The full recording of the Board of Supervisors August 31, 2021 discussion whether to promote Chamise Cubbison from assistant auditor-controller to auditor-controller is appended to the end of the newscast that accompanies this story.
The criminal case against Chamise Cubbison, the former auditor-controller and treasurer-tax collector, returns to court Wednesday with a preliminary hearing on a motion to dismiss filed by the defense.
In that motion, Cubbison’s criminal defense attorney, Chris Andrian, argues that a sheriff investigator’s failure to preserve emails he reviewed during the investigation is a violation of due process. During the hearing, Andrian will need to make the case that the missing emails were material and could prevent Cubbison from receiving a fair trial.
If Andrian can’t show the missing emails were clearly exculpatory, he’ll need to convince Superior Courty Judge Ann Moorman that the county acted in bad faith. That’s where a new email revealed in a January 10 filing in a related civil suit—could help the defense.
The email was sent from District Attorney David Eyster to Supervisor Glenn McGourty on August 30, 2021— just one day before a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors.
Its purpose? To ask the board not to appoint Chamise Cubbison—then assistant auditor— to replace outgoing elected auditor Lloyd Weer.
The full next of the email is included below:
Dear Supervisor McGourty:
As an elected District Attorney, I am respectfully encouraging you to exercise your vote to not appoint Chamise Cubbison in any capacity to fill the Auditor position or be a temporary substitute for the now retired Auditor-Controller Lloyd Weer.
I normally don’t opine on such decisions, but this decision is too important for me to stand on the sidelines.
If you were to have a longer talk with my three staff members and I, all who work on DA’s Office financial matters, each of us independent of the others would tell you that Ms. Cubbison lacks the ability to regularly make everyday necessary and appropriate financial and policy interpretation decisions.
Because most of the time she simply does not understand what is required by the law, rules, and regulations, Ms. Cubbison has regularly attempted to interfere with financial transactions by the DA’s Office that have always been legal, appropriate, necessary, and, in many cases, pre-approved by the CEO’s Office. Worse, Ms. Cubbison regularly acts as an inappropriate roadblock to the DA’s public safety mandates. The amount of time and resources she has caused my staff to waste is unbelievable.
As an attachment, I am sending a copy of a memo I recently received from Ms. Cavness of my office, one of my Administrative Services Managers (who has an accounting background and a Master’s in Business Administration). What is described in that memo is just the tip of a much larger iceberg showing that Ms. Cubbison is often lost when it comes to even simple accounting issues.
And please do not overlook that the current Board recently had to unanimously vote to force the Auditor’s Office to return a six-digit chunk of money to the Community Corrections Partnership because the Auditor (and his Assistant, Ms. Cubbison) twice acted inappropriately and pulled money out of the BOS-approved CCP budget without even a hint of transparency and without Board or CCP approval.
Also as attachments I am included documentation of interactions my staff has had with Ms. Cubbison that occurred before you took office. Ultimately, all the claims she was serially rejecting were eventually paid after I had to go to the Board, explain the situation, and the Board voted unanimously to have each and every claim paid.
The CEO’s Office at one point even brokered an informal deal with the Auditor-Controller and his assistant to get a legal opinion on their efforts to interfere with the day-to-day operations of the DA’s Office. When that opinion came back unfavorable to the Auditor-Controller and Ms. Cubbison, they simple [sic] rejected what it had to say.
The amount of wasted time and resources caused by this individual (and her mentor) have been extreme. She has been drawing unreasonable hard lines in the sand for years so I will now ask the rhetorical question of whether the Board will require her to show that the has been right on something at least once before being considered for promotion and/or appointed to higher office.
So what do I think the Board do? [sic] First, vote no for Ms. Cubbison’s appointment and/or any promotion.
Second, I would say that the time is ripe to reap the advantages of consolidating offices, as was authorized and put in place by the Legislature in 2017.
Originally enrolled as AB 1265, Government Code section 24304-2 allows the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors to consolidate the Auditor-Controller’s Office with the Tax Collector-Treasurer’s Office into a single management structure, in this case a single office under the supervision of Tax Collector-Treasurer Shari Schapmire.
Third, if and when Mrs. Schapmire decides it is her time to retire, I would further suggest that the County in advance of Mrs. Schapmire’s retirement follow the lead of Marin County (and others) and pursue voter approval of a ballot measure to do away with the elected offices of Auditor-Controller and Tax Collector-Treasurer in favor of a single financial department under the supervision of a highly qualified Director of Finance who would report directly to the Board.
An appointed position would allow the County to raise the current minimum (substandard) qualifications and professional standards for both positions, as well as allow the County to conduct a national search, for the right man or woman to oversee Mendocino County’s increasingly complex financial operations. Approved overwhelmingly by the Marin County voters over the objections of retiring long-time Auditor the Director of Finance model has worked well for Marin County (and elsewhere), so there is no reason this same move here should work well for Mendocino County. (See informational links below.)
http://www.smartvoter.org/2008/11/04/ca/mrn/meas/B/
https://ballotpedia.org/County_of_Marin_Appointed_Director_of_Finance,_Measure_B_(November_2008)
Finally, I can’t — and wouldn’t — hire people who have not pursued higher eduction and are not fully licensed to perform at a high level of the duties of a deputy prosector. I seek out the most qualified attorney candidates interested in Mendocino County who present with great educational background, diverse life experiences, and, of course, specialized legal training that allows for State Bar licensing.
Following, there is no reason why we should continue with another Auditor who would not be qualified for the job absent the grandfather clause that creates eligibility because Ms. Cubbison has supposedly learned all that she needs to know at the knee of her mentor who, in turn, also learned at the knee of his mentor who, in turn, also learned at the knee of her mentor.
Thank you for your anticipated consideration of my comments above and included attachments. We have even more documentation of troubles with Ms. Cubbison but what I have provided should give you a taste of what we have been dealing with time and time again.
C. David Eyster