From iepolitics.com
According to reports on KFI 640’s John and Ken show, it turns out San Bernardino County Kari Verjil’s invalid signature figures are not quite accurate. As Mike Schroeder, coordinator for the recall effort has said all along, signature gatherers registered unregistered voters at the same time the petitions were signed, which is legal. According to reports, Verjil negated those signatures.
I am told that recall coordinators have begun an audit of the rejected signatures. Of the first 40 rejected signatures reviewed, 25 have in fact been determined to have been valid after all. This is a disgrace. Once again, one of our county officials has made our county look like its run by a bunch of incompetent hicks.
And it may be. A little over a year ago, I met with Joy Chadwick, now-Deputy Chief of Staff for Chairman of the Board Gary Ovitt. During that meeting Joy chastised me for exercising my rights as a United States citizen when I filed a formal complaint with Secretary of State Debra Bowen’s office over the incompetence and favoritism shown towards certain candidates by Registrar of Voters Kari Verjil. She suggested that part of the reason I was having problems on the job was because I was outspoken about official misconduct. And like most of the rest of the officials I have dealt with on the Fifth Floor, she failed to conduct the investigation she promised me and, as usual, my complaints to her office about official misconduct was swept under the rug.
Now, here we are over a year later, and Joy is working for the Chairman’s office and her boss is up for re-election. And the county continues to sweep official misconduct under the rug. So, I’d like an answer. Does Supervisor Ovitt support this kind of incompetence? Does he care about the election process? Based on what his deputy Chief of Staff said to me, he supports this incompetence. And that is shameful. I hope Joy is wrong.
I know from my investigation last year that Kari Verjil plays favorites, making sure certain elected officials are immediately aware of anything their opponents file with the Registrar of Voter’s office. She also aids those that protect her to the detriment of other candidates as she did for Supervisors Dennis Hansberger and Brad Mitzelfelt last year.
It’s hard to say if the current fiasco is Verjil’s doing or was done on behalf of an official who supports Anthony Adams. It does not matter in the end if it changes the outcome or not. What matters is that it was done to begin with. The Registrar of Voters office should be above reproach. Today, instead, it is wrought with accusations of fraud and incompetence.
If the firing of Mark Uffer is not just a fluke but a serious effort at cleaning up San Bernardino County, then this Board of Supervisors needs to act immediately to restore the integrity of the elections process in this county. Kari Verjil is a Mark Uffer appointee and was protected by Mark. It’s time for her to go and its time for the Board of Supervisors to show its constituents its serious about restoring integrity to the elections process. And Supervisors Ovitt and Mitzelfelt need to be the loudest voices demanding Verjil’s resignation.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Another day, another editorial in the Press Enterprise
www.iepolitics.com
Shocking. Another day, another editorial in the Press Enterprise blasting the constitutional rights of politically-charged defendants Bill Postmus and Jim Erwin.
In a wholly-unsubstantiated editorial the PE criticizes former county official Jim Erwin and former county elected official Bill Postmus for exercising the rights granted them by the legal system. The PE called a perfectly acceptable court motion by Jim Erwin an "assault" on that legal system, and praised the ruling's outcome that resulted in a setback for Erwin.
The PE continues its unrelenting campaign against Bill Postmus and those associated with his former office. In the eyes of the Riverside Press Enterprise, Postmus, et al, are not innocent until proven guilty, they are guilty. Period.
In the PE's opinion the guilt of Postmus - and Erwin - is assured because the elected district attorney says it is. Case closed.
One would think that prosecutorial supremacy would be relegated to the annals of history, as seen in South America under right-wing military juntas or in the former USSR.
Sorry, PE editorial board. It doesn't work that way in the United States.
Bill Postmus and his "cronies" (their word, not ours) have every right to exercise the legal tools available to them. That means filing court motions, requests for information, issuing court pleadings, and seeking resolution via the proper process.
We have these rights because the founders realized that, by it's nature, the government has far more resources than an individual can ever hope to have. Even so, an individual can be charged without merit, and when the individual is a public figure, being charged is as bad as being convicted.
What Postmus and Erwin are doing is nothing different from the actions of hundreds of defendants in courtrooms across this country in every criminal case.
But the case against Postmus is different. It was launched by a political officer against other political officers. There is an obvious conflict, yet the PE continues to stick their head in the sand and ignore obvious facts.
District Attorney Mike Ramos is a controversial politician, and his investigation should be questioned and analyzed, so that the public can be assured the investigation's conclusions are 100% accurate.
This ambitious politician has already cost county taxpayers $350,000 for illegally firing a potential political rival. He is currently under two investigations for malfeasance. He has raised and accepted contributions from convicted money launderers.
Youthful politician Bill Postmus and former street deputy sheriff Jim Erwin are an embarrassment to the county after being charged by a district attorney with Ramos' baggage?
The Riverside Press Enterprise's blatant and shocking refusal to launch their investigations into the public life of Mike Ramos and his actions and conduct is a gross dereliction of duty. Edward Murrow and Walter Cronkite would be appalled.
Rushing to judgment and accepting a prosecutor's version of events means the PE would be right at home in Videla's Argentina or Stalinist Russia.
The PE needs to end this double standard in their treatment of Ramos' prisoners versus the reported ethical shortfalls of Ramos himself.
Shocking. Another day, another editorial in the Press Enterprise blasting the constitutional rights of politically-charged defendants Bill Postmus and Jim Erwin.
