The Truth these days, is hard to come by. There are a couple of current news stories that have threads connected to what has happened in San Bernardino County with the 3 Bill Postmus rehab trips while acting as Supervisor or Assessor. The first story is about Apple founder Steve Jobs and his absence from Apple. The official Apple version was that Mr. Jobs had a "hormone imbalance", and that it was not serious. We find out months later that Mr. Jobs had a liver transplant because he had end stage liver disease. From an LA Times story on the Apple non-disclosure issue,
Companies are not required to divulge medical details about executives, lawyers said. But they are required to disclose "material" information, which is defined as what a reasonable investor would need to know to make an informed decision on buying or selling stock.
"If they tried to lessen the disclosure and make it misleading by omission, that's just as bad as telling something that flat isn't true," said Jeffrey C. Soza, a securities lawyer at Glaser, Weil, Fink, Jacobs, Howard & Shapiro in Los Angeles.
The next story is about Gov. Mark Sanford going awol to Argentina for 5 days for an affair and how he led staff members to believe he was alone over Father's Day weekend, clearing his head by hiking the Appalachian Trail.
One of the oddest political episodes in memory -- the case of the missing governor -- ended Wednesday in a nationally televised news conference that played like a daytime soap opera. A tearful and rambling Sanford, absent his wife and four sons, confessed his infidelity and admitted to a whirlwind trip to Buenos Aires to secretly meet his lover.
The common link in the stories is that as stakeholders in what County government does and as citizens that are dependent on elected leaders to be "on the job", we have been mislead and lied to, time and time again. It is not acceptable in the private sector to "mislead by omission", nor is it acceptable in the public sector to cover up an elected officials illegal drug abuse while in office. What else has the public been lied to about in the ongoing Postmus saga? What will it take to learn the truth? Who will ask the tough questions and demand honest answers? Where are the feds when we need them? When will the DA's 2 year investigation end?
VALLEY VOICES-Victorville Daily Press 6-21-09
Regarding the Postmus suit
BOB CONAWAY
First, with pending criminal matters and a costly civil case in front of ex-First District Supervisor Bill Postmus and his former county employee buddies, not much money is going to be left to pay the county back if it wins a civil action — so the lawsuit by the county must have ulterior motives. There can be no "public benefit" to such a civil action if everyone burns up their money defending against a civil case and a looming criminal case.
Motives? Could they include using Postmus as the lightening rod for the corruption dialogue so everyone ignores his successor (Brad Mitzelfelt) who made it possible for Postmus to spend the time he did running for supervisor and later assessor, who said nothing about Postmus’ hospitalization for alleged drug addiction problems while supervisor, and effectively ran the county and Republican fundraising machine in Postmus’ absence, who apparently covered up the fact Postmus had a severe drug addiction problem when he ran for assessor, and, while Postmus’ chief of staff, promised Nursery Products he would use his position to find them a new location in the High Desert after the company was booted out of Adelanto?
And let’s not forget Biane, Ovitt & Gonzales (who benefited from Postmus’ fundraising sources and organization), and Fifth District Supervisor Josie Gonzales, who took money from Nursery Products with an appeal pending (which she would have to vote on as a county supervisor) of a planning commission decision to issue Nursery Products a conditional use permit (since thrown out by a Superior Court judge).
Second, with the amount of money we pay for County Counsel (and the supervisors just gave that office a raise a year or so ago, as I recall), why do we need outside help?
The county counsel is either competent and we don’t need the outside expense, or they are not, and some decisions should be made about staffing. If they are competent, then the contract for John Hueston and his firm, Irella & Menella, is a gift of public money in violation of California Constitution, Article XVI, Section 6, and the County of San Bernardino should be sued for its gift of public funds because the end game will not result in any money to recover.
There can be no public purpose for drilling a dry well (us desert rats can appreciate that experience).
Third, has any written discovery been served in the suit against Postmus (a fact curiously not mentioned in any of the press coverage)? Has Postmus asserted the 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination? If not, the supervisors' lawsuit may have some serious problems with winning, and the suit's motive has to be questioned.
Where has the District Attorney’s office been on this? If the evidence points to abuses of public resources for private benefit, why haven’t misdemeanor charges been brought on the gift of public funds? Ahh yes — the statute on misdemeanors is one year. Did DA Michael Ramos deliberately blow the time to file misdemeanor charges against his political allies Postmus, Mitzelfelt and Paul Biane?
If so, then this lawsuit could be the county’s attempt to cover up a decision that, if fully understood, could implicate not only other supervisors, but the DA (The DA’s office, by the way, also got a fat raise from the board a little over a year ago).
