and Anderson wrote, “do not include personnel actions which are confidential by law and which the Superintendent has taken and will take as appropriate.”
When Hayfield’s 2024 football season ended, Overton took a job with the St. James Performance Academy as its director of football, the academy announced.
“Since Hayfield, we have seen consistent, proactive enforcement of athletic rules and regulations,” Dunne said.
“We’ve seen vigorous oversight across a variety of schools, and that, to me, is heartening, because ultimately, what we want to make sure is that there is no repeat of Hayfield. And we also want to be able to say that we have upheld the integrity of the FCPS athletics program and that we have provided accountability and transparency,” he added.
Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.
An oversight body that has documented and exposed substandard jail conditions for decades would cease to exist if the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors moves forward with a cost-cutting plan.
L.A. County could save about $40,000 a year by eliminating the Sybil Brand Commission, according to an August report prepared for the supervisors by the board’s Executive Office.
The Sybil Brand Commission’s 10 members serve a key oversight role, regularly conducting unannounced inspections of county jails and lockups.
Named for a philanthropist and activist who worked to improve jail conditions for women in L.A. starting in the 1940s, the commission’s findings were recently cited in a state lawsuit over what Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta called a “humanitarian crisis” inside the county jails.
“In June 2024, the Sybil Brand Commission reported that multiple dorms at Men’s Central were overcrowded with broken toilets … and ceilings that had been painted over to cover mold,” Bonta’s office wrote in its complaint, which seeks to compel reforms by the county and sheriff’s department.
The recommendation to “sunset” the commission comes amid a spike in in-custody deaths with 38 so far this year, which puts the county on track for what Bonta’s office said would mark at least a 20-year high.
The Executive Office for the Board of Supervisors responded to questions from The Times with a statement Friday that said its report’s “purpose was not to eliminate oversight or input,” but to demonstrate “where responsibilities overlap and where efficiencies could strengthen oversight and support.”
The unattributed statement said the report found issues with “commissioner availability” that led to meeting cancellations and put “limits on their ability to conduct inspections.”
The Sybil Brand Commission took up the possibility of elimination at its meeting earlier this month, when commissioners and advocates railed against the proposal as a shortsighted way to cut costs that will leave county inmates more vulnerable to mistreatment and neglect.
In a separate move, the Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors is reassigning or eliminating a third of Inspector General Max Huntsman’s staff, slashing funding to the watchdog that investigates misconduct by county employees and the sheriff’s department, according to Huntsman.
“At the back of all this is the fundamental question of whether the board wants oversight at all,” Eric Miller, a Sybil Brand commissioner, said in an interview.
Miller added that the “sunsetting of Sybil Brand seems to be part of a persistent attempt to control and limit oversight of the sheriff’s department.”
The report from the Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors said its recommendation to do away with the jail oversight body came after a review of “225 commissions, committees, boards, authorities, and task forces” funded by the county. The proposal would “sunset” six commissions, including Sybil Brand, and “potentially merge” 40 others.
The report noted that “jail and detention inspection duties are also monitored by the Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission.”
But that commission, which was established less than a decade ago, takes on a broader range of issues within the sheriff’s department, from deputy misconduct to so-called deputy gangs. Unlike Sybil Brand, its members do not go on frequent tours of jails and publish detailed reports documenting the conditions.
The Executive Office’s statement said “unannounced jail inspections would continue, either through a COC subcommittee or coordinated oversight structure.”
Peter Eliasberg, chief counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, said the proposal to get rid of the commission is the latest in a recent succession of blows to law enforcement accountability.
That list includes the ousting of former Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission chair Robert Bonner earlier this year, and the introduction last week of a county policy requiring oversight bodies to submit many of their communications to the county for approval.
Eliasberg said losing the Sybil Brand Commission would be a major setback.
“Sybil Brand has been incredibly effective in shining a really harsh spotlight on some terrible things going on in the jails,” he said. “Sybil Brand, I think, has done some really important work.”
Huntsman, the inspector general, said during a Probation Oversight Commission meeting Monday that his office expects to lose a third of its staff. The “current plan proposes to eliminate 14 positions including vacancies,” according to the Executive Office statement.