In a wholly-unsubstantiated editorial the PE criticizes former county official Jim Erwin and former county elected official Bill Postmus for exercising the rights granted them by the legal system. The PE called a perfectly acceptable court motion by Jim Erwin an "assault" on that legal system, and praised the ruling's outcome that resulted in a setback for Erwin.
The PE continues its unrelenting campaign against Bill Postmus and those associated with his former office. In the eyes of the Riverside Press Enterprise, Postmus, et al, are not innocent until proven guilty, they are guilty. Period.
In the PE's opinion the guilt of Postmus - and Erwin - is assured because the elected district attorney says it is. Case closed.
One would think that prosecutorial supremacy would be relegated to the annals of history, as seen in South America under right-wing military juntas or in the former USSR.
Sorry, PE editorial board. It doesn't work that way in the United States.
Bill Postmus and his "cronies" (their word, not ours) have every right to exercise the legal tools available to them. That means filing court motions, requests for information, issuing court pleadings, and seeking resolution via the proper process.
We have these rights because the founders realized that, by it's nature, the government has far more resources than an individual can ever hope to have. Even so, an individual can be charged without merit, and when the individual is a public figure, being charged is as bad as being convicted.
What Postmus and Erwin are doing is nothing different from the actions of hundreds of defendants in courtrooms across this country in every criminal case.
But the case against Postmus is different. It was launched by a political officer against other political officers. There is an obvious conflict, yet the PE continues to stick their head in the sand and ignore obvious facts.
District Attorney Mike Ramos is a controversial politician, and his investigation should be questioned and analyzed, so that the public can be assured the investigation's conclusions are 100% accurate.
This ambitious politician has already cost county taxpayers $350,000 for illegally firing a potential political rival. He is currently under two investigations for malfeasance. He has raised and accepted contributions from convicted money launderers.
Youthful politician Bill Postmus and former street deputy sheriff Jim Erwin are an embarrassment to the county after being charged by a district attorney with Ramos' baggage?
The Riverside Press Enterprise's blatant and shocking refusal to launch their investigations into the public life of Mike Ramos and his actions and conduct is a gross dereliction of duty. Edward Murrow and Walter Cronkite would be appalled.
Rushing to judgment and accepting a prosecutor's version of events means the PE would be right at home in Videla's Argentina or Stalinist Russia.
The PE needs to end this double standard in their treatment of Ramos' prisoners versus the reported ethical shortfalls of Ramos himself.
iePolitics: Runner-ing away from the San Bernardino County Republican Party
From iepolitics.com
In a long and expansive news article on the collapse of the San Bernardino County Republican Party that appeared this past Sunday in the San Bernardino Sun, one quotable source is none other than Drew Mercy, longtime political consigliere to the husband-and-wife team of GOP State Senator George Runner and Assembly member Sharon Runner.
The Runners have occupied legislative seats in San Bernardino County’s High Desert region for nearly a decade. Sharon Runner first won election in 2002, and George Runner entered San Bernardino County as a state senator in 2004.
In the San Bernardino Sun article, Mr. Mercy is on record as stating “The fallout from the Postmus scandal has thrown everything for a loop,” in regards to GOP underwhelming performance in 2008,
specifically in the region where the Runners have long reigned supreme.
Drew Mercy goes on to state that a legislative campaign in the High Desert utilized its own resources to scrape out a victory in a Victorville-area State Assembly seat that was won by a much narrower margin than expected. Mercy managed the campaign of GOP nominee Steve Knight, who barely prevailed in what had been Sharon Runner’s district, for whom Mercy also carried water.
Oddly, Campaign Manager Mercy publicly stated that he opted to be involved in a Ventura County state legislative contest many miles removed from San Bernardino County.
Therein lies another identifiable problem with the San Bernardino County Republican Party: Absolutely ZERO support from the politically powerful Runner couple or their chief aide, who admitted that he abandoned San Bernardino County campaigns, rather than work to ensure the election of county Republicans. That’s not just irresponsible, that’s borderline malpractice, considering Mr. Knight’s close result.
If Drew Mercy or the Runner Duo were seriously interested in rebuilding the San Bernardino County Republican Party, they would act and not just talk. Neither Runner have contributed any significant resources towards voter registration, a communications program, or a financing plan.
Like the singer of the song “Paper Planes,” the Runner faction is MIA in supporting an effective Republican Party, and Mercy’s own admission that he and the Runners utilize support independent of the County Party illustrate the intentional separation between the two camps that existed before Postmus, during Postmus, and after Postmus’ chairmanship.
This absence and lack of direct involvement means no one from the Runner apparatus is fit to constructively criticize the local party.
Oh sure, they offer criticism, but not a plan for construction.
Until the Runners and Drew Mercy can walk the walk and back up their words with action, they are in no way, shape, or form fit to criticize previous effective leadership of the local GOP.
Ironically, as criticism of the Republican Party is offered, each termed-out Runner instead is busy trying to figure out the next rung on the political ladder for which to aim…or at least find a do-nothing government commission on which to sit.
Both when the San Bernardino County Republican Party flourished and when it began to flounder, the High Desert husband-wife tag team Runner-ed away and were nowhere to be found. Same as today.
At least they’re consistent.
In a long and expansive news article on the collapse of the San Bernardino County Republican Party that appeared this past Sunday in the San Bernardino Sun, one quotable source is none other than Drew Mercy, longtime political consigliere to the husband-and-wife team of GOP State Senator George Runner and Assembly member Sharon Runner.
