Recorder Takes Leave Amid Probe of Conduct : Government: Subordinates allege that Lee Branch’s relationship with a female worker in county recorder’s office has resulted in favoritism and hurt morale.

Orange County Recorder Lee A. Branch has taken a 30-day leave of absence pending the outcome of an investigation into allegations that his relationship with a female worker he supervises has caused problems for employees and disrupted his department.

The county’s affirmative action office, which handles complaints of discrimination and sexual harassment, began the investigation after receiving complaints about Branch’s conduct from employees more than a week ago.

Russ Patton, director of the county Personnel Department, said Tuesday that Branch’s leave began Friday after the recorder met with County Administrative Officer Ernie Schneider, county government’s top executive. The paid leave is scheduled to end Nov. 29.

“We are taking whatever action is necessary to preserve a safe and productive work environment,” Patton said. “We want people to get back to work and be able to do their work the best they can.”

Branch, 57, who earns $75,420 a year, could not be reached for comment Tuesday. He has been the county recorder for 15 years. In an Oct. 29 letter to Schneider, Branch wrote that he wanted to “fully cooperate” with authorities and that his absence would help facilitate the investigation.

Patton, whose department oversees the affirmative action office, declined to comment on specifics of the complaint because personnel-related investigations are confidential. The inquiry is expected to take several weeks.

Schneider confirmed that Branch has taken the leave because of the complaints, but declined to discuss the matter further.

Ella M. Murphy, the acting county recorder in Branch’s absence, said Tuesday that she has directed her staff to assist the inquiry in any way the affirmative action office deems appropriate. She declined to elaborate.

Ben Alvillar, the county’s affirmative action officer, is conducting the investigation and has already questioned some employees in the recorder’s office.

County sources, who spoke on the condition that their names not be used, said Alvillar is looking into whether Branch’s relationship with Nancy L. Smith, a documents manager he supervises, has resulted in favoritism and a tense working atmosphere affecting morale.

The situation has caused some resentment and uncomfortable situations for five or six employees during the past few years, sources said. Some of those workers are in more senior positions than Smith, who has been with the recorder’s office for 21 years.

Sources said investigators are trying to determine if Smith tried to influence the operation of the recorder’s office, undercutting higher-ranking members of the department, who allegedly have had difficulty reaching Branch about work matters for months.

One source familiar with the investigation who requested anonymity said part of the probe centers on whether Branch made lewd comments to a female employee in his office.

The alleged comment was “the straw that broke the camel’s back,” said another county official. “This is a serious problem of long standing. Morale in that office has been deteriorating for months.”

Smith, 50, who heads the recordable documents division, could not be reached for comment Tuesday. Sources said that she has been placed on a two-week leave pending the investigation.

Patton did not know what kind of discipline Branch could face if any wrongdoing is found. “It would depend on the circumstances,” he said. “At this time, we do not know enough about the situation to comment.”

Even if a discrimination complaint against Branch is proven, it would be difficult to discipline him because he is an elected official. Suspension without pay, demotion or dismissal are reserved only for regular county employees.

Elected officials can be held accountable for misconduct at the ballot box, and those bringing successful discrimination complaints can sue for damages. If the wrongdoing is serious enough, the county grand jury can bring malfeasance charges against the official, which could result in removal from office.

Besides the current investigation, Branch’s tenure at the recorder’s office has been marked by controversy before, including criticism of poor management, lax security and numerous errors in recorded documents.

In 1985, county government, responding to criticism from judges, reviewed Branch’s performance and found more than 150 problems in his department, including weak supervision in some areas and failures to record documents on time.

As a result, the county Board of Supervisors reinstituted the county clerk’s position and stripped Branch of responsibility for court records and marriage licenses. Today, the recorder’s office still maintains birth and death certificates as well as property records such as trust deeds, grant deeds, mortgage information and liens.

In 1988, county supervisors denied Branch a pay raise after he refused to move his operation after the county spent $260,000 to plan a new office facility for the recorder’s office.

That same year, another county report found further problems including a 21% error rate in a new index of official records. Branch blamed those problems on computer errors made by a company hired to create the index. The errors later were corrected, he said at the time.

Times staff writer Kevin Johnson contributed to this report.