What will 2012 hold for Alameda County?

As 2011 nears a close, Alameda County politicians, both past and present continue to set new lows in public service. Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi from Alameda County (18^th District) is fighting for her political future…most saying she will lose that fight…as she faces felony charges in San Francisco for shoplifting.

As Ms. Hayashi attempts to extract herself from this self inflicted damage, the people of Alameda County should ask the question, do the politicians of Alameda County indeed believe the legal system or the people they serve are so out of touch with reality to indulge the defense of “texting while shoplifting”.

As defenses to civil and criminal allegations go, it is indeed creative, though only a truly desperate narcissist would attempt transference and projection to their cell phone(s). Undoubtedly a first…but surely not the last for an Alameda County politician (past or present) desperate to blame a third party for their stupid (and perhaps criminal) behavior.

We the people of California can only hope that 2012 brings change (for the better) in those that we elect to guide this state. As we look around the State of California, the people of Alameda County should do a bit of soul searching. Many of California’s problems and scandals have some roots in Alameda County, and with politicians (past and present) from that region of the State.

It would appear many of California’s problems lead back to Bill Lockyer and the Treasurer’s Office. Perhaps Mr. Lockyer and his political resources, cronies and groupies should focus on the State’s financial problems, and not with self naming public trails, buying his wife a political career, or helping cronies who have done the State of California wrong.

Unless the voters demand accountability, politicians will continue their narcissist behavior and project responsibility for their incompetence and failings onto any unsuspecting party….or possibly an electronic device. George Orwell’s worst nightmare….the point which Big Brother has no one to blame other then Big Brother…not even Hal 9000 saw this coming!

Happy New Year!

Blowback in Alameda County?

As we continue to research, investigate and report on past and current Alameda County politicians in our efforts to shed light on the Back Story’s, we were not anticipating much in the way of blowback. Though what we have reported on so far is almost entirely from public records and sources, it appears those who have to date been mentioned in the Back Story may want to silence us, or at least control what we research or disclose.

A source close to Bob Knox advised us he recently hired a Marin County Attorney who specializes in criminal defense and white collar crimes to file a Personal Injury Claim. The claim was recently filed on behalf of Robert G Knox, RG Knox Company LLC, and CPC Holdings Inc. naming the Defendant in the case as “John Doe 1.” It is our understanding a claim against a “John Doe” reflects that a plaintiff is seeking to hold an unknown party responsible for a perceived injury. John Doe claims in the political environment have a long legal precedent of being viewed as “fishing trips.”

At this point, we have no information on what Mr. Knox’s claims or cause of action maybe, though it is notable that each of the plaintiffs has been mentioned in prior installments of the Back Story.

A source, who crosses paths with Bob Knox in the business world, indicates Mr. Knox is extremely unhappy with The Back Story.

We have also begun to see Bill Lockyer and his wife Nadia close ranks as it relates to our efforts to research and report on Alameda County. We have made two request of Bill Lockyer’s office, with no reply. Our request to Nadia Lockyer’s office was answered by her Chief of Staff implying they might consider answering our questions if those involved with The Back Story would first reveal themselves.

Nadia, how would the identities of people involved with The Back Story help you better answer questions related to your job as an elected official in Alameda County?

To date we have provided parties mentioned in The Back Story a professional courtesy and respect to address our questions in private, allowing them time to carefully reply. We may reconsider that approach in the coming months.

Perhaps Bill Lockyer, his wife and Bob Knox should take a lesson from Gavin Newsom. Mr. Newsom was the only UC Regent to openly embrace an invitation to discuss the issues of UC students at a recent Regent meeting. The balance of Mr. Newsom’s fellow board members abandoned the meeting after they faced pointed questions from students.

In closing this installment, we only need to read the front page of most major newspapers or Google current events to understand that the lack of governmental transparency and attempts to silence those that seek answers and/or peacefully protest is a road filled with endless political land mines, here and aboard. 

California Foreclosure Scandal - Tip of the Iceberg

As California Attorney General Kamala Harris debates her next move on the 50 State settlement proposal surrounding the nation-wide foreclosure scandal, we want to impart information from a recent court case that sheds further light on the problem facing Kamala Harris. We imagine this particular court case is just the tip of the Iceberg as it relates to the foreclosure scandal as a whole within California.