The Runners have occupied legislative seats in San Bernardino County’s High Desert region for nearly a decade. Sharon Runner first won election in 2002, and George Runner entered San Bernardino County as a state senator in 2004.
In the San Bernardino Sun article, Mr. Mercy is on record as stating “The fallout from the Postmus scandal has thrown everything for a loop,” in regards to GOP underwhelming performance in 2008,
specifically in the region where the Runners have long reigned supreme.
Drew Mercy goes on to state that a legislative campaign in the High Desert utilized its own resources to scrape out a victory in a Victorville-area State Assembly seat that was won by a much narrower margin than expected. Mercy managed the campaign of GOP nominee Steve Knight, who barely prevailed in what had been Sharon Runner’s district, for whom Mercy also carried water.
Oddly, Campaign Manager Mercy publicly stated that he opted to be involved in a Ventura County state legislative contest many miles removed from San Bernardino County.
Therein lies another identifiable problem with the San Bernardino County Republican Party: Absolutely ZERO support from the politically powerful Runner couple or their chief aide, who admitted that he abandoned San Bernardino County campaigns, rather than work to ensure the election of county Republicans. That’s not just irresponsible, that’s borderline malpractice, considering Mr. Knight’s close result.
If Drew Mercy or the Runner Duo were seriously interested in rebuilding the San Bernardino County Republican Party, they would act and not just talk. Neither Runner have contributed any significant resources towards voter registration, a communications program, or a financing plan.
Like the singer of the song “Paper Planes,” the Runner faction is MIA in supporting an effective Republican Party, and Mercy’s own admission that he and the Runners utilize support independent of the County Party illustrate the intentional separation between the two camps that existed before Postmus, during Postmus, and after Postmus’ chairmanship.
This absence and lack of direct involvement means no one from the Runner apparatus is fit to constructively criticize the local party.
Oh sure, they offer criticism, but not a plan for construction.
Until the Runners and Drew Mercy can walk the walk and back up their words with action, they are in no way, shape, or form fit to criticize previous effective leadership of the local GOP.
Ironically, as criticism of the Republican Party is offered, each termed-out Runner instead is busy trying to figure out the next rung on the political ladder for which to aim…or at least find a do-nothing government commission on which to sit.
Both when the San Bernardino County Republican Party flourished and when it began to flounder, the High Desert husband-wife tag team Runner-ed away and were nowhere to be found. Same as today.
At least they’re consistent.
iePolitics Commentary: Local newspapers display arrogance, Part 2
From iepolitics.com
The ink wasn’t even dry on the this evenings earlier commentary, when hot out of the Riverside Press Enterprise editorial board comes another gem titled Enough evasion.
Last time I heard, the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights just might lead one to believe that citizens of this great country were entitled to due process under the law and to be judged by a jury of their peers.
Not the editorial board of a local newspaper.
I could be mistaken though, since newspapers seem to know everything about everyone and every subject.
The Press Enterprise, which is known for its cutting editorial titles such as “John Smith needs to go”, “Time for Arnold Ziffle to resign”, or “Fire Huckleberry now” couldn’t resist this one.
I expected to see a column like this yesterday, on a day when the paper has it’s highest readership.
Unless something has happened without me being present, Friday was the first substantive proceeding in “my case”. With obviously more to come.
The editorial board of this local paper says don’t appeal the denial of a motion to recuse. Amazing! I never knew these newspaper folks had law degrees.
During my time in politics I’ve never been a doll of the newspapers, especially the Press Enterprise. The paper knows it and the editorial shows it. Heck, if the paper had its way the four indicted members of the San Jacinto City Council would have been executed by lethal injection last week. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending the indicted council members.
I guess a dying publication has to try and delay the inevitable as best it can.
A little tip. It’s not working.
Maybe instead of the name of the paper being The Press Enterprise, the name should be changed to The Riverside Oracle.
After all, when things don’t go the way the paper believes they should, we are subjected to phrases like, miscarriage of justice, idiot jurors, technicalities, and bad law.
The papers display of pompous arrogance is unbecoming any newspaper.
The ink wasn’t even dry on the this evenings earlier commentary, when hot out of the Riverside Press Enterprise editorial board comes another gem titled Enough evasion.
Last time I heard, the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights just might lead one to believe that citizens of this great country were entitled to due process under the law and to be judged by a jury of their peers.
Not the editorial board of a local newspaper.
I could be mistaken though, since newspapers seem to know everything about everyone and every subject.
The Press Enterprise, which is known for its cutting editorial titles such as “John Smith needs to go”, “Time for Arnold Ziffle to resign”, or “Fire Huckleberry now” couldn’t resist this one.
I expected to see a column like this yesterday, on a day when the paper has it’s highest readership.
Unless something has happened without me being present, Friday was the first substantive proceeding in “my case”. With obviously more to come.
The editorial board of this local paper says don’t appeal the denial of a motion to recuse. Amazing! I never knew these newspaper folks had law degrees.
During my time in politics I’ve never been a doll of the newspapers, especially the Press Enterprise. The paper knows it and the editorial shows it. Heck, if the paper had its way the four indicted members of the San Jacinto City Council would have been executed by lethal injection last week. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not defending the indicted council members.
I guess a dying publication has to try and delay the inevitable as best it can.
A little tip. It’s not working.
Maybe instead of the name of the paper being The Press Enterprise, the name should be changed to The Riverside Oracle.
