Schwab used Bea Cortes as part of his triad of votes on the City Council for years. He was nearly guaranteed acceptance of any "Staff Recommendation" he put forth.
Some "Recommendations" included:
Selecting Contractors with out an open bidding process for City Goods, Services and Contracts
Selecting Friends for the City Attorney and City Planning Director (Koontz)
Selecting "Preferred Developers" without open bidding and Council Approval
Selecting to "Borrow RDA Funds" and fund the GT City Fund, without the intention to pay them back.
Selecting Steve Berry as his Assistant
Selecting to Discontinue a Criminal Investigation of Embezzlement by Steve Berry
Selecting the Developer for the CBH and pushing the project without clear plans and contracts and allowing "Horse Trading" to be the management style used in a 20 Million Dollar Development. (Steve Berry just continued as he was instructed.)
Allowing approval of a non commercial kitchen in the Plans and Contract specifications for the Senior Center.
Forcing the Seniors to sell owned furniture, to accept the mandated CBH furniture, that was later taken back, leaving the Seniors to scramble to replace what they had accumulated over the years via donations and grants. This was a Schwab/Berry collaboration.
His arrogance drew out costly legal actions taken against the city due to his "Management" and the Council inability or unwillingness to consider anything other than "Staff Recommendations". This benefited his friend the City Attorney as his fees continued to pile up trying to defend Schwab/Berry Actions and "Recommendation".
So why is he running against Bea Cortes and not for the 2 year seat left open by Miller's resignation? Well, Bea Cortes a once guaranteed rubber stamp for any "Schwab/Staff Recommendation" dared to support Steve Berry for the position of City Manager rather than Schwab. Bea Cortes used her relationship with the DA's Office to have the charges filed against Miller. She also managed the press release and publication of the arrest and so forth. She and Berry conspired against Jim Miller because Jim Miller was in support of what he felt at the time the lessor of two evils. Only given a choice between Schwab and Berry it was at that time Miller's opinion that Schwab was the better choice between the two.
Berry had racked up weeks of trying to intimidate people. He was subject of a criminal investigation, and the bad contract fulfillment's for the Blue Mt. Senior Villa's and Senior Center came on his watch while Schwab recovered from a brain hemorrhage.
Berry was also known for inflating the city's party budget and taking "donations" for public events from developers and businesses that have business with or pending before the City Council and planning commission. These funds were not fully accounted for or reported to the City Council. Cortes likes a good party. She supported Berry. Perhaps this is why Schwab is now running against what was a trusted vote on his manipulated City Council.
Stacking up the City Council. Schwab could control the City Council again. Assume Walt wins as the Mayor. Assume Garcia stays in place her seat is not up for election. Assume that Schwab Friendly Candidate Darcy from the Planning Commission wins the 2 year seat. Schwab will have 3 votes on the council. When they vote to fill the vacated seat Walt's election to mayor will produce a possible 4th Schwab Friendly Council Member to be seated.
Why is this a bad thing for GT? We need to have a council independent of Schwab and Berry influences. The "Staff Recommendations" of the past have to be investigated and analysed before the affects can be fully understood and corrected. The current City Manager Betsy Adams should not be stopped for this effort by a Schwab controlled city council.
The citizens of GT should have a period of Schwab Free Influence at least on the City Council. The planning commission still is heavy with Schwab Appointment "Staff Approved Applicants".
So voters I suggest that you vote for people that have ZERO history with Tom Schwab.
That may include some qualified individuals with good intentions. BUT, right now we need a council of Anti Schwab Management Ideals. That includes candidates who are running just to split the vote or isolate party line voters. Watch out for a Republican now running as a Democrat. That person may be there just to "Split" the vote so Schwab sneaks by on name recognition alone.
San Bernardino County’s three top lawyers may be “former” employees by year’s end. San Bernardino County District Attorney Mike Ramos, Public Defender Doreen Boxer, and County Counsel Ruth Stringer all are in precarious positions at best.
Although mainstream media has refused to cover the antics of District Attorney Mike Ramos, iePolitics and InlandPolitics have covered them extensively. We have been accused of libeling poor Mikey. But the seeds he has sown are about to come back to haunt him and prove that we are the ones with truth on our side.
We expect the declarations of six of the women that Ramos had affairs with to be made public within the next two weeks. Those affairs occurred on county time and in county buildings and vehicles while the women were on the clock. We expect that there will be enough information that Mikey could be charged criminally.
However, if that is not the case, and honestly we don’t expect his partner, Jerry Brown, to charge him, we do have confirmation that the FBI is here in full force, conducting interviews and investigating a wide range of corruption allegations. We know that information has been given to them sufficient to charge Mikey minimally with one solid felony. It is just a matter of time. The only real question is whether it will happen before or after he is sworn in to his next term. I’m betting before.
Next up is Doreen Boxer. We hear things are about to explode at the Public Defender’s Office in more ways than one. It seems Boxer is far more political than we have given her credit for. She has tried to sell out defendants to further (or keep) her career.
Boxer might have gotten away with it had she not tried to also take down some of the office’s top attorneys in the process. I have found over the years that the most successful deputy public defenders are those who truly believe in their mission. If they happen to be a top notch attorney also, they are not going to sacrifice a client for their boss’ career. I expect her to be gone by the end of October, probably much sooner.