As referenced in prior installments, Ms. Knox and a co-tenant investor procured a residential investment property located in Alameda County. Court records specify Ms. Knox’s co-tenant investor demanded termination of their business relationship and the prompt sale of the co-owned property. The co-investors demands were based on the uncovering of unauthorized use by Ms. Knox of the property in question as collateral for a loan. (See prior installment)

In spite of Ms. Knox agreeing to sell the co-tenant property as requested by her co-investor, Ms. Knox concealed the fact she had no intention of signing a listing agreement therefore rendering a sale impossible. Court records and an independent source confirmed this. Both co-tenants must sign a listing agreement per California Law to allow for active marketing and sale of a property.

Court records and Ms. Knox’s own testimony reflect that while concealing her intentions not to sell the property, Ms. Knox sold a real estate option and non-compete agreement to a neighboring property owner. This option and agreement were sold without the approval or knowledge of the co-tenant investor or Bank of America, the Bank holding the mortgage on the property. The option was a right of first refusal. Ms. Knox was paid a substantial amount of money for the option and non-compete agreement.

A non-compete agreement is such that a property can no longer be operated for its intended purpose for a certain period of time. The right of first refusal option makes listing and marketing a property nearly impossible. Such an option must be disclosed, therefore telling any prospective buyer a third party holds a right to match your offer. Therefore, no interested party would waste their time or money with due diligence, knowing a third party would have the contracted right to match his offer.

As a result of the above events, the co-tenant property was foreclosed on by Bank of America without any attempt on their part to seek an understanding of the problems that lead to foreclosure. There is no evidence Bank of America was aware of Ms. Knox’s activities. However, in light of the fact, Bank of America was aware of Ms, Knox’s unauthorized use of the property to collateralize a loan, Bank of America was on notice.

The co-investor’s entire investment was lost, and no funds from either the non-compete agreement or option for right of first refusal were distributed by Ms. Knox to her co-investor.

The Back Story has been informed the Alameda County District Attorney, the State Attorney General, Bank of America and the FTC have been notified of this matter.

Rosegate Assisted Living - KMJ Associates

In an earlier installment it was noted that Ms. Knox (Kati L Knox) and her San Leandro based business were the subject of a civil court proceeding in Alameda County. Though court records reflect alleged claims of real estate fraud, two specific mortgage related loan claims caught our attention.  In light of the mortgage crisis and on-going nation-wide investigations by local District Attorneys and State Attorney Generals, we felt reporting on this matter was in the public's best interest.

Here’s what we know: Court records reflect that Ms. Knox personally acquired a $100,000 Equity Line of Credit (ELOC) using a co-tenant (two or more owners of a property) investment property as collateral, for a down payment on her (new) personal residence in Danville. Court and public records reflect Ms. Knox neither asked nor received approval from her co-tenant investor to use the co-tenant property as collateral. Furthermore, as supported by public records, Ms. Knox did not inform Bank of America (the source of the ELOC) when acquiring the loan that there was a co-tenant on the collateralized property. Moreover, court records indicate Ms. Knox does not recall filling out a loan application. We asked Bank of America about Ms. Knox’s claims. They made it clear every loan of any amount requires a loan application, and co-tenant (co-owner) disclosure is a key part of any real estate loan application. Most, if not all, loan applications do have truth in fact clauses (aka perjury clauses).

Sources and records indicate that when Ms. Knox’s co-tenant investor uncovered the unauthorized loan, Bank of America was contacted via the co-tenants attorney seeking an explanation. Bank of America replied almost immediately indicating the loan would be promptly repaid and closed, which it was. 

The second matter relates to a loan from a current employee of Rosegate Assisted Living. After reviewing court records and determining this employee testified under oath and is currently listed on Rosegate’s website, we will refer to him by name; Darryl Chin (Mr. Chin).

Both Mr. Chin and Ms. Knox admitted Mr. Chin contributed money towards the “project”, in the amount of $30,000. Mr. Chin also admitted under oath that he and Ms. Knox were dating at some point.