After all, when things don’t go the way the paper believes they should, we are subjected to phrases like, miscarriage of justice, idiot jurors, technicalities, and bad law.
The papers display of pompous arrogance is unbecoming any newspaper.
Republicans trail Democrats by 21,000 in county Republicans retain slim lead in Victor Valley
From vvdailynews.com
A year after Democratic voters surpassed Republican voters in San Bernardino County, the blue party’s lead has swelled to 21,397 more voters registered as Democrats than Republicans, according to the county Registrar of Voters.
The countywide swing toward Democrats represents a dramatic shift in the county, where two years ago Republicans outnumbered Democrats by more than 34,000. In the Victor Valley, however, Republicans still slightly edge out Democrats — by a slim 1,660 voters — with Republicans comprising 39.3 percent of registered voters in Adelanto, Apple Valley, Hesperia and Victorville.
In Victorville and Adelanto, Democrats outnumber Republicans by 10 to 24 percentage points, while the GOP has the majority in Hesperia and Apple Valley by 5 to 17 percentage points, respectively. “We’ve been lucky in the Victor Valley, no matter how you cut it we’ve stayed fairly consistent in most of our nonpartisan races, school boards, city and town councils, they are predominately dominated by Republicans,” said Pat Orr, 1st District caucus chair of the San Bernardino County Republican Party. “That’s the way people prefer it because they want their hometown government to be conservative.” The Democratic Party declared the county blue for the first time in more than six years when Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 2,800 voters in October 2008.
Democrats secured a 20,000-voter lead over Republicans by August. “If you look at the demographics of the county, there is no reason for San Bernardino to be a red county, and it’s not anymore,” said Carol Robb, chair of the San Bernardino County Democrat Party. “It’s working people, it’s people with color, there aren’t that many really rich people or even semi-rich people in San Bernardino County. It’s just made up of good hard-working ordinary people and the Democrat party appeals to them.”
This month Republican leaders are embarking on an aggressive registration campaign to gear up for the June primaries. They have attributed their party’s local decline to a faltering voter registration program, while Democrats set up new local clubs and focused on registration drives and booths at public events.
President Barack Obama’s election attracted swarms of new Democratic voters, said Robb, who said last year she helped county residents in their 50s and 60s register for the first time. However, Orr said the 2008 election was driven by “droves of people that probably won’t come out to vote ever again.” The shift to a blue county also follows a wave of corruption allegations in county offices. Former 1st District Supervisor, Assessor and Republican Party Chair Bill Postmus is facing nine felony charges related to embezzlement and drug possession. In a separate civil suit, county supervisors allege Postmus used his post as county Assessor to run a political operation and raise funds for the Republican Party.
Registration has shifted to favor Democrats in the 2nd and 4th districts, where Republican county supervisors Paul Biane and Gary Ovitt are up for re-election. All six countywide elected offices are up for election, including district attorney, auditor controller recorder-clerk, sheriff, treasurer-tax collector, assessor and superintendent of schools. “ We also have a real shot at a couple of Assembly seats where there’s been dramatic shifts in voter registration,” Robb said, such as the 36th District currently held by Assemblyman Steve Knight, Palmdale, who represents Victorville and Adelanto.
The deciding factor in 2010 local, state and federal elections could be independent voters, according to Orr. Just over 18 percent of voters in the Victor Valley are registered as nonpartisan. “I’m not sure the registration really matters a hoot,” Orr said, with more than 140,000 voters registered as nonpartisan countywide. “It’s who you put up.”
A year after Democratic voters surpassed Republican voters in San Bernardino County, the blue party’s lead has swelled to 21,397 more voters registered as Democrats than Republicans, according to the county Registrar of Voters.
The countywide swing toward Democrats represents a dramatic shift in the county, where two years ago Republicans outnumbered Democrats by more than 34,000. In the Victor Valley, however, Republicans still slightly edge out Democrats — by a slim 1,660 voters — with Republicans comprising 39.3 percent of registered voters in Adelanto, Apple Valley, Hesperia and Victorville.
In Victorville and Adelanto, Democrats outnumber Republicans by 10 to 24 percentage points, while the GOP has the majority in Hesperia and Apple Valley by 5 to 17 percentage points, respectively. “We’ve been lucky in the Victor Valley, no matter how you cut it we’ve stayed fairly consistent in most of our nonpartisan races, school boards, city and town councils, they are predominately dominated by Republicans,” said Pat Orr, 1st District caucus chair of the San Bernardino County Republican Party. “That’s the way people prefer it because they want their hometown government to be conservative.” The Democratic Party declared the county blue for the first time in more than six years when Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 2,800 voters in October 2008.
Democrats secured a 20,000-voter lead over Republicans by August. “If you look at the demographics of the county, there is no reason for San Bernardino to be a red county, and it’s not anymore,” said Carol Robb, chair of the San Bernardino County Democrat Party. “It’s working people, it’s people with color, there aren’t that many really rich people or even semi-rich people in San Bernardino County. It’s just made up of good hard-working ordinary people and the Democrat party appeals to them.”
This month Republican leaders are embarking on an aggressive registration campaign to gear up for the June primaries. They have attributed their party’s local decline to a faltering voter registration program, while Democrats set up new local clubs and focused on registration drives and booths at public events.
