Supervisor Lockyer, a woman scorned.

Supervisor Nadia Lockyer emerged from seclusion and substance abuse treatment last week and joined her fellow Alameda County Supervisors on a retreat, of sorts. If any actual County business was accomplished at this retreat, it surely was overshadowed by Ms. Lockyer’s attendance.

In a mildly surprising move, State Treasurer Bill Lockyer accompanied his wife to her offices and later arrived to pick her up. Mr. Lockyer’s presence would seem to send many messages. However, one particularly strong political message was that sent to Nadia’s fellow Supervisor’s. The message appears to have been, Big Bill is still in control and he is closely watching how his wife, and um, his $1.7+ million dollar investment is treated by her co-workers. The message appears to have been clearly understood by Nadia’s fellow board members, as none of the other four members made any material statements regarding Nadia’s return. Keep in mind, it is an election year for a few BOS members and Bill’s resources, and contacts would be very helpful in seeking re-election. That of course may all be moot if an ongoing investigation(s) determines Bill and/or Nadia have violated Local, State or Federal Laws.

Neither Bill nor Nadia Lockyer made any public statements last week, though Nadia’s Chief of Staff did read a prepared statement that seemed in many ways, a re-spun, modified combined version of Mary Hayashi’s mea culpa and Nadia’s pre-rehab statement. It was of no surprise the statement was light on information and heavy on deflection and spin, as ongoing investigation(s) surely limit what could be revealed so as to protect Nadia and Bill from any pending criminal or civil claims.

With the prospects of legal uncertainty hanging over the Lockyer’s, local media appear to be actively investigating their own leads…some surely to land on the desk of Kamala Harris. The Bay Area News Group was apparently waiting for Nadia’s return to question her about visits with her lover while he was incarcerated in Santa Clara on drug related charges. The visits themselves are questionable for any elected official using good judgment and common sense, though what is highly questionable and possibly illegal is Nadia’s representation in jailhouse logs as his legal counsel. Further, on one occasion she represented herself as his “PD.” The meaning of “PD” is unclear at this point, though it likely is a standard and often used term, as jailhouse administration apparently did not question its use on sign-in logs. Speculation is “PD” is an abbreviation for either Public Defender or Police Department. Ms. Lockyer is neither of these.

Ms. Lockyer did not respond to inquires on her visits to the Santa Clara Jail. However, her Chief of Staff did respond on her behalf with allegations that her lover’s father sought Nadia’s legal assistance with his son’s criminal problems, therefore justifying her visits with him during incarceration. The allegations were met with a prompt response from the lover’s counsel that the statement is not only false, but Nadia is abusing her power. Ms. Lockyer herself later acknowledged she "was not the attorney of record" for her lover at the time of her visits. The allegations of abuse of power seem to hint of future civil claims against Alameda County, possibly the Lockyer’s personally, or a request to revoke Ms. Lockyer’s Law License in California.

The facts as reported would seemingly raise serious questions of the validity of the allegation against the father, as one of a number of Nadia’s visits apparently was nearly an hour and half long. These claimed legal visits apparently were not justified by any need for legal counsel, as the lover apparently had no pending legal matters as he was serving his required time for a prior conviction that there is no evidence he was appealing. Nadia also apparently picked up her lover from jail when he was released.

Prior information regarding this scandal further undermines the Chief of Staff’s allegations, as Bill Lockyer himself was allegedly attempting to work with the lover’s father to end the “bad relationship” and seeking to possibly destroy or cover-up evidence of the relationship. The noted evidence might include the alleged sex tape(s) which none of the key players has denied exists, and seemingly was confirmed by DA O’Malley when her investigation turned up sexually detailed evidence of a consensual relationship.

It would look as if the reappearance of Supervisor Lockyer to the public venue may be more about Nadia, the scorned lover and troubled addict, seeking to avenge her fall from grace by means of pre-emptive strikes against those who may of failed to heed Bill’s and her request for silence in a possible effort to cover up their sorted and troubling activities.

Bill Lockyer is well known for throwing around his political weight (no pun intended…okay maybe just a little) when the need arises. Though for the most part, such weight only works within political circles, and Nadia’s lover and family are not within political circles, therefore making any political weight worthless in efforts to influence the lover’s father/family. This may explain why Bill sought the help of DA O’Malley to apparently discredit the lover, which appears to have backfired on Big Bill and may hint of why the lover’s father is now a target of seemingly unsupportable allegations. It may also explain why Nadia’ claims of physical abuse at the Newark Motel never resulted in an arrest or charges.

Oh, and let’s not forget Nadia’s text messages warning of the use of Bill’s Security Detail, as well the wrath Nadia will bring her (ex) lover for ‘the pain (his) your lies have inflicted in my (Nadia’s) heart and sole every moment you find yourself alone or bored with another.”

Hell have no fury like a woman scorned…

Alameda County Politicians in tail spin…

This installment originally was to focus on criminal charges filed last week against the husband and wife team that operated Associated Community Action Program (ACAP). The subject was in following with a trend of installments here in the Back Story. Well that changed yesterday with another Matire & Ross stunner about a more well know husband and wife team in a very steep tailspin.