Now where this transaction seemingly goes wrong is in who or how it was repaid. While under oath Mr. Chin and Ms. Knox had completely different answers on how the funds were repaid. Ms. Knox indicated that Mr. Chin’s employer; KMJ Associates (Rosegate Assisted Living) repaid the $30,000 in funds. However, Mr. Chin stated the funds were repaid via “Kati Knox’s personal check”. Clearly one of these parties is misleading the courts for reasons that are yet not clear.

According to court records Ms. Knox also admitted concealing from Mr. Chin the $100,000 ELOC she acquired.  Ms. Knox stated, “It wasn’t something I talked about”. It appears Ms. Knox intentionally concealed the $100,000 ELOC from both her co-tenant investor and Mr. Chin, as well apparently concealed from Bank of America the fact she had investors other then herself.  Ms. Knox also admitted she did not notify Bank of America she was using the funds from the ELOC as a down payment on a personal residence. Such information is required on loan applications, per Bank of America policy.

We found no evidence to indicate how Mr. Chin’s $30,000 contribution was used, or if it was even used towards the real estate transaction, as there is a key disagreement on an important part of that arrangement…the repayment of the funds. However, such a transaction between an employer and employee whereby a personal relationship has or does exist between a superior and subordinate has the potential for a very interesting sexual harassment claim.

We attempted to reach Mr. Chin regarding this matter. He failed to respond.

Rose Gate Assisted Living - San Leandro

This installment of The Back Story will focus on Rosegate Assisted Living, the San Leandro California elder care facility owned by Kati (Kathleen) Knox (Ms. Knox) and KMJ Associates. Rosegate has been discussed in prior installments, so we felt it a fitting time to look deeper into this company.

In our review of Rosegate, we spoke to multiple sources, surfed through the internet, and researched public records. Our efforts resulted in a surprising and very unpleasant discovery.

Apparently, Ms. Knox’s grandmother was a resident of Rosegate and under the care and direction of Ms. Knox’s staff. For reasons that appear driven by gluttony for financial gain, Ms. Knox asked her staff to substantially reduce the level of care and service provided her own grandmother, while continuing to charge for the higher (contracted) level of care and service. The substantial reduction in the level of care and service was not authorized by any party holding the power to act on behalf of Ms. Knox’s grandmother.

The breached contract was discovered and Ms. Knox and the Rosegate staff were queried regarding their actions. Multiple sources indicate Ms. Knox’s justification for Rosegate’s breach of contract was based on Ms. Knox’s belief Rosegate has the right to run a “social experiment” on a resident without consent or authorization of the patients family or a doctor. Sources indicated Ms. Knox’s grandmother was quickly removed from the Rosegate facility by the authorized representative of the family.

Public records and multiple sources reflect when Rosegate’s staff and Ms. Knox were asked to hand over files related to this matter, as required by law, Rosegate refused to do so. The Department of Social Services(DSS) demanded Rosegate honor the legal rights of the patient’s family (in this case Ms. Knox’s own family) to obtain the files. Rosegate refused the demands of DSS and Rosegate was subsequently cited under California Code of Title 22. With the threat of further citations and potential loss of their license, Rosegate provided what they claimed to be a patient’s file as required. In fact, what apparently was provided was completely void of the legally required medical records and documents as required under California Title 22. The DSS subsequently cited Rosegate for a second time. We at The Back Story would be of the opinion that Rosegate’s violations of Title 22 were an attempt to cover-up more serious violations of possible (financial) elder abuse in conjunction with breach of contract.

The DSS was very coy and evasive when we sought further information on any ongoing investigation in to this matter.

We found on Rosegate’s website a tag line that states “We treat our seniors like family.” If for any reason this tag line defines Rosegate’s mission statement, or any part of their mission statement, then there would be a pressing concern for current and future residents.

We made attempts to discuss this matter with Ms. Knox, however, no reply or comment was provided. 

R.G. Knox Company LLC

We are back after a month of preparation for our next round of installments. Our absence has been spent delving into the finer details of earlier stories.

In prior installments, we touched on Bob Knox’s new investment banking firm, R.G. Knox Company LLC, located in Park City, Utah. This is the investment firm that at present is approved by the California State Treasurer’s Office to provide and underwrite investment activity of taxpayer funds.