President Barack Obama’s election attracted swarms of new Democratic voters, said Robb, who said last year she helped county residents in their 50s and 60s register for the first time. However, Orr said the 2008 election was driven by “droves of people that probably won’t come out to vote ever again.” The shift to a blue county also follows a wave of corruption allegations in county offices. Former 1st District Supervisor, Assessor and Republican Party Chair Bill Postmus is facing nine felony charges related to embezzlement and drug possession. In a separate civil suit, county supervisors allege Postmus used his post as county Assessor to run a political operation and raise funds for the Republican Party.
Registration has shifted to favor Democrats in the 2nd and 4th districts, where Republican county supervisors Paul Biane and Gary Ovitt are up for re-election. All six countywide elected offices are up for election, including district attorney, auditor controller recorder-clerk, sheriff, treasurer-tax collector, assessor and superintendent of schools. “ We also have a real shot at a couple of Assembly seats where there’s been dramatic shifts in voter registration,” Robb said, such as the 36th District currently held by Assemblyman Steve Knight, Palmdale, who represents Victorville and Adelanto.
The deciding factor in 2010 local, state and federal elections could be independent voters, according to Orr. Just over 18 percent of voters in the Victor Valley are registered as nonpartisan. “I’m not sure the registration really matters a hoot,” Orr said, with more than 140,000 voters registered as nonpartisan countywide. “It’s who you put up.”
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Blame Bill Postmus For Local GOP Woes?
From iepolitics.com
In a story today in the San Bernardino Sun newspaper, the new chair of the San Bernardino County Republican Party, Robert Rego, blames the party's serious woes on, who else? Bill Postmus.
Now everyone knows that Bill Postmus, who served as chair of the county party from 2004-2007, is currently facing legal challenges, and earlier this year battled a damaging drugs addiction. Ouch!
Although Postmus maintains his innocence, his name nonetheless has become synonymous with political trouble.
Therefore it is easy to blame big bad Bill Postmus for the San Bernardino County Republican Party's present dreadful condition.
But assigning blame on Postmus ignores simple reality. First, Postmus left the chairmanship nearly two-and-a-half years ago. In politics, that's not merely a "long time," that's an eternity. Since Postmus has been gone, San Bernardino County has had five elections.
What Bill Postmus and his team of political professionals brought to the table for San Bernardino County was an effective Republican Party that was loved by GOP candidates and voters and feared by Democrats. Under Postmus' helm, the county's voter rolls swelled to a peak of 30,000 more Republicans than Democrats.
These Results made San Bernardino County the envy of many GOP operations statewide. Longtime and aspiring Republican politicos courted Postmus' support and that of his team. Fundraising records were shattered by the party, and the results were astounding. In 2004, 85 percent of GOP-endorsed candidates won their election contests.
Today, not much is left. Postmus and his professionals are gone, and so is the strength, heart and soul of the local party. The two individuals who had the best chance of bringing back the party's good fortunes were hounded out several months ago (Chair Anthony Adams and ED Matt Schumsky.)
So all that's left for the local Republican Party to do is bake a blame cake. And the "leaders" of the party - and I use that term loosely - are taking the easy way out and blaming Postmus and the economic recession.
Yet the recession hasn't affected local Democrats' ability to organize efficiently. Nor has it diminished voter enthusiasm at a time when voters nationwide are asking serious questions about the policies of the Democratic Party.
Perhaps Mr. Rego was right that Postmus wasn't good at coddling certain embers of the Central Committee. But Postmus got results, unlike any chair before or since. Every successful local political party has a strong leader and executive; Postmus ensured that the San Bernardino County Republican Party had both.
It is too early to issue a verdict on Robert Rego's chairmanship of the party. But if he were serious about rebuilding the party, he could start by looking towards the future and not dwelling on imaginary causes of the party's current woes.
In a story today in the San Bernardino Sun newspaper, the new chair of the San Bernardino County Republican Party, Robert Rego, blames the party's serious woes on, who else? Bill Postmus.
Now everyone knows that Bill Postmus, who served as chair of the county party from 2004-2007, is currently facing legal challenges, and earlier this year battled a damaging drugs addiction. Ouch!
Although Postmus maintains his innocence, his name nonetheless has become synonymous with political trouble.
Therefore it is easy to blame big bad Bill Postmus for the San Bernardino County Republican Party's present dreadful condition.
But assigning blame on Postmus ignores simple reality. First, Postmus left the chairmanship nearly two-and-a-half years ago. In politics, that's not merely a "long time," that's an eternity. Since Postmus has been gone, San Bernardino County has had five elections.
What Bill Postmus and his team of political professionals brought to the table for San Bernardino County was an effective Republican Party that was loved by GOP candidates and voters and feared by Democrats. Under Postmus' helm, the county's voter rolls swelled to a peak of 30,000 more Republicans than Democrats.
These Results made San Bernardino County the envy of many GOP operations statewide. Longtime and aspiring Republican politicos courted Postmus' support and that of his team. Fundraising records were shattered by the party, and the results were astounding. In 2004, 85 percent of GOP-endorsed candidates won their election contests.
Today, not much is left. Postmus and his professionals are gone, and so is the strength, heart and soul of the local party. The two individuals who had the best chance of bringing back the party's good fortunes were hounded out several months ago (Chair Anthony Adams and ED Matt Schumsky.)
So all that's left for the local Republican Party to do is bake a blame cake. And the "leaders" of the party - and I use that term loosely - are taking the easy way out and blaming Postmus and the economic recession.
Yet the recession hasn't affected local Democrats' ability to organize efficiently. Nor has it diminished voter enthusiasm at a time when voters nationwide are asking serious questions about the policies of the Democratic Party.
