Hanretty released from prison, appeals court order for $2.7M in restitution | December 11, 2013 | Almanac | Almanac Online |


News - December 11, 2013

Hanretty released from prison, appeals court order for $2.7M in restitution

by Barbara Wood

Tim Hanretty, the former Woodside and Portola Valley school official who was imprisoned for embezzlement and misappropriating public funds in 2012, has been released after serving a year of his two-year sentence and has taken steps to appeal a court order to repay $2.67 million to the Woodside Elementary School District.

This story contains 559 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe


Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of another community
on Dec 11, 2013 at 9:36 pm

Mr Hanretty has a long history of stealing monies from non profit organizations and his most recent positions in school districts. Those aware of his prior actions were vindicated that he was finally caught. He should NEVER be trusted around money as he certainly knows how to "play the part." It is unfortunate he was released after serving one year; given the light sentence he received.

Like this comment
Posted by Wait a sec
a resident of Atherton: other
on Dec 11, 2013 at 10:27 pm

My reading of these articles found:

1. Mr. Hanretty apparently had $101,000 of home-related solar work reimbursed by the school district. This is stealing, and he definitely needs to pay it back.

2. Mr. Hanretty spent $2.6M of school district loan money on school district projects he presumably thought were important but were not authorized. It's hard for me to call this theft, since he didn't steal the money for himself. Certainly a misguided public servant who thought the ends justified the means, and who thought he knew better. I would agree this is misappropriation of public funds.

Should he have to pay the entire $2.6M back? That's a bit fuzzy. If it was spent on things the school absolutely didn't need, and currently has no use of or benefit from, then there is a very persuasive argument that he should. But what if the school is benefiting from at least some of this? I'm not sure repayment of the entire amount is fair in this case. What would make sense to me is getting an independent auditor or citizen group to figure that issue out to see if there can be some middle ground.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.