It was brought to our attention the website for R.G. Knox Company LLC has a very conspicuous public misrepresentation which after investigation looks as if it were intentional. The website states “R.G. Knox Company, Established 1975.” In fact, public records from the State of Utah reflect R.G. Knox Company LLC was registered in 2005….NOT 1975. Further evidence of this intent to mislead clients arises from SEC Filings prepared, signed and filed by Bob's wife, Karla. These filings state for the record R.G. Knox Company LLC was not an active company until 2007. Ms. Knox is a registered CPA in California and Utah. Her involvement in this matter has been referred to the California and Utah agencies that oversee CPA's and their certification.

A source contacted Mr. Knox in an effort to sort out this matter. Bob stated he "started the company in San Francisco in 1975.” Well, last we checked San Francisco is NOT in Utah. Zion’s Bank (for whom Mr. Knox was recently employed) was contacted to determine their involvement, if any, with R.G. Knox Company LLC. As a publicly traded company, as well a bank, Zion’s has strict reporting requirements which must be followed. Any such involvement with R.G. Knox Company LLC must be publicly disclosed. Zion’s Bank did not appear to have any such records.

What we at The Back Story found very fascinating is Mr. Knox’s Utah based investment-banking firm was formed and active during a period of time for which he was an employee of Zion’s Bank in their investment banking division. This may raise relevant questions concerning conflicts of interest, self-dealing, and perhaps insider trading. The SEC, as well federal laws have strict guidelines for officers and employees of publicly traded banks and investment firms. Acting on behalf of your own private firm while an officer/employee of a publicly traded bank/investment firm is an area of interest in this post Madoff era.

Environmental Cesspool

The fourth installment of The Back Story starts with recognition for those who lost their lives 10 years ago today. Those people were innocent victims of a terrorist act and will forever be remembered in our history books and our memories. The courage of the passengers of Flight 93, many whom were residents of California, and the firefighters in New York City who faced, without fear, overwhelming odds and the grave consequences are examples of what defines a hero. They are all hero’s!

In this installment I will be writing about an environmental cesspool which may cost California Taxpayers over 9 million dollars as reported in the LA Times. Public records reveal that former Alameda County Treasurer and Supervisor Bob Knox and companies he owns are responsible for a toxic nightmare in California.

Here is what we know. Companies owned by Bob Knox, as determined by the California Department of Toxic Substance and Control (DTSC), have been involved in the handling of a hazardous substances with very high Zinc, Lead and Cadmium content. All three base metals have health hazards. However, Lead and Cadmium have very serious health perils which include irreversible brain damage and lung tumors.

In 1996, Bob Knox apparently acquired, via a holding company by the name of CPC Holdings Inc., Chemical & Pigments located in Contra Costa County, and subsequently owned and operated the Chemical & Pigments facility. This business produced numerous products high in Zinc, Lead and Cadmium. The address given for CPC Holdings is the same Park City Utah address that Bob Knox list as his home address.

In May 1998, Chemical & Pigments filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy. It appears all valuable assets were sold off shortly thereafter and the facility left unattended.

In January 2002 and again in October 2002 the State of California sent their Emergency Response Unit (ERU) from the DTSC to the Chemical & Pigments facility to address serious and numerous environmental problems that had been left unresolved by its prior owner. ERU found the facility abandoned and unsecured with serious security breaches. There were storage tanks leaking hazardous substances and large amounts of unsold product containing high levels of hazardous substances on the property.

On October 18, 2002, the State of California issued an Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Determination Order. The order was issued out of serious concern for public health and welfare due to prior releases and the serious threat of future releases of hazardous substances that could endanger the health and welfare of the public. The order made clear that remediation and removal of hazardous substances and resulting contamination is required. The goal outlined by the State of California was to prevent any future danger to public health and welfare and allow for safe future use as productive industrial property.

The order made clear the respondents, as listed in the order, which included Chemical & Pigments, Robert G. Knox III(Bob Knox), and CPC Holding Inc. were to act in a manner required by the State of California.

Based on a public document, Bob Knox and CPC Holdings. Inc. have subsequently failed to pay cost associated with the remediation of the Chemical & Pigments site. In April of this year, the State of California sent a letter requesting repayment of taxpayer funds used to remediate the site. The cost to taxpayers as of April 2011 is nearing seven million dollars. To be exact, $6,774,967. The letter also indicates a lien for over a million dollars has been placed on the Chemical & Pigments property in an effort to force repayment of taxpayer funds.