Perhaps Mr. Rego was right that Postmus wasn't good at coddling certain embers of the Central Committee. But Postmus got results, unlike any chair before or since. Every successful local political party has a strong leader and executive; Postmus ensured that the San Bernardino County Republican Party had both.
It is too early to issue a verdict on Robert Rego's chairmanship of the party. But if he were serious about rebuilding the party, he could start by looking towards the future and not dwelling on imaginary causes of the party's current woes.
District Attorney Case Against Councilman Jim Miller Unwinding
From iepolitics.com
The case filed by San Bernardino County District Attorney Michael Ramos against Grand Terrace City Councilman Jim Miller is already half-way down the proverbial drain.
After being paraded out in front of a District Attorney orchestrated media arrest on a single felony charge of conflict of interest, the prosecution is now desperate to salvage something from the case.
iePolitics has learned the prosecutor assigned to the case, Deputy District Attorney John Goritz has offered Miller a misdemeanor conviction with the condition he resign his elected office.
Obviously, Councilman Miller’s response to this ridiculous offer is no!
The latest events come after it was revealed at Miller’s arraignment on September 30, that DA investigators never bothered to confirm whether or not Miller ever voted on any advertising contracts between the city and his wife’s newspapers business.
Apparently, he didn’t.
Now Miller’s single felony count is for voting to approve consent calender items where as a matter of normal course of business the council approves a disbursement register. Payments to Miller’s wife’s business were listed. Previously, Miller had consulted with the Grand Terrace city attorney, who ruled no conflict existed.
When the city attorney changed his position on the practice Miller abstained from all future votes.
Miller is represented by Attorney Richard Ewanisyk.
The case filed by San Bernardino County District Attorney Michael Ramos against Grand Terrace City Councilman Jim Miller is already half-way down the proverbial drain.
After being paraded out in front of a District Attorney orchestrated media arrest on a single felony charge of conflict of interest, the prosecution is now desperate to salvage something from the case.
iePolitics has learned the prosecutor assigned to the case, Deputy District Attorney John Goritz has offered Miller a misdemeanor conviction with the condition he resign his elected office.
Obviously, Councilman Miller’s response to this ridiculous offer is no!
The latest events come after it was revealed at Miller’s arraignment on September 30, that DA investigators never bothered to confirm whether or not Miller ever voted on any advertising contracts between the city and his wife’s newspapers business.
Apparently, he didn’t.
Now Miller’s single felony count is for voting to approve consent calender items where as a matter of normal course of business the council approves a disbursement register. Payments to Miller’s wife’s business were listed. Previously, Miller had consulted with the Grand Terrace city attorney, who ruled no conflict existed.
When the city attorney changed his position on the practice Miller abstained from all future votes.
Miller is represented by Attorney Richard Ewanisyk.
Uffer Era Draws to a Close
Uffer Era Ends on a 3-2 Vote
Mark Uffer’s five-year tenure as the county’s top administrative officer drew to a close this week with a 3-2 vote of the board of supervisors.
The sacking of Uffer, who was named interim county administrative officer in March 2004 and then given the official title as CAO in September 2004, was not done for cause, the county board members said. Rather, the three supervisors who favored having him take his leave said it was simply a matter of their changing management and policy imperatives rendering him out of step with their collective marching orders that sealed Uffer’s fate.
“The board felt it was necessary to move in a different direction at this time.” said board of supervisors chairman Gary Ovitt, who joined with supervisors Brad Mitzelfelt and Neil Derry in approving the motion to terminate Uffer.
“The board felt it was a time for a change in leadership and direction and that is why the board made this change,” said Derry. “Despite the end result of the vote, I believe Mark Uffer has done his best for the county.”
Since no cause was cited in giving Uffer his pink slip, he will be granted a full year’s pay and benefits as a severance package, as per the terms of an ordinance passed by the board in January.
Thus, Uffer will be paid his annual salary of $273,748 and about $50,000 more in deferred compensation and benefits, including cell phone, car allowance, retirement plan contributions and health insurance. Those payments will run through November 16, 2010. Thereafter, Uffer, 56, will be eligible to begin drawing retirement.
Multiple efforts by the Sentinel to reach Uffer for his reaction were unsuccessful. A secretary at the county administrative office on Wednesday said, “I do not believe we are at liberty to provide you with his contact number at this point.”
While the official comments of the board and the surviving county administration relating to Uffer were respectful and low key, maintaining there was nothing amiss with Uffer’s handling of the machinery of county government, the Sentinel’s inquiries as to the actual motivation for the change in top management were met with depictions of an administrator who was feared more than he was respected and respected more than he was liked.
Off the record explanations from several high ranking and mid ranking county officials as to why Uffer was sent packing underscored his cocksureness and heavy-handedness as traits that grated on those both above and below him over the long haul.
As early as 2007, there was sentiment on the board to have Uffer removed as CAO. Then-supervisor Dennis Hansberger was unwilling to entertain his release, however, and the two supervisors who this week opposed Uffer’s firing – supervisors Josie Gonzales and Paul Biane – were further not willing to make a top managerial change.
Upon Neil Derry’s defeat of Hansberger in 2008, Derry was under immediate pressure to, in the words of one high ranking county official, “pull the trigger on Mark from the day he was sworn in.”
Derry, however, resisted that call, insisting that he wanted to observe Uffer’s performance before making any decision with regard to his future with the county.