Huntsman told the commission that the Executive Office of the Board of Supervisors informed him on Sept. 11 that “a number of positions in my office will be taken away from me and moved to the Executive Office and will no longer be available for independent oversight.”
The inspector general added that “there’s a group of staff that have been specifically identified by the Executive Office and taken away, and then there are positions that are curtailed. So the end result is we have a third fewer people, which will impact our operations.”
The Executive Office’s statement said the changes would “save more than $3.95 million” and avoid “deeper cuts” elsewhere.
“We remain confident that the OIG’s remaining staffing levels will allow the OIG to fulfill its essential duties and carry out its mandate,” the statement said.
Late Friday afternoon, Edward Yen, executive officer for the Board of Supervisors, sent out an email “retracting” the new county policy that required many communications by oversight bodies to undergo prior approval.
“While the intent of the policy was to provide long-requested structure and support for commissions and oversight bodies,” Yen wrote, “we recognize that its rollout created confusion and unintended consequences.”
More than three years after the California Department of Justice launched a civil rights investigation into the troubled Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, the case is finally headed toward a sprawling settlement agreement expected to touch on issues including jail conditions, deputy gangs and staffing, according to sources familiar with the matter and emails viewed by The Times.
The investigative findings — which remain secret — span over 100 pages and sources say they include controversial recommendations for deputies to curtail making traffic stops, stop enforcing some drug laws and complete hundreds more hours of training.
Initially launched in January 2021 under Xavier Becerra, California’s attorney general at the time, the probe came amid a string of controversial shootings, costly lawsuits, repeated allegations of deputy misconduct and then-Sheriff Alex Villanueva’s resistance to oversight.
Though a new administration is in place, many of the same problems remain – some of which the state detailed when presenting the findings of its investigation to department officials and other stakeholders in a recent meeting, according to four sources who asked to remain anonymous because they were not authorized to speak on the record.
Already, the findings and recommendations have sparked pushback, some from oversight officials who raised concerns about the lack of transparency and some from union leaders who questioned the practicality of the state’s nearly 400 recommendations.
“Preventing deputies from conducting traffic stops and enforcing drug laws might seem like a good idea to those living in gated communities or with armed protective details,” Richard Pippin, president of the Assn. of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, wrote in a recent message to union members. “But ALADS knows our community partners in the contract cities and elsewhere will be shocked by some of these proposals that are best described as elitist and unrealistic.”
The Sheriff’s Department said this week it was “not at liberty” to discuss the matter, while Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office did not respond to The Times’ request for comment. Lawyers for Los Angeles County said only that they’d been in communication with the state and “hoped to avoid litigation.”
The Sheriff’s Department is already subject to five more narrowly targeted settlement agreements overseen by federal courts. One centers on racial profiling and policing practices in the Antelope Valley, while the other four relate to the conditions and treatment of inmates in the county jails. The oldest of those cases dates back to the 1970s, but it remains open because the department has never fully complied with the settlement terms.
Given the scope of the state’s latest investigation, a new settlement agreement could be far broader than those already in place. And given the sheer size of the Sheriff’s Department — the largest in the country, with a $4-billion budget — it could be one of the most expansive that the California Department of Justice has ever entered.
Word of the state’s voluminous findings began making the rounds last week, after Sheriff Robert Luna sent a lengthy email to deputies offering a vague update on the status of the case.
“As some of you may know, three years ago in January 2021, the California Department of Justice (CAL-DOJ) began a civil rights investigation into the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to determine whether the LASD has engaged in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional policing,” the email began, according to a copy reviewed by The Times.
“We have been communicating with the CAL-DOJ officials and look forward to addressing the issues of concern and coming into compliance,” the sheriff continued. “We expect further communication with CAL-DOJ in the weeks and months ahead regarding proposed corrective actions.”
The email did not offer a clear timeline for the next steps, but Luna wrote that the department, county lawyers and “other key stakeholders” would need to evaluate the findings and recommendations, which he said would touch on more than a dozen areas, including use of force, arrests, deputy gangs, internal investigations, discipline, oversight, community engagement, training, staffing and conditions in the jails.
A state civil rights probe was already underway when Sheriff Robert Luna took office in 2022.
(Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press)
Any agreement reached between CAL-DOJ and the Sheriff’s Department will help make sure the department complies with state laws and standards and could improve trust from the community, he said.
