Lt. Andrew Porter, the lead investigator in the felony prosecution of suspended Auditor Chamise Cubbison, acknowledged Tuesday that her former boss played a larger role in the high-profile case than originally presented publicly.
Porter testified that now retired Auditor Lloyd Weer regularly signed off on department payroll documents during a two-year period when Paula June Kennedy, the county’s former Payroll Manager and Cubbison’s co-
defendant, was drawing disputed extra pay by using an obscure pay code designated for miscellaneous office spending.
Weer retired in September 2021 but was brought back into the office as a consultant with Board of Supervisors’ approval to help out in an office under stress because of a faulty computer system, understaffing, and talk of a forced consolidation with the Treasurer-Tax Collector’s Office.
Weer in earlier testimony has acknowledged Kennedy single-handedly processed a county payroll for 1,200 employees, and that the demands on her time and mental state were great. Weer also has admitted to
having had numerous conversations with Kennedy, Cubbison and county administrators about what could be done to ease the on-the-job burdens that led to Kennedy’s decision to pay herself about $68,000 in extra pay over a three-year period during the Covid pandemic.
District Attorney David Eyster seized upon the extra pay to accuse Cubbison and Kennedy of criminal misappropriation of public funds. Eyster was a chronic critic of the Auditor’s Office because it questioned his own spending.
Cubbison maintains that she believed Weer and Kennedy, longtime office associates, had come to an arrangement for the extra pay. She cites notations on a Kennedy spreadsheet stating, “per Lloyd” or “per
Lloyd/Chamise.”
Kennedy contends it was Cubbison who gave her the nod to use the 470-pay code but refused to put the authorization in writing. The code is designated for miscellaneous expenses, allowed within the department and without board approval if kept under $1,000.
Porter, a 30-year local law enforcement veteran, admitted under questioning by defense attorneys Fred McCurry and Chris Andrian that Weer was never seen as a suspect in the criminal case despite his active role in the internal struggle to compensate Kennedy for the hours everyone agrees she was putting in handling a complex payroll during a difficult time. Weer also was in office during the first two years Kennedy drew the pay, and he sometimes reviewed the completed payroll for accuracy.
Weer, according to Porter’s testimony on Tuesday, was always seen as a potential witness, a “good guy” who was allowed to have his wife Judy present while he was being interviewed. Investigators typically do not allow that unless it is an individual’s attorney. Weer, in fact, at a follow up visit by Porter asked if he needed to retain an
attorney.
Weer has acknowledged meeting with Kennedy about her pay demands, and that he later told the investigator, “Gee, I hope I didn’t say something that made her think I approved,” according to Porter.
“Did that give you pause? Did that not indicate perhaps a closer look at his role,” asked Andrian, Cubbison’s attorney. Porter replied, “No.” Porter also acknowledged meeting with DA Eyster more than a dozen times during his investigation, and that it was more than a year before the District Attorney’s Office formally filed the charges.
Kennedy lawyer McCurry, a county Public Defender, pressed Porter to explain why he focused only on Kennedy as the initial suspect, and then later Cubbison although both were cooperative.
Porter said he learned of deep divisions between Cubbison and Kennedy, who ignored Weer’s role and put the blame entirely on Cubbison and called her a “lying bitch” during one interview.
Porter said he eventually began to see Cubbison as a possible suspect but never Weer.
Porter also said his investigation showed that Cubbison never personally benefitted from the extra money Kennedy paid herself. He also acknowledged that his investigation showed that no one believed Kennedy was getting paid for work not done.
The preliminary hearing will resume Wednesday before Judge Ann Moorman in Mendocino County Superior Court. At its conclusion, Moorman will decided whether to let the controversial case go to trial, or grant defense attorneys’ moves for dismissal.