It is difficult to grasp that a former California elected public servant, who even to this day professes the “importance of safeguarding the public’s limited funds” would seemingly dump on the residents of California the toxic cesspool for which he and his companies share responsibly for creating. More appalling is Bob Knox now ostensibly wants the taxpayers of California to pay for his share of this environmental mess. These do not appear to be the actions of a person safeguarding the public interest and funds of the residents of California.

Finally, keep in mind Bob’s Utah based investment-banking firm has been accepted by Bill Lockyer and the State Treasures Office as a company whom may be trusted to manage and invest California taxpayer money. It would appear strikingly ironic that the State of California is seeking the collection of nearly seven million dollars of taxpayer funds from Bob Knox and his companies, all the while potentially entrusting him to properly manage and invest additional taxpayer funds. I wonder how a majority of California Taxpayers would view that decision?

Bill Lockyer, can you please comment on this matter?

Kati Knox (Kathleen L Knox)

This installment of The Back Story returns to the comings and goings and questions surrounding the daughter of former Alameda County Treasurer and Supervisor, Bob Knox. Bob’s daughter is herself active in local politics, having sat on the San Leandro Human Services Commission, as well visibly supporting many local politicians.

We have been provided access to documents that clearly reflect Ms. Kati Knox (true legal maiden name: Kathleen Louise Knox) apparently committed perjury when recently submitting a request for a marriage license in Alameda County. It also appears that both the Alameda County DA and Recorders Office have been made aware of this information. It is unknown at this point the status of any potential investigation into the evidence of perjury.

Here is what we know; Ms. Knox was initially married approximately 20 years ago and consequently divorced less then 10 years ago. Subsequently, Ms. Knox filed a request to marry for the second time less then five years ago. On her application for her second marriage, she failed to indicate, despite the requirement by law to do so, that she had been married prior, or was she a party to any prior divorce proceedings. There are at least two separate sections of a California Marriage Application that address prior marriages and/or divorces.

Now you may want to declare her missteps a simple slip or desire to forget the past. That assessment might have bought Ms. Knox a “Get Out of Jail Free Card”, if it had not been for the fact her second marriage was to the same man she had divorced approximately 10 years prior. Moreover, both parties signed and agreed (under the penalty of perjury) that neither party had been married prior. Further, it appears the witness to Ms. Knox’s second marriage, who signed as such, was a long-time employee at Ms. Knox’s San Leandro based business. We believe, though we have not yet confirmed such, that this employee was also aware of the fact these two parties had been previously married.

Not only would the above appear to support perjury, it would also appear to support a conspiracy to commit a sham marriage.

In researching this matter, we contacted the Alameda County DA and the Recorders Office to get their opinion on this matter (we did not mention any party names). They surmised that if true, these types of perjury cases underlay some form of financial fraud. Primarily they find these cases relate to medical benefit fraud, however, tax fraud, real estate fraud, citizenship fraud, etc can also be motivating factors for perjury on marriage license applications.

Please keep in mind as noted in a previous installment of The Back Story, Ms. Knox and her San Leandro business were defendants in a civil fraud proceeding in Alameda County. The proceeding was related to real estate. Nevertheless, perjury is a criminal matter and handled separately by law enforcement and the District Attorney’s Office.

In preparation for this installment, we contacted a few sources and found that ostensibly Ms. Knox and her husband have been living in separate residence since their initial divorce. We could find NO evidence they cohabitated shortly before or anytime after their second marriage.

The obvious sham nature of Ms. Knox’s second marriage is further supported by information we reported in our “welcome” post, where Ms. Knox has been romantically linked to a San Leandro businessmen and a Police Officer. Sources have indicated Ms. Knox has been extremely open with sources about her personal life style, all the while supposedly being married and a mother of twins. Sources also indicate her high school age twins have until recently also been living apart (each with a respective parent) and going to schools nearly 40 miles apart.

I will be seeking clarification from the Alameda County Recorder and District Attorney on how this matter is being handled. I will up-date you when we acquire new information.

Cover-up? Fraud? Domestic Spying?