This week, eleven months after he assumed office, Derry fell into line with Ovitt and Mitzelfelt’s line of thinking.
According to one well placed source, Mitzelfelt’s relationship with Uffer had never been comfortable, primarily because, the source said, Uffer was less accommodating of Mitzelfelt than the supervisor felt he should be. This was an outgrowth of the manner in which Mitzelfelt came into office, i.e. through appointment in the aftermath of former supervisor Bill Postmus’s departure to become assessor.
“Brad and Mark got off on the wrong foot,” the source said. “When Brad became a supervisor, Mark Uffer did not treat him as an equal to the others because he came in as an appointed supervisors rather than as an elected one.”
With Ovitt, the major issue dividing him from the CAO was “lack of trust,” a source close to the board of supervisors said. “Gary and members of his staff have expressed that Mark was not always accurate in his representations to supervisor Ovitt and the board in general. It was felt that he had a crude management stylethat pitted supervisor against supervisor, department head against department head.”
There was no single catalyst that resulted in Uffer’s firing, according to that source. Rather it was an accumulation of smaller issues over a long period, he said.
Uffer did not gracefully weather bad news or jostling developments, according to someone who worked with him on a close and continuous basis.
“He would kill the messenger,” the county official said.
Another county employee, one at a lower ranking position, related that Uffer was too insistent on form and perception of competence and public acceptance and approval than in actual competence and performance.
“He kept giving this speech about McDonalds and how McDonalds provides first rate customer service and satisfaction and how he wanted the county residents to be as satisfied with the county at the planning counter or the courthouse or the county hospital as the customers are at McDonalds,” she said. “But the county isn’t in the business of selling hamburgers or french fries. Government is different from business.”
Another county employee said Uffer had lost the loyalty of key county workers down the chain of command.
“Uffer would throw the county’s mid-level managers and even department heads under the bus to save himself,” the employee said. “He was unforgiving of mistakes, even ones of reasonable nature where someone would be trying to innovate or try something new. If it didn’t work, he would hold them responsible. A fair number of department heads have left as of late. There was just a lack of trust by mid-level management.”
That perceived lack of tolerance for innovation or experimentation was at a variance with the reputation that preceded Uffer’s elevation into the interim and then full blown county administrative post.
For six years before that promotion he had been the administrator at Arrowhead Medical Center in Colton, the county hospital that had been mired in controversy for years before it was built but which enjoyed a decent reputation under Uffer’s leadership.
“He enjoyed great success as director of Arrowhead Regional Medical Center and prior to that as a top executive in the health care industry,” David Wert, the county’s official spokesman in 2004 and yet today wrote at the time of Uffer’s ascendency to the CAO post five years ago.
“Mark is an innovative problem-solver who has done an excellent job as interim CAO,” said Dennis Hansberger, who was then chairman of the board of supervisors. “He is an exceptional steward of the public’s resources and a very gifted leader. The board, the county’s employees, and the public are very fortunate that someone with Mark’s abilities is available to us.”
The board took up the issue of Uffer’s performance and the prospect of his continued tenure with the county during a closed session at the start of this week’s board of supervisors meeting on Tuesday. That closed hearing lasted about forty minutes and took place in a room from which Uffer was excluded. According to a well place source, “There was a debate but there was no shouting and no crying” during the board’s private deliberations. Upon the taking of the 3-2 vote to terminate Uffer, the board emerged from the room and before informing the public of its decision, a somewhat surprised Uffer was told that he was being let go.
“He did not take it well,” was how someone who overheard that exchange described it.
Uffer’s second-in-command, assistant county administrative officer Dean Arabatzis will temporarily assume Uffer’s responsibilities until the board announces who will serve as interim CAO.
Supervisor Derry said he believes he and his colleagues will look beyond those currently employed by the county as candidates to replace Uffer. “I tend to doubt we will go in-house, given that a majority of the board wants change.”
The greatest likelihood, Derry said, is that the board will choose a replacement from California who is conversant with the current fiscal constraints being put on local governments by Sacramento.
“I’m not sure we will go nationwide in our recruitment,” Derry said, saying the board will be looking at the ranks of city managers in considering a workable replcement. “There are a number of people within California and within San Bernardino County who would be suitable.”
Mark Uffer’s five-year tenure as the county’s top administrative officer drew to a close this week with a 3-2 vote of the board of supervisors.
The sacking of Uffer, who was named interim county administrative officer in March 2004 and then given the official title as CAO in September 2004, was not done for cause, the county board members said. Rather, the three supervisors who favored having him take his leave said it was simply a matter of their changing management and policy imperatives rendering him out of step with their collective marching orders that sealed Uffer’s fate.
“The board felt it was necessary to move in a different direction at this time.” said board of supervisors chairman Gary Ovitt, who joined with supervisors Brad Mitzelfelt and Neil Derry in approving the motion to terminate Uffer.
“The board felt it was a time for a change in leadership and direction and that is why the board made this change,” said Derry. “Despite the end result of the vote, I believe Mark Uffer has done his best for the county.”
Since no cause was cited in giving Uffer his pink slip, he will be granted a full year’s pay and benefits as a severance package, as per the terms of an ordinance passed by the board in January.
Thus, Uffer will be paid his annual salary of $273,748 and about $50,000 more in deferred compensation and benefits, including cell phone, car allowance, retirement plan contributions and health insurance. Those payments will run through November 16, 2010. Thereafter, Uffer, 56, will be eligible to begin drawing retirement.