It seems the news coverage continues to be softball lobbing, with no intention of getting at the truth.
Bob Conaway lives in Barstow and has been a candidate for the California Assembly and the
United States House of Representatives several times.
Pervasive scandal
Press Enterprise 09:21 PM PDT on Saturday, May 30, 2009
Every new bit of information that emerges from the corruption investigation in San Bernardino County seems to demand further scrutiny. The latest filing, in an arrest last week, raises troubling questions about the practices and attitudes of government in the county. And the investigation should not end until it can provide substantial answers for a discomfited public.
Investigators arrested Rancho Cucamonga Councilman Rex Gutierrez last week for grand theft and misappropriation of public funds. The charges stem from his job with the county assessor's office, which under former Assessor Bill Postmus became the focus of a criminal investigation.
But the declaration filed in Gutierrez's arrest echoes the separate report released this month, compiled by attorney John Hueston. Both portray a county catering to special interests, where government is a means to further personal ends at public expense. The allegations go beyond a rogue assessor, and cut to the fundamental way government operates in San Bernardino County.
The scandal raises wide-ranging suspicions about the county's political habits and behavior, and the investigation needs to address those issues fully. No government can afford to let basic questions go unanswered without vacating any claim to public trust.
Both Hueston's report and the declaration filed in Gutierrez's arrest, for example, say that Postmus hired Gutierrez in 2007 at the urging of developer Jeff Burum. Burum needed Gutierrez's vote on the Rancho Cucamonga council, and Gutierrez needed a job, one informant said.
That arrangement looks suspiciously like a trade of favors between politicians and a powerful developer. Burum, remember, was one of the Colonies' partners who received a $102 million legal settlement from the county in 2006. So does the county routinely hand out jobs to friends of developers, regardless of the cost to taxpayers? Who else on the county payroll owes his job to influence by well-connected insiders?
Investigators say Gutierrez did little actual work for the assessor, instead devoting his time to city business and political activities while collecting a full-time salary. And investigators say Postmus was aware of Gutierrez's work habits, but did not fire him because of the Burum connection.
Gutierrez also stayed on the assessor's payroll for six months after supervisors eliminated his position, thanks to Burum's influence. According to investigators, Burum even got Supervisor Paul Biane to intervene to help keep the county paying a worker who did no work. So just how can county officials justify retaining an employee whose job had vanished, and who did little of value for the county? Or does having powerful friends trump any concern about wasting public money?
But those are not the only questions that need further illumination. Hueston received some last-minute information that clearly deserves follow-up: One source alleged a broad "pay-to-play" scheme involving county land deals and assistance with planning and assessment issues.
This type of misconduct -- demanding payment for county contracts and services -- was at the heart of the scandals that rocked San Bernardino County government a decade ago. So has behavior really not changed, despite all the county's "reforms"?
Postmus and his cronies are just the most visible aspects of a county political culture that demands close scrutiny. The district attorney's office this month announced that its criminal investigation had expanded beyond the assessor's office. Good. County government needs a thorough airing, not a narrow focus on publicly obvious misconduct.
Postmus elected with little or no experience
03:57 PM PDT on Saturday, May 23, 2009
By BEN GOAD
Washington Bureau
Special Section: San Bernardino Co. Probe
Bill Postmus had little, if any, applicable experience when he was elected San Bernardino County assessor in 2006. The man that voters placed in charge of valuing properties across the nation's largest geographic county had no background in tax law or fiscal policy.
But he did have support from the county sheriff's deputies union and powerful developers, as well as a fundraising operation that dwarfed that of his competition, incumbent Don Williamson.
Postmus, former head of the county GOP, was a political animal, and investigators say he remained that way when he took over as assessor.
A county-commissioned investigative report released this month alleges that Postmus and his aides used the assessor's office to run a political machine at taxpayer expense and did little tax-assessment work. The county Board of Supervisors is now suing Postmus and five others to recoup public funds. Postmus and at least two others also face criminal investigations.
California's constitution requires county assessors, sheriffs and district attorneys to be elected to office. There are no professional requirements for candidates running for assessor.
But Postmus scandal-plagued reign as assessor raises questions about whether it's better to fill some government jobs by appointment, rather than putting the positions on the ballot.
Local and state officials say the danger of having unqualified, politically beholden officials would be greater if assessors were appointed, though Postmus' case raises questions about the need for requiring candidates to have some qualifications.
Postmus himself has said his successor should have relevant experience and should not be a career politician.