“As we work towards finalizing the specifics, we will keep you informed of any developments or changes as we work through this together,” Luna wrote. “Community trust is at the core of our work in public safety and with this agreement we will improve our systems and Department to better serve the citizens of Los Angeles County.”
California law allows the attorney general to investigate law enforcement agencies suspected of engaging in a “pattern or practice” of violating state or federal law. Unlike with criminal investigations that focus on specific incidents, a pattern or practice investigation looks more broadly at whether a law enforcement agency routinely violates people’s constitutional rights.
When he first announced the Los Angeles County investigation in late January 2021, Becerra raised concerns about the lack of comprehensive oversight of the department as well as allegations of retaliation, excessive force and other misconduct.
“There are serious concerns and reports that accountability and adherence to legitimate policing practices have lapsed at the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department,” he said in a statement at the time. “We are undertaking this investigation to determine if LASD has violated the law or the rights of the people of Los Angeles County.”
At the time, Becerra did not specify a focus for the investigation, saying that his office was “not placing a particular scope and time or place, or person” in the crosshairs.
Though Becerra initially said a thorough report on the investigation’s findings would be made public, it is not clear whether his successor still plans to do that. One county source familiar with the matter said it was likely the detailed findings would remain secret, though a signed settlement agreement would eventually become public.
The original announcement of the investigation three years ago came after a series of high-profile shootings by deputies that triggered widespread protests and demands from community organizers and lawmakers for independent investigations. Those calls were amplified after the June 2020 killing of 18-year-old Andres Guardado, who was shot five times in the back by a deputy assigned to the Compton station.
Last year — a few months before both that deputy and his partner were sentenced to federal prison for an unrelated incident — The Times obtained a leaked email showing that the California Department of Justice had taken up the Guardado case. It’s not clear if that became part of the civil rights probe or if it is being handled separately, though the California Constitution grants the office the power to review cases where the “law is not being adequately enforced” by a local or county agency.
When Becerra opened the broader civil rights probe in 2021, local activists and oversight officials heralded the move. Melina Abdullah, co-founder of Black Lives Matter-Los Angeles, called it “a step forward in the names of people like Dijon Kizzee and Andres Guardado and so many others” killed by L.A. deputies, adding that she hoped it would uncover corruption in the department and bring an end to deputy gangs.
Robert Bonner, a former federal judge who now serves on the watchdog Civilian Oversight Commission, said at the time that he hoped the investigation would focus on deputy cliques and would eventually lead to a consent decree requiring their elimination.
Though Villanueva didn’t learn of the probe until it was announced publicly, he said in 2021 that he welcomed the attorney general’s investigation and promised to cooperate.
“Our department may finally have an impartial, objective assessment of our operations, and recommendations on any areas we can improve our service to the community,” he said. “We are eager to get this process started, in the interest of transparency and accountability.”
This week in an email to The Times, Villanueva — whom voters replaced two years ago with the current sheriff — took a dimmer view of the state’s investigation.
“The entire premise of their investigation was political retaliation by the Board of Supervisors and their political appointees,” he wrote, accusing supervisors of lobbying the attorney general to open the case. “With federal consent decrees covering most of LASD operations already, there is little room for state intervention,” he added.
Union officials also worried about the burden of adding new requirements from another sprawling settlement.
“The report clearly indicates that every deputy would be required to complete hundreds of hours of training to satisfy even the baseline requirements,” Pippin wrote in his message to union members. “The report also challenges the direct authority of the sworn chain of command and moves much of the power and decision-making authority to offices or groups with zero operational experience,” he continued, saying the state’s recommendations would “create confusion in the chain of command.”
Meanwhile some oversight officials worried about the apparent lack of outside input.
“I just hope the attorney general and the county officials will take input from the community before reaching a final settlement,” said Sean Kennedy, who chairs the Civilian Oversight Commission. “No real solution can be forged without hearing from the people most affected by decades of unconstitutional policing.”
At the outset, it was expected that the inquiry would involve interviews with local officials, members of oversight panels and community groups — though it’s not clear who has been interviewed or what the investigation ultimately entailed. Kennedy said the oversight commission has not been included in “any of the settlement meetings to date.”
