Riley: It’s a ‘Lie’ That he OKd $250,000 for Bush Visit

An angry Supervisors’ Chairman Thomas F. Riley said Thursday it is “an unmitigated lie” that he informally approved a plan by Sheriff Brad Gates to pay for President Bush’s April visit to Orange County out of a drug-fighting budget, as Gates claimed.

“I did not--repeat--did not discuss any funding requirement,” Riley said. “As far as I’m concerned, there was no budget discussed with me, and if anybody said I approved any budget, it is an unmitigated lie.”

Riley was disputing a statement by one of Gates’ top assistants, who said Wednesday that the county supervisors’ chairman had informally OKd the plan to finance the President’s visit.

Gates himself on Thursday insisted that Riley had signed off on the plan. Referring to Riley, a retired Marine Corps general, by his nickname, Gates said: “I met with the General three or four times during the process and indicated what everybody was doing. We offered to pay for that out of the narcotic fund if the General thought that was the right thing to do.”

The strongly worded and conflicting statements reflect a heightened sensitivity in county government about the issue of paying up to $250,000 for the President’s visit at a time when the county is facing a budget deficit.

Assistant Sheriff Walter Fath, who handled preparations for the Bush event, told The Times on Wednesday that county government will have to pay $250,000 for the President’s visit to a remote Orange County ranch on April 25. On Thursday, however, Gates said that figure was a “high side” estimate and that the department does not yet know the actual cost.

There was also confusion Thursday among top leaders of county government, who said it appears that nobody outside of the Sheriff’s Department knew how much money Gates was spending for the Bush visit, let alone granted approval for it.

They also said that the county’s rules appear unclear about whether the expenditure required supervisors’ approval or whether Gates has the authority to spend such a large amount at his own discretion. Administrators and supervisors said they will review those county policies.

Gates’ situation is unique inside the government, they pointed out, because he is an independently elected official and the money was seized by the Sheriff’s Department during a drug investigation. Federal law requires that money seized in a drug case be spent on narcotics-related law enforcement.

Still, in the past, the supervisors have been asked to approve expenditures of the seized money.

“There is a lack of consistency,” Supervisor Don R. Roth said. “I think we need to get our signals straightened out. I think the (County Administrative Office) needs to assure the board that there are some uniform procedures in the future.

“I hate to be blind-sided sitting down and reading a newspaper article.”

‘No Procedure’

After talking with Gates, Supervisor Roger R. Stanton said: “In retrospect, it would have been nice if the board had been aware of it in advance.

“Apparently there was no procedure set up for this. The benefit that will derive from this is that something will be done so that it doesn’t happen again.”

Riley, Roth and Stanton said they do not believe that Gates violated county rules by not notifying them. Their concern was that the rules are unclear and that they were surprised by the news of the cost.

But Gates said: “All of the proper procedures were done on this thing. I think everybody worked together on this thing extremely well.”

Kept Riley Informed

The sheriff repeated that he kept Riley informed throughout the process and that he sought approval for the expenditure from the county counsel’s office. “I didn’t talk to each supervisor. . . . I just have to assume that it went to the other offices” from Riley.

Auditor-Controller Steve Lewis said Thursday that he believes the sheriff acted properly and did not need approval from the supervisors or the administrative office to make the improvements to the ranch.

But Chuck Hulse, chief deputy auditor controller, said: “I would say that approval wasn’t required for everything; for certain things, approval might be required.”

Hulse said department heads must seek supervisors’ approval for costs related to “fixed assets” of more than $1,000. He said county procedures define a fixed asset as a “tangible asset . . . having utility which extends beyond the current year,” including land, buildings, property improvements or equipment.

‘No Written Procedures’

“There are no written procedures on how one does this thing,” County Administrative Officer Larry Parrish said. “There is some latitude that does not contemplate this event” of a presidential visit.

“I’ll be talking with county counsel and I imagine the matter will have to be cleared up.”

County Counsel Adrian Kuyper said he is uncertain whether the sheriff needed approval to spend money on Bush’s visit and he will look into the question, if asked.

Most of the cost of the Bush visit involved turning a rustic, backwoods ranch into a 90-minute staging area for the President. The greatest expense was to grade and spread gravel on a 3.5-mile dirt road from the Ortega Highway to the ranch.

Workers also added a stage and put in electricity, telephone lines and toilets at the site--called Rancho del Rio. Furniture was purchased for a closed-door lunch between Bush and local drug agents. And the money was used to help to transport 1,400 invited guests from the Ortega Highway over the dirt road to the ranch.

Owned by Drug Smugglers

White House officials reportedly chose the site as background for an anti-drug speech because it was formerly owned by a drug smuggler and seized during a raid by the Sheriff’s Department.

“There was some comment made that the President felt that the news media had not been responsive to his efforts to make war against drugs and he hoped this would provide the background,” Riley said.

Riley said he knew that the sheriff was spending money to prepare a remote canyon site for the President’s visit, but he expected the cost to be far less.

“I’m sure we’ll get a lot of admonition for spending that much money for that purpose,” he said. “Since we were doing the (invitations) and getting donations, I really didn’t think it would be very much.”

Some Work Was Donated

Fath, the assistant sheriff, said Wednesday that some of the work at the ranch was donated by private companies. He said the $250,000 estimate does not include the donations.

Gates, however, said Thursday that the $250,000 estimate does include the contributions. He said he does not know how much was contributed. So far, he said, the department has spent a total of $80,000 and it has not received all of the bills.

“It’s $250,000 at the maximum,” Gates said. “All I can do is apologize for us. Communications is a tough thing.”

Gates stressed that the money came from money seized in drug raids and not from taxpayers. “The taxpayers did not pay for any of this. So who paid for this trip? The dope dealer,” he said. “That’s my line that I want you to print.”