"The Board of Supervisors should give the highest consideration towards appointing a steward of the public trust with experience in the field of fiscal policy, preferably an individual with proven experience in the property tax assessment process," Postmus wrote in his Feb. 6 resignation letter. "As we have learned, political considerations should not be a priority for any county assessor."
Elected vs. appointed
"Being elected provides a degree of insulation from politics," said Riverside County Assessor Larry Ward, who also serves as the county's clerk and recorder.
Since assessors serve at the will of the voters, other elected officials don't hold as much influence over the office, Ward said. Were assessors appointed, they might feel more beholden to those who installed them in the position.
Some area assessors said they view the position as less political than city council member or county supervisor, since the office is charged with administering policy and not shaping it.
"Most of us don't really consider ourselves politicians, except that we have to run every four years," Ward said.
Assessors are charged with ensuring all taxable property in their jurisdiction is properly valued and fairly taxed. If assessors answered directly to governments instead of the public, there could be pressure for them to raise property values in order to generate more property tax money to bolster county coffers, they said.
"Because assessors are elected, it frees them from being intimidated by those who might prefer that they maximize revenue," said Dan Goodwin, president of the California Assessors Association.
Goodwin, assessor for Ventura County, said the alleged politicization of San Bernardino County's assessor's office has cast a bad light on the office in general.
"This Postmus thing was a disappointment to all of us," he said. "His actions frankly splashed mud on everybody."
Qualifications needed?
District attorneys need law degrees to be elected, and sheriffs' resumes must include law enforcement experience. But there are no required qualifications for assessor candidates in California.
State law requires assessors to become certified appraisers, but anyone newly elected to the office has a year to obtain certification. To do so, assessors must pass a test administered by the state Board of Equalization, which Postmus did eight months into his term.
Ward and Goodwin, who both have a background in assessment and tax policy, described the test as fairly basic.
The board also conducts surveys of assessments to ensure the counties are doing a good job, and issues recommendations about how to improve operations.
But with 58 counties, each assessor's office is audited only once every five years, board spokeswoman Anita Gore said.
In light of the Postmus case, Goodwin said increased requirements might help avoid a repeat of the San Bernardino County scandal.
"Maybe we should start looking at the possibility of some basic minimum qualifications," Goodwin said, though he emphasized that anything too restrictive could dissuade good candidates from pursuing the office.
Ward was less certain, saying some people with political backgrounds would make fine assessors.
Reach Ben Goad at 202-661-8422 or bgoad@PE.com
Board enabled Postmus abuses
| 07:55 AM PDT on Friday, May 15, 2009 Riverside Press Enterprise |
CASSIE MACDUFF
San Bernardino County supervisors bear significant responsibility for the political empire former assessor Bill Postmus built at taxpayer expense during his two-year tenure.
Before Postmus left the Board of Supervisors in late 2006, his peers let him pad his future staff with eight new positions, many of which had no apparent duties related to the office's purpose.
Why didn't the supervisors question what the additional staff members would be doing? They certainly didn't dish out staff increases to other department heads without scrutiny.
Postmus' predecessor, Don Williamson, had an executive staff of four, including himself.
Postmus quadrupled the top echelon of his office to 12 people. The grand jury pointed out last year that the budget increased by $1.3 million his first year in office.
I wrote last fall, after the grand jury report came out, that the supervisors were Postmus' enablers. They gave him carte blanche to abuse his office.
Independent counsel John Hueston's investigation, made public this week, makes clear that most of Postmus' "executive support staff" weren't working for the public's benefit; they were Republican political operatives at public expense.
Surrounded by his cadre of hand-picked politicos, you'd think Postmus would have been better insulated when he started displaying overt signs of drug abuse.
But the Hueston report shows they let their boss embarrass himself again and again.
On March 12, 2007, Postmus was supposed to deliver introductory remarks at a noon fundraiser for his hand-picked successor on the board, Brad Mitzelfelt.
When Postmus didn't show up, someone went to his home looking for him. He arrived at the event stuttering, with dilated pupils and hair askew. "Bill looked like he fell off a park bench," former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin told Hueston.
Witnesses said people were asking if Postmus was "stoned again," implying his drug use was common knowledge by then.
Erwin and two other executive staff members did an intervention after that, whisking him into rehab. But by September, Postmus began looking disheveled again, Hueston's report said, and a staff member searched his apartment, finding canisters of DVD cleaner.
Erwin, a former sheriff's deputy, concluded Postmus was "huffing," inhaling intoxicating fumes.
Doesn't that stuff cause brain damage?
