San Bernardino, Ca— SANBAG is a defendant in a lawsuit brought by the county Flood Control District based on damages the district sustained because of SANBAG’s freeway expansion project. SANBAG’s resolution is nothing more than an attempt to gain some advantage in its litigation with the county Flood Control District.
The Flood Control District will act in the interest of the taxpayers. Because this matter is in litigation, at this time the Flood Control District refers to the positions it has taken in the suit, which are a matter of public record.
Concerning SANBAG’s call for an independent investigation, it is well known that an independent investigation is already underway by the District Attorney and the state Attorney General, who have made it clear that their investigation is ongoing. As SANBAG is fully aware, a separate civil investigation would not have the ability to compel testimony in the manner of a criminal investigation, and it could not possibly be completed within 90 days. Therefore, a separate civil investigation would be unnecessary and premature.
More On The Story
March 03, 2010 6:41 PM
By NATASHA LINDSTROM Staff Writer
Victorville Daily Press
SAN BERNARDINO • The San Bernardino County transportation planning agency SANBAG on Wednesday urged county supervisors to launch an independent investigation into themselves, with a current supervisor and chief of staff recently linked as possible co-conspirators in the largest bribery scandal in county history.
In a formal resolution, SANBAG members representing more than 20 cities requested the county immediately hire an independent investigator to dig into “all circumstances” related to a controversial $102 million settlement with developer Colonies Partners. The resolution stated the investigation should be made public and completed within 90 days.
“We feel if there’s been wrongdoing, then it needs to be investigated and it needs to come out,” Victorville Councilman Ryan McEachron said. “The county Board of Supervisors has a duty to be forthright to the public, just like any elected official.”
The county and county Flood Control District responded by calling a new civil investigation “unnecessary and premature,” with a probe by the county District Attorney and state Attorney General offices already underway.
“SANBAG’s resolution is nothing more than an attempt to gain some advantage in its litigation with the county Flood Control District,” the county press release states. “As SANBAG is fully aware, a separate civil investigation would not have the ability to compel testimony in the manner of a criminal investigation, and it could not possibly be completed within 90 days.”
The bitter legal dispute stems from a county corruption scandal centering around the $102 million settlement paid to developer Colonies Partners in 2006 over flood control improvements in Upland. Prosecutors allege Colonies developers obtained the legal victory through corrupt means, including bribing county supervisors to OK the deal.
San Bernardino County has also sued SANBAG, the city of Upland and Caltrans, arguing those agencies contributed to flood damages and therefore should help pay the $102 million settlement.
“We think that an independent investigation is necessary in order for the county to continue the case with any semblance of good faith,” said Steve DeBaun of Best, Best, & Krieger, the law firm representing SANBAG for the Colonies lawsuit.
SANBAG is governed by council members of the 24 cities within the county, plus the five county supervisors.
In addition to calling for an investigation, the resolution unanimously passed by SANBAG members asked county supervisors to stay out of all closed-session discussions related to the suit against the county. None of the five county supervisors were present at Wednesday’s meeting, according to McEachron.
David Zook, spokesman for 1st District Supervisor Brad Mitzelfelt, said Mitzelfelt has “voluntarily recused himself from all SANBAG closed-session discussions on the case, even though he didn’t have to.”
But over the past year, multiple supervisors have refused to leave closed session discussions while SANBAG members and their attorney attempted to discuss the ongoing litigation with the county, according to several SANBAG members. DeBaun said the supervisors’ presence “hindered our ability as their legal counsel to give the board a full and fair assessment of the case.”
“The bottom line is you can’t talk strategy when the person that’s suing you is sitting in the room with you,” Hesperia Councilman Mike Leonard said.
County supervisors have reportedly recused themselves from the last two closed session meetings, which several SANBAG members attributed to mounting pressure for them to stay out.
The county’s suit against SANBAG has been in the discovery stage for several months, with a trial date set for January 2011, according to DeBaun.
If the county supervisors who voted in favor of the Colonies settlement are indicted, the legal action could be undone, prosecutors said last month. That could make the county’s suit against SANBAG obsolete.
What’s more, SANBAG members said they could lose federal funding if one of their board members is indicted.
“I think we’re hopeful that they take us seriously,” McEachron said. “There were more than 20 other elected officials of San Bernardino County that voted for this. I’m not sure if they will or not. That will remain to be seen.”
Natasha Lindstrom may be reached at (760) 951-6232 or at nlindstrom@VVDailyPress.com.