Multiple efforts by the Sentinel to reach Uffer for his reaction were unsuccessful. A secretary at the county administrative office on Wednesday said, “I do not believe we are at liberty to provide you with his contact number at this point.”
While the official comments of the board and the surviving county administration relating to Uffer were respectful and low key, maintaining there was nothing amiss with Uffer’s handling of the machinery of county government, the Sentinel’s inquiries as to the actual motivation for the change in top management were met with depictions of an administrator who was feared more than he was respected and respected more than he was liked.
Off the record explanations from several high ranking and mid ranking county officials as to why Uffer was sent packing underscored his cocksureness and heavy-handedness as traits that grated on those both above and below him over the long haul.
As early as 2007, there was sentiment on the board to have Uffer removed as CAO. Then-supervisor Dennis Hansberger was unwilling to entertain his release, however, and the two supervisors who this week opposed Uffer’s firing – supervisors Josie Gonzales and Paul Biane – were further not willing to make a top managerial change.
Upon Neil Derry’s defeat of Hansberger in 2008, Derry was under immediate pressure to, in the words of one high ranking county official, “pull the trigger on Mark from the day he was sworn in.”
Derry, however, resisted that call, insisting that he wanted to observe Uffer’s performance before making any decision with regard to his future with the county.
This week, eleven months after he assumed office, Derry fell into line with Ovitt and Mitzelfelt’s line of thinking.
According to one well placed source, Mitzelfelt’s relationship with Uffer had never been comfortable, primarily because, the source said, Uffer was less accommodating of Mitzelfelt than the supervisor felt he should be. This was an outgrowth of the manner in which Mitzelfelt came into office, i.e. through appointment in the aftermath of former supervisor Bill Postmus’s departure to become assessor.
“Brad and Mark got off on the wrong foot,” the source said. “When Brad became a supervisor, Mark Uffer did not treat him as an equal to the others because he came in as an appointed supervisors rather than as an elected one.”
With Ovitt, the major issue dividing him from the CAO was “lack of trust,” a source close to the board of supervisors said. “Gary and members of his staff have expressed that Mark was not always accurate in his representations to supervisor Ovitt and the board in general. It was felt that he had a crude management stylethat pitted supervisor against supervisor, department head against department head.”
There was no single catalyst that resulted in Uffer’s firing, according to that source. Rather it was an accumulation of smaller issues over a long period, he said.
Uffer did not gracefully weather bad news or jostling developments, according to someone who worked with him on a close and continuous basis.
“He would kill the messenger,” the county official said.
Another county employee, one at a lower ranking position, related that Uffer was too insistent on form and perception of competence and public acceptance and approval than in actual competence and performance.
“He kept giving this speech about McDonalds and how McDonalds provides first rate customer service and satisfaction and how he wanted the county residents to be as satisfied with the county at the planning counter or the courthouse or the county hospital as the customers are at McDonalds,” she said. “But the county isn’t in the business of selling hamburgers or french fries. Government is different from business.”
Another county employee said Uffer had lost the loyalty of key county workers down the chain of command.
“Uffer would throw the county’s mid-level managers and even department heads under the bus to save himself,” the employee said. “He was unforgiving of mistakes, even ones of reasonable nature where someone would be trying to innovate or try something new. If it didn’t work, he would hold them responsible. A fair number of department heads have left as of late. There was just a lack of trust by mid-level management.”
That perceived lack of tolerance for innovation or experimentation was at a variance with the reputation that preceded Uffer’s elevation into the interim and then full blown county administrative post.
For six years before that promotion he had been the administrator at Arrowhead Medical Center in Colton, the county hospital that had been mired in controversy for years before it was built but which enjoyed a decent reputation under Uffer’s leadership.
“He enjoyed great success as director of Arrowhead Regional Medical Center and prior to that as a top executive in the health care industry,” David Wert, the county’s official spokesman in 2004 and yet today wrote at the time of Uffer’s ascendency to the CAO post five years ago.
“Mark is an innovative problem-solver who has done an excellent job as interim CAO,” said Dennis Hansberger, who was then chairman of the board of supervisors. “He is an exceptional steward of the public’s resources and a very gifted leader. The board, the county’s employees, and the public are very fortunate that someone with Mark’s abilities is available to us.”
The board took up the issue of Uffer’s performance and the prospect of his continued tenure with the county during a closed session at the start of this week’s board of supervisors meeting on Tuesday. That closed hearing lasted about forty minutes and took place in a room from which Uffer was excluded. According to a well place source, “There was a debate but there was no shouting and no crying” during the board’s private deliberations. Upon the taking of the 3-2 vote to terminate Uffer, the board emerged from the room and before informing the public of its decision, a somewhat surprised Uffer was told that he was being let go.
“He did not take it well,” was how someone who overheard that exchange described it.
Uffer’s second-in-command, assistant county administrative officer Dean Arabatzis will temporarily assume Uffer’s responsibilities until the board announces who will serve as interim CAO.
Supervisor Derry said he believes he and his colleagues will look beyond those currently employed by the county as candidates to replace Uffer. “I tend to doubt we will go in-house, given that a majority of the board wants change.”
The greatest likelihood, Derry said, is that the board will choose a replacement from California who is conversant with the current fiscal constraints being put on local governments by Sacramento.
“I’m not sure we will go nationwide in our recruitment,” Derry said, saying the board will be looking at the ranks of city managers in considering a workable replcement. “There are a number of people within California and within San Bernardino County who would be suitable.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)