In another shocking episode detailed in Hueston's report, one day in mid-2008, Postmus came to the office looking blue, with white foam around his mouth, according to a secretary. One of his arms was not moving and he was dry-heaving and convulsing.
He laid down for a nap and the secretary, "due to her concern," called his pastor. His pastor? Why didn't she call his doctor? It sounds like he was at death's door.
After lunch, Postmus' spokesman took him to a recorded interview with a newspaper reporter. The recording was posted on the Internet and the resulting story said Postmus was "hiccuping and dry heaving," the Hueston report said.
Why would his staff take him to an interview in that condition?
OK, maybe that was their cry for help. But nothing changed. Four months later, Postmus publicly told the supervisors he had overcome his addiction, only to be arrested on suspicion of drug possession nine days later.
With the report out, Postmus now decries it as unfair and says he wasn't given a chance to respond. He had a chance to respond but refused to talk to Hueston. Let the chips fall where they may.
Cassie MacDuff can be reached at 951-368-9470 or cmacduff@PE.com
I am going to use my home page to comment on the Hueston Report in detail. First, this is a plea to any and all other outside the County law enforcement agencies to get involved in the County investigation and prosecution. It's pretty sad having no faith in local law enforcement doing anything but so far they have done nothing but offer excuses. No charges after 18 months. In a related op-ed story
Time for DA to Get Off Fence
10:00 PM PDT on Saturday, May 16, 2009 Riverside Press Enterprise
CASSIE MACDUFF
Last summer, the San Bernardino County grand jury reported that political activity was taking place in the San Bernardino County assessor's office.
The tangible evidence was political e-mails that flew back and forth among employees during work hours. The grand jury also had the testimony of insiders.
Last week, "broad abuse of county resources and extensive political activity" in then-Assessor Bill Postmus' office was confirmed by special counsel John Hueston's investigation.
Hueston's unequivocal findings remove the district attorney's wiggle room over whether criminal charges are warranted against the employees who turned the executive office into Politics-R-Us.
Soon after the grand jury released its findings, Assistant District Attorney Jim Hackleman told me the law doesn't draw a bright line between "incidental use" of county time and equipment for political activity and when such use becomes criminal.
"We think it has to be more than a single e-mail. ... The question is how many?" he said then.
Here's what the Hueston report says about the quantity of e-mails:
"We uncovered hundreds of politically oriented e-mails just in the small sample of e-mails to which we had access.
"Mr. Postmus, Mr. Aleman and others received daily e-mails from political blogs, commentators and campaigns. Often times these e-mails were circulated and discussed.
"Employees often used e-mail to make specific requests of a political nature, such as requests to transfer campaign money, to obtain political proxies, or to discuss upcoming political events."
I wanted to ask Hackleman whether the evidence compiled by Hueston tilts the "incidental use" equation toward "criminal." But through a spokeswoman, he declined to be interviewed, citing -- once again, no surprise -- the ongoing investigation.
Shouldn't the investigation be wrapped up by now? No, spokeswoman Susan Mickey says it's actually widening. No telling when or where it'll end.
Couldn't prosecutors have charged some former workers for timecard fraud while the rest of the investigation continues? How about the six who were sued by the county last week to recover their fraudulently collected pay?
Hueston took less than four months to document the chicanery. The DA has been at it since 2007. Sure, prosecutors have to prove their cases beyond a reasonable doubt. But come on ...
The only charges filed against former assessor officials so far are tangential: Adam Aleman, tampering with evidence sought by the grand jury; Jim Erwin, failing to properly report a Rolex watch and a trip to New York; Postmus, arrested on suspicion of possessing drugs but not charged yet.
Mickey said no charges will be filed until the investigation is completed. Prosecutors, she said, "are not going to piecemeal it."
They might want to rethink that.
Cassie MacDuff can be reached at 951-368-9470 or cmacduff@PE.com
The Hueston report mentions some whistleblower leads that need to be followed up on.
Mitzelfelt's campaign was the beneficiary of County time and assistance. This needs to be investigated. He was the appointed County Supervisor at the time. Using County resources for political purposes.
Then the Mitzelfelt staff doing political dirty work while on "vacation time", yea right. The last line in the second screen shot is just too funny. "It bears noting...
SB County keeps purchasing process despite claims that Postmus abused it
Joe Nelson, Staff Writer
Posted: 05/23/2009 07:48:43 PM PDT
Despite scathing criticism from the grand jury and a former federal prosecutor over a controversial contract granted to a political consultant in 2007, San Bernardino County hasn't instituted any changes on how such contracts are negotiated.