My second installment was previously to be a continuation of my initial post; however, my “welcome” posting produced some fascinating information that has the prospective to bring Alameda County, Bob Knox, and his daughter (Kati Knox) into the investigation and national debate on illegal domestic spying on United States citizens.

In a recent Alameda County Court matter where-by Kati Knox was defending herself and her San Leandro based firm against fraud claims, court records reflect Ms. Knox invoked her Fifth Amendment rights against self incrimination when asked (under oath) to answer questions related to employment as a health care consultant in Washington DC.

Court records reflect an extended battle and exchange between Ms. Knox’s counsel and the Court regarding the sufficiency of invoking her Fifth Amendment rights in this proceeding. Despite the Court’s direct request for Ms. Knox to answer the questions related to her Washington DC employer, Ms. Knox did not answer and stood by her Fifth Amendment rights.

The Court made numerous additional request, and in doing so explained the seriousness of invoking her Fifth Amendment rights, and stated “even James Bond” or any employee of the “CIA” or “National Security…would have to say” under oath who their employer was. Ms. Knox’s counsel did not allow her to answer.

After further pressure from the Court to answer the question, things go from strange to memories of Watergate and Oliver North, as Ms. Knox’s counsel implies that even if Ms. Knox were to answer the question, “you wouldn’t get the company that she really worked for.” Ms. Knox’s counsel goes further and states there would be “criminal sanctions for disclosing the contents of that work that she (Ms. Knox) did.”

Personally, I am no legal expert; nevertheless implying to the Court’s of this Country your client (Ms. Knox) might commit perjury to cover-up her employers identity, as well be under threat of criminal sanctions for disclosing such raises very serious legal questions of what Ms. Knox and the Washington DC based company who employs her is actually doing, and why an apparent cover-up would be necessary.

In a closing exchange between Ms. Knox’s counsel and the Court, Ms. Knox’s counsel admits her client holds “a government job where she” (Ms. Knox) receives payment via a “shell company” for which “she’s not allowed to discuss, especially in open court.”

The information I have reviewed also indicates Ms. Knox admitted to purchasing a home in the Washington DC area and relocating her family. Despite the relocation and the stresses of a new job, her employer allowed her a great deal of freedom to regularly return to the Bay Area for business reasons that are extremely vague. Further, in what may have been a serious slip of the tongue, Ms. Knox’s counsel made reference during later questioning to a company or entity by the name of “Virginia Health Care Systems.”

I have gathered additional information that may further shore up Ms. Knox (Kati Knox) possible involvement in domestic spying activity. Ms. Knox has in the past used various last names including her maiden name as well versions of her married name Wrobel, Knox-Wrobel, and Granville. The latter name is the most intriguing, as Granville is Bob Knox’s middle name (Robert Granville Knox III). Ms. Knox has also used various versions of her first name such as Kathleen, Katie, and Kati.

Ms. Knox also has the following email addresses katik007@yahoo.com & kathleenlkw@yahoo.com. These addresses implore the question of arrogance and/or hiding in plain sight?

As I prepare to close my second installment, I will circle back to past Alameda County politicians and make in my opinion a simple connection between Kati Knox’s activities as noted above and her father, Bob Knox. This connection is supported with information available in World Wide Web that appears to claim Ms. Knox shared confidential and legally protected (Hipaa/Hippa) private patient medical information with her father. What is apparent from the information available is it looks as if both parties may have gone to great lengths in an attempt to cover-up this inadvertent, but apparently grave slip-up.

Please keep in mind Ms. Knox currently owns and operates a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly, which provides her access to confidential medical records of her patients. The US and California Department of Justice and the California Department of Social Services oversees and enforces very strict laws on the release and disclosure of medical data. Sharing such information in violation of the law has serious legal consequences on both a Federal and State level.

For reference, I spent a few minutes reviewing the history of Valerie Plame. I found it very interesting in that it appears once Valerie Plame’s identity was revealed and confirmed as an employee of the CIA, the CIA “lifted” and “rolled back her cover.” The CIA determined that “public interest outweighed” any “damage” from “disclosure” of “employment and cover status.” The apparent truth of Valerie Plame was out and her employer was making no further attempt to cover-up her employment or role with the CIA.