Finally, there is iePolitics’ favorite legal Beagle, Ruthie Stringer. Okay, so I really cannot stand this woman. I’ve had two of my attorneys tell me that she is going to fight me on my cases no matter what. The attorneys repesenting the county have said so. I cannot even imagine how much the county has spent fighting me, hoping they discourage me and I kill myself. But we are going to win. And I am one of at least a dozen employees who have righteous claims and have decided to fight back. Expect a high-profile suit to be filed next week.
We hear the Board of Supervisors might have actually grown a backbone and is forcing Stringer to retire earlier than she had planned. Her leave payout is expected to exceed $500,000 and her annual retirement income should be around $200,000. She will be among the county’s highest paid retirees.
Ruthie’s retirement costs pale in comparison to what her legal advice has cost taxpayers. But it is not even her legal advice as much as it is her disloyalty to the Board of Supervisors.
A significant chunk of the current corruption investigation was caused by Stringer in her attempt to keep Mark Uffer and Mike Ramos in her pocket. Her lack of litigation experience along with an extremely vindictive personality fit right in with the Uffer/Ramos scheme.
Ramos’ deficiencies in legal expertise is similar to Stringer’s. They are equally incompetent and willing to use their respective offices for political assassination.
We have heard that it was Stringer who encouraged Uffer to file suit against the county, telling him that the county will settle with him. I suspect that revelation has aided in her early retirement.
We expect the Stringer retirement announcement very soon, but soon is a year too late. She has cost taxpayers multi-millions of dollars in litigation costs due to piss-poor legal advice based on hatred rather than facts. We can only hope she is on the list of those the FBI is investigating.
We can only hope that as these three attorneys depart, our Board of Supervisors conducts a legitimate nationwide search to fill the vacancies. These three epitomize what is wrong in this county. It would be a shame for them to be replaced with more political cronies. But we expect more shame, not less. That is the county way.
Additional information regarding the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) probe into the San Bernardino County corruption scandal has been trickling into iePolitics. It appears there are two general areas the Bureau is concentrating on: all investigations conducted by District Attorney Mike Ramos’ Public Integrity Unit (PIU) and the Superior Court bench.
Based upon questions being asked by agents, this investigation is wide-ranging. iePolitics has been told that questions are being asked regarding various real estate deals; destruction of records by former Third District Supervisor Dennis Hansberger; disparity in handling the various FPPC complaints by Ramos against Penrod, Erwin, Biane, Devereaux, and others; the difference in the way in which 1099 charges against Jim Miller and Bea Cortes were handled; the POST scandal; possibly several of the issues at ARMC (regarding Supervisors Biane and Gonzales); and much more.
From what we are being told, the FBI is looking at each investigation the PIU has been involved in and tracing it back to its inception. It would appear that part of the investigation is meant to uncover selective prosecution and use of the district attorney’s prosecutorial powers for political purposes. It is believed that the attorney general’s involvement is also being reviewed.
As stated in previous articles, we know that solid evidence of at least one felony committed by Ramos was provided to the FBI several months ago; however, it is not known what crime was alleged. Furthermore, evidence of witness tampering and intimidation personally committed by Ramos may be made public as early as today.
As much as we here at iePolitics enjoy watching Ramos squirm as the tables have been turned on him, of much greater concern and satisfaction is the scrutiny the Superior Court bench is now receiving from the federal government. Clearly, all judges have a great deal of discretion in the decisions they make. However, from the first moment a Superior Court judge became involved in the corruption scandal, there have been highly suspect decisions and rulings.
Search warrants were issued based solely on the testimony of a convicted perjurer who agreed to cooperate to gain a lesser sentence. Excessively high bails were set for white collar crimes that far exceed what is set for violent offenders who are a flight risk. And one judge had a personal relationship with the Ramos’ personal attorney. This scandal has been fraught with questionable rulings from the bench.
Additionally, we have witnessed two examples where the district attorney and attorney general have attempted to thwart attorney/client privilege. First, a search warrant was signed and served on the attorney of one of the defendants, something this is almost unheard of. And more recently, the bullying by the Attorney General’s office to force all parties involved in the Colonies decision to waive attorney/client privilege has reached new heights with threats being made by the Attorney General’s office.
But perhaps the most egregious examples of prosecutorial misconduct and judicial incompetence or payoff involve the two sets of charges against former Assistant Assessor Jim Erwin. There are sections of the law that clearly show Erwin did NOT have to report the trip or watch, but the district attorney charged him anyway. The craziest and most far-fetched charges are the conspiracy and bribery allegations.
We realize the average person reading this article does not understand the law well enough to know that certain elements must be present to allege both conspiracy and bribery. While Erwin was still in custody we asked a retired prosecutor to review the charges against Erwin and give us his opinion. He was shocked that a judge would sign an arrest warrant based on the allegations made as the elements of the crime were not present. That has been the opinion of every attorney we know of who has actually spent the time to read the entire complaint.
And that begs this question: Why would a judge sign these search warrants and arrest warrants? Certainly, they should know as well as anyone what the elements of each crime are.
As we have written about before here at iePolitics, the close personal relationship between Ramos and members of the San Bernardino County Superior Court bench is a concern. It is not only a concern to the corruption scandal defendants, but to all who enter the courthouse in search of justice. Now we have the FBI observing San Bernardino County justice first hand. And if they do a thorough job, it will benefit every citizen in this county.
Be it corrupt prosecutors, politicians or judges, they all need to go down and be punished for the havoc they have wreaked on our county. We welcome this investigation and look forward to their findings.