The scandal-tainted Assessor's Office was able to avoid Board of Supervisors' approval when it secured a purchase order for public-relations work in July 2007 by Michael Richman, a longtime political ally of former assessor Bill Postmus.
In exchange for his pay, Richman, according to reports and former Assessor's Office employees, hardly ever showed up to work, and when he did, it was all about politics and seldom about assessor-related activities.
Jim Erwin, a former assistant assessor, described the Richman contract as "compensation to take care of a buddy," according to a report released by attorney John Hueston, who was retained by the county in January to investigate allegations of misconduct in the Assessor's Office to help the county determine if there were grounds for a lawsuit.
Neither Jim Lindley, the county's former purchasing director, nor Richman's attorney, Steve Baric, returned repeated phone calls Friday seeking comment.
"According to numerous witnesses, Mr. Richman's attendance in the office was sporadic," Hueston said in his report.
"In any event, four witnesses said he was around 4-5 hours for one day a week."
The grand jury made similar findings in its report released in June.
"The Grand Jury found very little results from this contract that benefitted the Assessor's function and that the work product failed to justify the cost of the contract," according to last year's grand jury report.
The "Richman contract" and other alleged misconduct in the Assessor's Office including political activity, widespread time-card fraud and drug abuse has triggered a criminal investigation by the District Attorney's Office. This month, the county filed a lawsuit against Richman, Postmus, former assistant assessors Adam Aleman and Jim Erwin, former taxpayer advocate Greg Eyler and former intergovernmental officer and Rancho Cucamonga City Councilman Rex Gutierrez.
Despite the fallout of the Richman contract, the county has not changed how purchase order contracts are handled.
"At some point, department heads have to be trusted to do the right thing and make sure the services provided by a vendor comply with the PO (purchase order) and serve a county purpose," said David Wert, county spokesman.
He said Lindley, now the director of the county's Public Health Department, signed off on the Richman contract, but only after working with the Assessor's Office and County Administrative Officer Mark Uffer to make sure the purchase order was not "influenced by political pressure" from Postmus.
"Eventually, the Assessor's Office came up with a PO for Richman that passed purchasing muster," Wert said.
As for checks and balances, Wert said they do exist, otherwise Postmus, Aleman and Richman would not have been investigated and sued.
"As the county learns more about the details surrounding the Richman agreement during the litigation process, perhaps some strategies will become apparent that could be instituted to deal with this type of situation more proactively," Wert said. "In the meantime, the fact that the county investigated and is suing over an improper situation is likely to serve as a deterrent to other managers who might otherwise consider not following the rules."
Wert said the county sets a policy limiting purchase order agreements for professional consulting to $50,000. All other purchases have a $100,000 limit.
On March 28, 2007, Richman, who knew Postmus from his work with the San Bernardino County Republican Party, set up a political consulting company, MPR Strategies, according to records on file with the Secretary of State's Office. The purpose was to have a business to secure a future contract with the county, said Jim Erwin, former assistant assessor of operations.
Erwin, one of the defendants in the county's lawsuit, pleaded not guilty to 10 felony counts Wednesday in San Bernardino Superior Court for allegedly failing to properly report about $15,000 in gifts he received from Rancho Cucamonga developer Jeff Burum in January 2007.
The gifts were compensation for Erwin's assistance in helping Burum reach a landmark $102 million settlement with the county in 2006 over an Upland flood-control project.
Wert said Richman could have received the contract as an individual, and didn't need to form a business to qualify under the county's purchasing rules.
Erwin said that is not the case, or at least it wasn't when he was working in the office.
"The instructions given to Aleman and Postmus by purchasing was that Richman had to have a legal entity to contract through. Otherwise he would have to have an employment contract," Erwin said. "So the only other way was for the individual to form an LLC (limited liability company) and have that individual be a contractor for the county."
People close to the investigation who were working in the Assessor's Office during the Richman negotiations say Lindley and Matt Brown, chief of staff for 2nd District Supervisor Paul Biane, who was at the time the board chairman, aided Aleman through the purchase-order process.
Brown denied the allegations Friday in an e-mail.
"I had zero involvement with the Richman PO, and I never offered anyone from the Assessor's Office advice on how to navigate the procurement process," he said.
Aleman, according to Hueston's report, first tried to get a $75,000 contract for Richman, but Lindley told him it would require approval from the Board of Supervisors. Aleman didn't think the board would approve a contract with a political consultant and believed it would create public- relations problems, so he sought another avenue.
Erwin said Lindley suggested the purchase-order method of getting Richman hired as a contractor.