As if to continually seek her fifteen minutes of fame, Nadia Lockyer again tops local political news. A report in yesterday's Chronicle, if true, will surely end Nadia’s political career for good, and might take her husband, Bill Lockyer’s career with it. The Matier & Ross story took this unfolding scandal to a national level, as blogs and media across the country could not resist another Hollywood like scandal in California Politics. Arnold and the Nanny shocker had just faded from sight. The timing could not have been better for a media hungry to showcase how troubled the California Political machine truly is.

Matire & Ross’s report sheds additional light and connects dots on what became public earlier this month. Not surprising, the report rips more holes in Bill Lockyer’s original statement on the matter. It also seemingly confirms what many had suspected; that Bill attempted to use his position to influence the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office and seek special handling of this scandal. I do not believe the general public has access to that type of service. Ms. O’Malley may have some explaining to do? Considering Bill Lockyer’s very close ties to Kamala Harris and the Attorney Generals Office, which he controlled for many years, we would speculate Ms. Harris punts this matter to an independent investigative authority.

Additionally, the alleged attacker of Ms. Lockyer has apparently made further statements that portray a much different picture then that of Nadia and Bill’s public statements. Further, law enforcement has not named the alleged attacker, as he has not been charged with any crimes associated with the allegations. It was confirmed that the motel room was Nadia’s; contradicting Bill’s earlier implication, that Nadia went to the motel to help an ex-boyfriend in crisis. Keep in mind, as earlier reported Nadia’s 8-year-old son was with her at the motel. The alleged boyfriend has implied he was the victim of Nadia’s rage, and acted in self-defense, and that even to this day, Nadia maintains contact with him. Ms. O’Malley’s office has been rumored to have acted on Bill’s request to investigate, and determined the relationship between the boyfriend and Nadia was consensual. This was apparently supported by electronic communications and sexually explicit photos found during the investigation. There is also rumor of a “sex tape” floating about, though yet no proof has been provided. It appears Bill Lockyer may have received an advance copy of the tape for his viewing pleasure, special thanks to a thoughtful delivery from Nadia’s boyfriend.

And if not to take this scandal to new lows, Bill apparently called the boyfriends parents (the boyfriend is 35…doubtful his parents have much to say about who he dates or has a consensual relationship with) and apparently tried to persuade them to intervene and end the relationship that Bill labeled a “bad relationship”. Clearly that was Bill’s opinion, something it does not appear his wife agreed with. Remember, they were separated, as Bill admitted.  It also appears Bill may have sought to destroy evidence of the relationship…the timing of which could be very important if he knew an investigation was underway, for which he requested of Ms. O’Malley.

Another area of likely concern is Bill Lockyer’s security detail. Did Bill Lockyer use his State provided security detail paid for by taxpayer money, to act on his personal needs for private detective work? Nadia actually stated in a text message that special needs were possible via Bill’s security detail. Bill’s staff denied any such use.

Whether premature or not, there is much speculation on who will replace Nadia Lockyer. Not surprising, all the possible replacements being thrown around have excellent track records and solid grass root support. The names that initially seem to be grabbing attention are Ellen Corbett, Mark Green and Kevin Dowling.

As the voters of Alameda County digest these new revelations, and there are sure to be more, not only regarding the Lockyer’s, but numerous other local politicians currently in the cross-hairs of scandal, we would advocate voters take your rights to vote and the consequences of your voting decisions with a greater degree of responsibility in the future.

Ms. Hayashi's Disrespect for Journalism Students

Ms. Hayashi’s true colors continue to show. A recent visit to her Sacramento Office by local high school students afforded the public and these students a genuine lesson in just how disrespectful a disgraced public official will treat our future leaders.

A group of Castro Valley High Journalism students prearranged a visit to Ms. Hayashi’s office recently, and did so via an assistant in Ms. Hayashi’s office. Apparently, the assistant was not aware the students were planning to practice their journalism skills…though that would seem immaterial under normal circumstances. Well, these are not normal circumstances for Ms. Hayashi’s…remember, she’s a Brain Tumor survivor….and god forbid she answer any questions from journalism students that might dig into her recent shop-lifting conviction that she publicly (via her attorney) attributed to her medical condition.

Ms. Hayashi ostensibly rebuffed and refused to answer any of the student’s questions, and left the journalism students to speculate and draw their own conclusions….which they did.

The Castro Valley High students gave Ms. Hayashi a textbook opportunity to step up, be a leader by example, set the record straight, and be accountable. These basic principles of good leadership are what every teacher and parent want their student/child to learn in California Public Schools.

Regrettably, Ms. Hayashi provided not only lack of good leadership, but glaring proof that not only do our elected public officials see little value in the public education system in California….currently ranked at or near the bottom, but apparently, Ms. Hayashi also believes she has no obligation to the students in our public schools when it comes to their rights to learn the truth and seek an understanding of what our elected officials are doing while on the payroll of taxpayers.

Ms. Hayashi’s impertinence for the students of Castro Valley High School is just a further example of arrogance and contempt by our elected officials concerning the demands of taxpayers and students in California. Ms. Hayashi’s actions differ very little from those of the Board of Regents when they walked out of a meeting during which pointed questions were asked by UC College students.

We advocate that every high school with a journalism department which sits within Ms. Hayashi’s district demand an interview with Ms. Hayashi. In addition, for those journalism students at Castro Valley High, we recommend you request Ms. Hayashi come to your school to answer all your questions. If you have learned anything from this experience it should be….DO NOT let our public officials off the hook when it comes to accountability. You have the right to ask the questions, so ask them, and seek the truth and accept nothing less!

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.