I believe it would be reasonable for a person to venture, that in light of Ms. Knox’s use of her Fifth Amendment rights, and her counsel’s aggressive defense of such, as well her counsel’s surprising admissions to the Court, Ms. Knox is likely, to this day, working in a covert manner for an unnamed government shell company.

(A great deal of additional data on this particular subject is being vetted and verified and will be shared at an appropriate time)

Welcome

At one time Alameda County was perceived as a bright star and a rock of upstanding politicians in a sea of corrupt counties and local governments within California. Much of this changed back in the 80’s around the time of Pete Stark, Bill Lockyer, Don Perata, Bob Knox, Elihu Harris and many more. To this day Alameda County is yet to fully recover from that period.

The list of supporting players is long and twisted. There are the ex-wives, girl friends, mistresses, illicit drug enablers, back room campaign financiers, pay-to-play business associates, and unsuspecting volunteers.

Sadly, there were also a number of well meaning, honest, hard working people whom sought to help make a difference, but found the politicians of that period a disgraceful wake-up call to the changes rapidly occurring within Alameda County. Many of those people have enlightened me over the years.

The Back Story will chronicle some of what I personally experienced, as well provided to me by other insiders. Some of my sources remain active in Alameda County and California level politics, both as political insiders and individuals doing business with local and State level government entities. (I would enjoy any additional information or post from people familiar with Alameda County politics, in particular with the politicians and time frame covered)

My chronicles start with Bob Knox’s (Robert G. Knox III) initial campaign for Alameda County Treasurer. I was an uncompromising individual with goals for higher education and doing great things to help others. In an odd meeting with mutual friends, I found myself volunteering to help Bob Knox’s election campaign. I continued to help and work for him on-and-off for over a decade thereafter.

Almost from the start, I saw things that were improper: fund raising events where cash and checks from investment bankers and business associates of Bob Knox’s were slipped to him or his campaign manager in back rooms, which for some reason did not get reported on required financial disclosures. A source once asked why those funds did not make it to the reports. Bob’s reply was a warning never to ask or discuss the matter “if you want my help in the future.” I witnessed the consumption of illegal and illicit drugs at Bob Knox’s home in the Oakland Hills during “thank you parties” and gathering of campaign staff. The drugs were provided by campaign staff and consumed by many. A source indicated the drugs were supplied by Bob Knox’s mistress at that time. The mistress was also providing campaign assistance, but it is unclear if she was paid for her role.

Sometime during Bob Knox’s Treasurer’s campaign, Bill Lockyer, current California State Treasurer, and Bob Knox formed their political and personal relationship. That relationship continues today, and is as robust as ever. The foundation of this relationship from the onset was the exchange of political favors and business benefits in exchange for access to fund-raising assistance and resources from Lockyer’s long list of supporters. This exchange of favors has continued uninterrupted and has mutually benefited both parties. As of just over a year ago, Bob Knox provided Bill Lockyer a substantial political favor by financially supporting Bill Lockyer’s new wife Nadia, in her successful campaign for Alameda County Supervisor. This is a position Bob Knox held for many years. Bob’s support for Nadia went well beyond financial, as Bob called in many of his long-time political and business associates to contribute and volunteer end-less hours on Nadia’s campaign. Bob was also front and center on a campaign mailer for Nadia that referenced his former position as County Treasurer. Bob’s daughter, Kati Knox, who owns a business in San Leandro, and has been politically active in San Leandro for many years and romantically connected to numerous San Leandro businessmen and an active San Leandro Police Officer, worked relentlessly on Nadia’s campaign.

Bob Knox recently formed an investment banking firm, R.G. Knox Company LLC, (www.rgknox.com) based out of his home in Park City Utah and is currently one of only a few small firms (below normally accepted capital levels) to be accepted by Bill Lockyer’s office to the “Public Finance Underwriter Pool for 2011-2013”. Acceptance as an underwriter provides these firms access to potential fees (substantial in many cases) for managing funds for the State of California and the Treasurer’s office.

Bob Knox’s new investment banking firm surfaced after he shutdown his California based investment-banking firm and resigned as a VP at Zion’s Bank in Salt Lake City. I have some unconfirmed details regarding the reasons behind these recent events. I will share them once they can be confirmed.

(The Back Story will continue to grow in the weeks and months to come)