Mark Mosher, information services manager for the Assessor's Office at the time of the investigation, told Hueston that the purchase order was the "path of least resistance" for hiring Richman.
Richman is now the chief of staff for Michelle Steele, who represents the state Board of Equalization's 3rd District, which includes most of San Bernardino County.
Staff writer Josh Dulaney contributed to this report
Report: Postmus built empire on county's clock
04:15 PM PDT on Wednesday, May 13, 2009
By DUANE W. GANG and IMRAN GHORI
The Press-Enterprise
PDF: Read the report from special prosecutor John Hueston and the supervisors' lawsuit
PDF: Read former assistant assessor Adam Aleman's response to prosecutor's report
PDF: Read former Assessor Bill Postmus' reponse to prosecutor's report
Special Section: San Bernardino Co. Probe
San Bernardino County supervisors sued former Assessor Bill Postmus and five others Tuesday after an internal investigation concluded they had defrauded taxpayers of hundreds of thousands of dollars while operating a political machine on county time.
Postmus and his top staff knowingly conspired and engaged in political work while billing taxpayers, the lawsuit contends.
Some staffers rarely showed up for work, were paid higher-than-average salaries, engaged in questionable hiring practices and worked on political campaigns for Republican candidates, according to the report by attorney John C. Hueston, hired by the county to investigate the assessor's office under Postmus.
One employee reportedly showed up to work drunk. Another was paid for his work as a Rancho Cucamonga city councilman. Another was abusive and broke county cell phones by slamming them against walls, the investigation states.
Postmus denied any wrongdoing and called the report a "taxpayer-funded hit piece."
The investigation released Tuesday paints a scathing picture of Postmus and his executive staff, using the office for political purposes with little care for public money or the office's mission to serve taxpayers by setting property values for taxation purposes. The report was based on interviews with employees of the assessor's office, including the executive staff.
"In the words of one former assessor office executive employee, the work of the assessor's office was incidental to the political work pursued by the executive employees under the tenure of Bill Postmus," Hueston said. "Our investigation uncovered a scheme by which Bill Postmus brought in an executive staff at taxpayer expense to operate as his personal political machine."
The release of the 33-page Hueston report came after supervisors met for more than two hours Tuesday afternoon in a closed session.
It is the latest chapter in an ongoing scandal involving Postmus. The district attorney's office continues a criminal investigation and a spokeswoman said the report would assist prosecutors in their case.
Postmus is a former chairman of the Board of Supervisors and former head of the county Republican Party. He once was considered a rising political star but resigned as assessor in February.
In January, he was arrested for investigation of drug violations after a search warrant was served at his home. He has not been charged.
The report details concerns raised by employees about Postmus' alleged drug use. One employee told investigators Postmus came to the office "looking blue with white foam around his mouth. One of his arms was not moving and he was dry heaving and convulsing," the report stated.
Postmus has admitted to battling a drug addiction and said he has entered rehabilitation.
The county hired Hueston, a former U.S. attorney who prosecuted Enron executives, in January to investigate Postmus and build a case for his removal from office. After Postmus resigned, the county asked Hueston, whose services have cost the county about $225,000 so far, to complete his work.
Postmus, in an e-mailed statement, called the report unfair and lashed out at the supervisors for not giving him a chance to respond.
"This so-called report is neither shocking nor surprising," he said. "It was always intended to be as negative as possible toward my former office and those who worked for me."
If he had stayed in office and the supervisors had pursued his removal, Postmus said the county would have provided him an attorney and a chance to respond to the allegations.
"This is not just unfair," Postmus wrote. "The board's manipulation of a structured process for political ends goes against the most basic levels of American fairness and sets a dangerous precedent."
Executive staff
In addition to Postmus, the county sued four of his executive staff members -- former assistant assessors Adam Aleman and Jim Erwin, former intergovernmental affairs officer Rex Gutierrez and former taxpayer advocate Greg Eyler.
The county also sued a political consultant -- Mike Richman and his MPR Strategies firm -- that Postmus hired at taxpayer expense through a no-bid contract.
The civil complaint alleges violations to the California False Claims Act, a breach of fiduciary duty, improper expenditure of public funds, unjust enrichment and civil conspiracy.
"As a taxpayer and as a public official, I find the activities detailed in the report deeply disturbing," Board of Supervisors Chairman Gary Ovitt said in a statement.
Aleman edited the Republican Web site redcounty.com on county time, directed staff to assist in fundraisers and provided political support to candidates, according to the report.
Aleman was arrested last year on six felony charges of destroying public documents and providing false information to a grand jury. He has pleaded not guilty.