A similar investigation of the Kern County Sheriff’s Office that started in 2016 led to a settlement agreement four years later, when the agency agreed to implement a laundry list of reforms that included a ban on the use of chokeholds, a new procedure for reporting deputy shootings to the public and stricter rules governing deputy searches.
Nearly a decade earlier a two-year probe overseen by then-Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown found that Maywood, a small city in southeastern Los Angeles County, was patrolled by “rogue cops” who arrested people without probable cause and routinely used excessive force.
The Maywood Police Department reached an agreement with the state that required the city to raise its hiring standards, publish annual audits of the department’s operations, and equip officers with audio recorders and their cruisers with video cameras, among other reforms. A year after entering the agreement, Maywood disbanded its police force and instead contracted with the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department.
Bitcoin (BTC) ATMs have become both convenient and worrying, with scammers taking advantage of unsuspecting victims. Authorities in the US and other jurisdictions are now waging a war against crypto-ATM-based scams.
California takes a stance on new cryptocurrency laws
The state of California has introduced rules for cryptocurrency transactions. Senate Bill 401, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, means you can only make $1,000 worth of cryptocurrency transactions at ATMs each day, and starting in 2025, the maximum they can charge you is $5, or 15% of the transaction. Whichever is higher.
Initially, some Bitcoin ATMs allowed up to $50,000 in transactions with fees ranging between 12% and 25% above the value of the digital asset. These changes are intended to protect people from scams and high fees, explained Sen. Monique Lemon, one of the co-authors.
Scammers taking advantage of the convenience of Bitcoin ATMs have been a growing concern, with the Federal Trade Commission reporting that more than 46,000 people have lost more than $1 billion to cryptocurrency scams since 2021. New transaction limits give victims more time to spot scams before loss of money. But Charles Bell of the Blockchain Advocacy Coalition worries that these rules could hurt the cryptocurrency industry and small businesses.
You may also like:
Explore Australia’s rapid rise in the global cryptocurrency ATM scene
FBI Alerts About Bitcoin ATM and QR Code Scams
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has raised the alarm about fraudulent schemes exploiting ATMs for cryptocurrencies and quick response (QR) codes for payments. These schemes take various forms, including online impersonation, romance scams, and lottery fraud, all using cryptocurrency ATMs and QR codes as tools.
QR codes, which smartphone cameras can scan, simplify cryptocurrency payments. However, criminals are now using it to trick victims into paying money. Victims are often asked to withdraw money from their accounts and use a QR code provided by scammers to complete transactions at physical cryptocurrency ATMs.
Once the victim makes the payment, the cryptocurrency is transferred to the scammer’s wallet, making recovery nearly impossible due to the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies. The FBI offers several tips to protect against these schemes, focusing on caution, verification, and avoiding cryptocurrency ATM transactions that promise anonymity using only a phone number or email.
You may also like:
Bitbuy is partnering with Canada’s largest Bitcoin ATM provider
Cryptocurrency regulation efforts in California
The passage of Senate Bill 401 in California is part of a broader effort to regulate the cryptocurrency industry while protecting consumers. Another law, scheduled to take effect in July 2025, will require digital financial asset companies to obtain licenses from the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation. This represents a clear shift towards tightening government regulation and oversight in the world of digital finance.
Gavin Newsom’s decision to sign these bills into law demonstrates California’s commitment to strengthening the cryptocurrency industry and protecting its citizens. Balancing innovation and security remains a challenge, especially in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
Bitcoin Depot’s historic debut on the NASDAQ
In July, Bitcoin Depot, a leading bitcoin ATM operator, went public on the Nasdaq. This milestone comes after Bitcoin Depot merged with GSR II Meteora, a blank check company.
The move to go public demonstrates the growing legitimacy and acceptance of cryptocurrencies in major financial markets.
Authorities vs. illegal crypto ATMs
The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is taking a strong stance against illegal cryptocurrency ATM operators. Using its power under money laundering regulations, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has carried out raids on cryptocurrency ATMs suspected of illegal activities across England.
The measures, which follow previous operations in east London and Leeds, are part of the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) efforts to crack down on unregulated cryptocurrency operations. This highlights global pressure for stronger cryptocurrency regulation, mirroring steps taken in California. The balance between innovation and security remains a fundamental concern for regulatory bodies around the world.