In a statement, Aleman said he never knowingly authorized political work on county time.
"I think it is clear that the report intends to portray only one side of that office's activities -- the negative one," Aleman said by e-mail.
Erwin, who later became chief of staff to Supervisor Neil Derry, criticized the county for including him in the lawsuit. As a result of a separate investigation, Erwin was charged in March with 10 felony counts for not properly reporting gifts he had received from a developer while assistant assessor. His arraignment is scheduled for next week.
Gutierrez, a Rancho Cucamonga city councilman, socialized and did city council work on county time, the report states.
Gutierrez was paid $59,883 when he was hired in March 2007 and immediately received a 10 percent raise.
"Mr. Gutierrez's work habits were so irregular that he was labeled with the nickname 'Intergalactic Officer,' " the report found.
When his position was being eliminated, Gutierrez asked Rancho Cucamonga developer Jeff Burum to intervene on his behalf and ask Postmus to extend his job. He got the extension.
Burum is a co-managing member of Colonies Partners, a development firm that received a $102 million legal settlement from the county in November 2006.
Gutierrez, who later went to work for the county Economic Development Agency, was terminated Tuesday afternoon, county officials said. He did not return a message seeking comment.
In an interview earlier this year, Gutierrez said he did his best in the assessor's office.
"I did the job I was given and did the best I could and represented my boss," he said.
Eyler, the taxpayer advocate, did little to interact with taxpayers and often didn't know how to respond to questions about property tax issues, the report found.
Postmus' executive secretary told investigators that Eyler once told staff during working hours that he and Postmus had just taken in a movie. Some witnesses said he came to work drunk. Erwin sent Eyler home because of the alcohol issue only to later be chastised by Postmus for doing so, the report states.
Eyler denied many of the allegations when interviewed by investigators, and could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
MISUSE OF FUNDS
Postmus expanded his executive staff from four to 12 people even before he officially took office in January 2007. While he was still a supervisor, the board approved the creation of the larger staff.
The investigation found that the larger staff and other expenditures were not needed. Among the highlights:
A contract for Richman was expanded after Richman lost his job as executive director of the San Bernardino County Republican Party. Richman received $49,200 for the contract, up from $37,000 but just under the $50,000 threshold that would have required a public board vote.
According to the report, Aleman explained the higher amount was set to get Richman the maximum without board approval.
Richman did little work for the county, the report states. He declined through an attorney to be interviewed for Hueston's report.
Richman currently is chief deputy for Board of Equalization member Michelle Steel. He could not be reached for comment.
Postmus hired Scott Becker, a longtime friend, to hang 14 pictures of himself in the assessor's office, even though county staff could have done the work. Becker was paid $1,434, or about $102 per picture.
Postmus' secretary, Sheila Raines, called the payment "irresponsible," according to the report, and offered to do the work for free. Postmus refused.
Hueston attempted to interview Becker but he warned investigators he would "shoot their heads off with a .12 gauge shotgun" if they showed up on his property.
At least two tuition reimbursements provided through the assessor's office potentially violated county policy.
Aleman received $8,280 to complete his undergraduate degree and Eyler received about $1,000. Aleman in a statement said the tuition reimbursement received proper clearance from county officials.
Executive staffers misused county equipment, broke cell phones and used them for political activity.
Aleman broke a number of phones by slamming them against walls in fits of rage.
The report added that the assessor's office still is searching for a laptop that had been issued to Aleman and also is waiting for Eyler and Ted Lehrer, Postmus' public information officer, to pay large phone bills. One of Lehrer's bills ranges from $1,600 to $1,900.
Board reaction
In a footnote to the report, Hueston states his office received many calls and e-mails from purported whistleblowers, most of whom raised issues beyond the scope of his investigation. One tip that may be investigated further raises the allegation of a "broad pay-to-play scheme involving San Bernardino land deals and assistance with planning and assessment issues."
Derry, whose county supervisor campaign reportedly received support from Postmus' executive staff, said the allegations raised in the report may just be the beginning and that the civil lawsuit, which will include an extensive discovery phase, could yield information on more wrongdoing by Postmus and his former employees.
"This is not going to be the end of it," he said.
Derry said he was surprised by the inclusion of Erwin in the defendants list.
"Nobody wants to sue a friend but I made the commitment to follow through on the Hueston report and the recommendations of the special counsel," Derry said.
Derry said he was disappointed in part by some of the allegations uncovered and said Erwin "perhaps could have taken a more preventative role." But he also defended Erwin as the chief whistleblower who provided Hueston with a roadmap of who and what to investigate.
In an interview Tuesday, Erwin said the county is "aiming at everybody they possibly can."
He called the lawsuit a "slap on the face."
"The county has no clue what it is doing," he said. "I am sure they would have just rather swept this under the rug. ... I was one of the ones that brought a bunch of this stuff out."
Postmus' former spokesman Ted Lehrer, who was among those interviewed for the report, accuses Erwin of spending at least an hour a day on running Derry's campaign between August to October 2007, when he left the office after a disagreement with Postmus.
Derry said he was unaware of any political activity on his behalf by Erwin at the assessor's office. He said his campaign did not begin in earnest until 2008, after Erwin left the office.
Lehrer also is cited as the source of allegations that Supervisor Brad Mitzelfelt sought assistance from assessor's employees with his 2008 election campaign, including a request for property records related to one of his opponents, Rita Vogler.
Mitzelfelt said the request for records was made by an employee on her vacation time. His staff provided a copy of her timecard and a date-stamped request form showing that it did not take place on county time.
"I did not and would not encourage county employees to take part in political activities when they're on the clock," he said.
Supervisors began hearing rumors about some of the allegations but did not know the full extent of what was going on, he said.
"The Board of Supervisors does not supervise elected offices on a daily basis," he said.
In the end, the report found Postmus and Aleman the most responsible.
"Even if the county cannot fully recoup its losses, filing civil suits against corrupt employees sets a powerful precedent for all current and future county employees," the report states.
Staff writer Jim Miller contributed to this report.
Reach Duane W. Gang at 951-368-9547 or dgang@PE.com
Reach Imran Ghori at 951-368-9558 or ighori@PE.com
POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
A synopsis of political activity allegedly conducted by executive staff members in the San Bernardino County assessor's office, as outlined in the Hueston report released Tuesday:
REDCOUNTY.COM: Adam Aleman, who was assistant assessor, is described as an editor of the Web site Redcounty.com, a conservative Web site designed to provide positive information about people loyal to Aleman and negative information about people Aleman did not like. Aleman and Ted Lehrer, a communications officer, provided information for the site, and Assessor Bill Postmus encouraged them to "keep it up."
POLITICAL FUNDRAISERS: Assessor's office employees were asked to assist at fundraisers for local politicians, including fundraisers for Postmus and Rex Gutierrez, a Rancho Cucamonga councilman who was an intergovernmental relations officer for the assessor.
MITZELFELT CAMPAIGN: Lehrer said he was asked by Aleman to help with Brad Mitzelfelt's campaign for San Bernardino County supervisor. Lehrer said he wrote letters to editors, composed blog entries, walked precincts and drove Postmus to strategy sessions with Mitzelfelt.
Lehrer heard Aleman call Mitzelfelt on the phone during working hours to tell Mitzelfelt that certain tasks had been completed.
Numerous witnesses said Aleman asked a staff member to pull the property records of a family member of Rita Vogler, who was running against Mitzelfelt. The records were to be used as political ammunition against Vogler, according to the witnesses.
MITT ROMNEY CAMPAIGN: Aleman told Lehrer to write favorable content about Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Redcounty.com. Lehrer and other assessor's office employees were assigned to staff Romney's San Bernardino County headquarters.
According to former executive secretary Josh White, Aleman asked White to help Tim Johnson, district director to Supervisor Paul Biane, run Romney's campaign in the Inland Empire.
White said he did this during business hours and that he also designed e-mails sent by the group, Inland Empire Volunteers for Romney, and signed by Johnson.
SHAWN STEEL AND MICHELLE STEEL CAMPAIGNS: Aleman and consultant Mike Richman, who was under contract with the assessor's office, worked on behalf of Shawn Steel, a candidate for the board of the Republican National Committee. Lehman said that Richman spent almost all of 2008 collecting support for Shawn Steel.
Shawn Steel is married to Michelle Steel, another of Richman's political clients and a close Postmus supporter. Michelle Steel's campaign for the state Board of Equalization was frequently discussed in strategy sessions at the assessor's office. Richman was also a paid consultant for Neil Derry's campaign for county supervisor.
OTHER ACTIVITY: Aleman instructed assessor's office employees to work at campaign events and assist political candidates. Gutierrez attended fundraisers for himself and filled out campaign forms from his desk at the assessor's office.
Witnesses also said Richman worked to find news media opportunities for Steve Poizner, now state insurance commissioner, and that assessor's office staffers recruited candidates to run for the county GOP's governing body and helped candidates for city clerk, including Joseph Turner, who was a friend of Aleman and Postmus.
Turner is currently on Derry's staff.
